Wanting to give honor to whom honor is due. Russ Gunsalus and his team have lined up a great team of thinkers in Indianapolis to talk about the nature of Wesleyan higher education, with not only Wesleyan speakers but also representatives of conservative Methodism, Free Methodism, and even the Nazarenes. :-)
1. First off tonight, our own Steve Lennox gave a presentation on which he has reflected for years, namely, his sense that the distinctive nature of Wesleyan higher education comes from the fact that it treats education as a "sanctifying context." It is a context of reconciliation and restoration, effected through community, placed within the broader narrative of God's redemptive work on humanity and the creation. Shockingly, Wesleyan schools should aim at "forming saints" in the broadest sense possible!
2. Responding was no less than the delightful William Abraham. Two things stuck out to me in his response. The first is his sense that the Wesleyan tradition, along with other traditions like the Pentecostals, really fits within a third house, in addition to the more catholic on the one side and high Protestant on the other. He finds the glue for the third house in the words of Irenaeus, "where the Spirit is, there is the Church."
He also suggested that we have no business calling ourselves, "Wesleyan" if we haven't read Wesley's standard sermons. Fair enough. Although I don't think Wesley is a trump card for what Wesleyans must believe, I completely agree that we should know Wesley. Aaron Perry put it this way in response to my earlier post: "I like what Eddie Fox said of the Methodist movement. He said that we don't follow Wesley, but we follow Jesus in the company of the Wesleys."
Showing posts with label Steve Lennox. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Steve Lennox. Show all posts
Tuesday, May 27, 2014
Friday, June 05, 2009
Magisterial Paper by Steve Lennox at Symposium
Steve is in the middle of a tremendous paper on the hermeneutic of 1800s holiness revivalists. It pulls the rug out from under the Hermeneutical Spiral and Vanhoozer's half-way reformation.
This quote from Daniel Steele (1894) is shocking and significant:
"It will not do to lean on the authority of a majority of experts; but on the practical question of the extent of gospel salvation from sin. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, the unlearned minority who have put the doctrine to experimental proof may be very much wiser than the learned majority of the magnates of the modern church, who have never subjected the question of the test of personal experience. Here the testimony of some Uncle Tom or Amanda Smith of the slave plantation may outweigh the opinion of a whole faculty of German theological professors. Experience outweighs theory; faith makes philosophy kick the beam" (Half-Hours with Saint Paul and Other Bible Readings, 239-40).
To read Lennox's paper, go here.
This quote from Daniel Steele (1894) is shocking and significant:
"It will not do to lean on the authority of a majority of experts; but on the practical question of the extent of gospel salvation from sin. Through the power of the Holy Spirit, the unlearned minority who have put the doctrine to experimental proof may be very much wiser than the learned majority of the magnates of the modern church, who have never subjected the question of the test of personal experience. Here the testimony of some Uncle Tom or Amanda Smith of the slave plantation may outweigh the opinion of a whole faculty of German theological professors. Experience outweighs theory; faith makes philosophy kick the beam" (Half-Hours with Saint Paul and Other Bible Readings, 239-40).
To read Lennox's paper, go here.
Wednesday, March 04, 2009
Guest Post: Steve Lennox Book Review
I'm delighted to bring you a brief review of Christopher Wright's recent book, The God I Don't Understand by IWU's own Steve Lennox, former Dean of the Chapel and all around good guy!
_________
Christopher J. H. Wright, The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008. 224 pages. ISBN: 978-0-310-27546-6. $19.99 (cloth).
There is always room for one more good book that addresses perplexing theological issues like suffering. Having had to wrestle with these questions personally and professionally, I’ll take all the compassionately presented and biblically consistent counsel I can get. Which is why I feel so positive about Christopher J. H. Wright’s The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith.
In Part One, Wright deals with suffering. He points out that since God refused to reveal the ultimate origin of evil, “we finite human beings cannot, indeed must not, ‘make sense’ of evil. For the final truth is that evil does not make sense” (42). He then turns to “The Offence of Evil” in which he acknowledges the believer’s right to react against suffering, as do the psalmists in their laments. God has given those who suffer—whether from illness, sin, enemy, or even God—a vocabulary to express their true feelings; but “the language of lament is seriously neglected in the church” (52). Wright counsels more than complaint, he offers hope. “The Defeat of Evil” is guaranteed by the cross of Christ, where God uses evil to defeat itself.
The subject of Part Two, God’s treatment of the Canaanites, might not be on the top of everyone’s list of things they don’t understand. Those of us who teach the Old Testament cannot avoid it and Wright’s treatment is one of the best I’ve seen. He begins by eliminating three proposed answers that are not helpful, then suggests we read these events in the context of the whole Bible.
At the heart of the book is what is at the heart of Wright’s biblical theology, the cross. He begins by affirming that the “Why” of the cross was simply the love of God; what actually happened as a result of the cross is more complex. Among the variety of ways the Bible describes what the cross accomplished, Wright mentions reconciliation, forgiveness, cleansing, justification, and new life, though he singles out substitution as something essential to them all.
With chapters seven and eight we come to Wright’s main purpose in this section, a defense of penal substitution. For a fair and balanced treatment by someone who sees the cross accomplishing more, but not less than penal substation, Wright’s treatment is a good one. He seems, however, to jump from defending the substitutionary nature of the atonement to defending a particular version of it, that of penal substitution.
The last part of this book deals with Eschatology. He first dispenses with “Cranks and Controversies” that come about when people get their view of eschatology from novels and books rather than “careful study of the Bible itself and of the solid tradition of Christian faith through the ages of the church” (170). Then Wright describes what the Bible has to say about the return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the day of judgment. Unlike many treatments, Wright addresses this from a whole-Bible perspective, allowing us to see the Day of the Lord as the time when God puts all things right and judges humanity based on the light we’ve received and the lives we’ve lived. Wright’s understanding of heaven sounds very much like that of N. T. Wright, whose work he recommends.
For those seeking wise, biblical counsel on important and perplexing issues, I highly recommend the Wright stuff.
For a fuller version of this review, see a forthcoming issue of Evangelical Journal.
_________
Christopher J. H. Wright, The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2008. 224 pages. ISBN: 978-0-310-27546-6. $19.99 (cloth).
There is always room for one more good book that addresses perplexing theological issues like suffering. Having had to wrestle with these questions personally and professionally, I’ll take all the compassionately presented and biblically consistent counsel I can get. Which is why I feel so positive about Christopher J. H. Wright’s The God I Don’t Understand: Reflections on Tough Questions of Faith.
In Part One, Wright deals with suffering. He points out that since God refused to reveal the ultimate origin of evil, “we finite human beings cannot, indeed must not, ‘make sense’ of evil. For the final truth is that evil does not make sense” (42). He then turns to “The Offence of Evil” in which he acknowledges the believer’s right to react against suffering, as do the psalmists in their laments. God has given those who suffer—whether from illness, sin, enemy, or even God—a vocabulary to express their true feelings; but “the language of lament is seriously neglected in the church” (52). Wright counsels more than complaint, he offers hope. “The Defeat of Evil” is guaranteed by the cross of Christ, where God uses evil to defeat itself.
The subject of Part Two, God’s treatment of the Canaanites, might not be on the top of everyone’s list of things they don’t understand. Those of us who teach the Old Testament cannot avoid it and Wright’s treatment is one of the best I’ve seen. He begins by eliminating three proposed answers that are not helpful, then suggests we read these events in the context of the whole Bible.
At the heart of the book is what is at the heart of Wright’s biblical theology, the cross. He begins by affirming that the “Why” of the cross was simply the love of God; what actually happened as a result of the cross is more complex. Among the variety of ways the Bible describes what the cross accomplished, Wright mentions reconciliation, forgiveness, cleansing, justification, and new life, though he singles out substitution as something essential to them all.
With chapters seven and eight we come to Wright’s main purpose in this section, a defense of penal substitution. For a fair and balanced treatment by someone who sees the cross accomplishing more, but not less than penal substation, Wright’s treatment is a good one. He seems, however, to jump from defending the substitutionary nature of the atonement to defending a particular version of it, that of penal substitution.
The last part of this book deals with Eschatology. He first dispenses with “Cranks and Controversies” that come about when people get their view of eschatology from novels and books rather than “careful study of the Bible itself and of the solid tradition of Christian faith through the ages of the church” (170). Then Wright describes what the Bible has to say about the return of Christ, the resurrection of the dead, and the day of judgment. Unlike many treatments, Wright addresses this from a whole-Bible perspective, allowing us to see the Day of the Lord as the time when God puts all things right and judges humanity based on the light we’ve received and the lives we’ve lived. Wright’s understanding of heaven sounds very much like that of N. T. Wright, whose work he recommends.
For those seeking wise, biblical counsel on important and perplexing issues, I highly recommend the Wright stuff.
For a fuller version of this review, see a forthcoming issue of Evangelical Journal.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
Lennox in IWU Chapel on Atonement
Steve Lennox spoke on atonement in chapel today. Eventually, you will be able to hear it on iTunes, launching from this webpage. He came up with a nice little acrostic on atonement:
L = liberation from the power of Sin (I suspect we might map this to Christus Victor too, victory over evil powers)
O = order (here he covered satisfaction type material--the need for balance in God's creation and justice)
V = vicarious exchange (substitution type material)
E = example (moral influence type material)
There was good application stuff to the tune of about 6 points, but I didn't write it down. So you'll have to listen to the podcast.
By the way, I also found out that Peter Enns is now attending a Nazarene church. Welcome to the Wesleyan tradition! Unlike the PCA, we don't eat our young... at least not as often :-)
L = liberation from the power of Sin (I suspect we might map this to Christus Victor too, victory over evil powers)
O = order (here he covered satisfaction type material--the need for balance in God's creation and justice)
V = vicarious exchange (substitution type material)
E = example (moral influence type material)
There was good application stuff to the tune of about 6 points, but I didn't write it down. So you'll have to listen to the podcast.
By the way, I also found out that Peter Enns is now attending a Nazarene church. Welcome to the Wesleyan tradition! Unlike the PCA, we don't eat our young... at least not as often :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
