After about a two month hiatus from blogging, I am now considering getting started again. Over the last two months I have visited Istanbul, Turkey; attended the Wesleyan Doctinal Symposium, and taken a 8 day vacation trip to Florida. It seems like a lot to post about, but so little time I am afraid.
By now, I am sure that most people tuned in regularly to my blog have grown tired of waiting for a new post as well. The question is: is anybody still out there? And what shall we post about next? Any suggestions?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I'm here. how 'bout discussing the book "black like me" :)
i was really hoping we could dive into a little one fish two fish...what do you think?????
Great thoughts, Jessica and Susie. I appreciate that you are reading - and your comments are priceless.
I'm still here too...you could post some thoughts from our little group discussions on "The Challenge of Jesus"...or possibly do a little essay on why the "Left Behind" series is your favorite eschatological reading material. You choose :)
hmmm. something i have always been wondering about is your thoughts on different movies you've seen. i know jefe has been your movie dealer for awhile now, but whether you watch it or not remains a mystery. may i suggest that you go out and watch "to end all wars"? i would LOVE to hear what you think on that. it is about as beautiful of a redemption story as it gets.
I was really wishing that you would again take up the dangling threads from your last two posts:
paragraph 7 in April 9 and last line of May 6.
Really interested in what you think are the ramifications of non violence as it applies to the attonement. Did Jesus not call 10000 angels because he knew the Father wanted him on the cross to fulfill the plan of salvation for us, or did he not call them because he was committed to nonviolent resistance to evil even unto death? Did the Father want or need the bloodshed and suffering of his son or did the evil forces in this world cause it? There seems to be a big difference in the Father sending his Son to reconcile us to Him even though He would have known the outcome; and the Father planning, willing the death of innocent Jesus as a means of placating His own Wrath.
So then, if Jesus died as a consequence to the life he led and his choice to love his enemies to the death, does our salvation depend on the cross or on the resurrection, or on his life, death, and resurrection? How does that effect what it means to be "saved"? Do we need to accept his invitation to the Kingdom and all that means?
Is there any element of theology that is not changed by a nonviolent view of God? Attonment by violent, extreme suffering of innocent victim - the will of a loving and forgiving God? Salvation gained by trusting that Jesus endured such injustice so that I would not face justice?
Jesus speaks as if belief and love were synonymous with obey. Why then do we say believe that Jesus died for you and you will be saved? If his life is a call to Kingdom living, the last installment of an ever escalating plan to bring us back to God, won't salvation depend on obeying or following as faithfully as possible? Then, what happens to the "lamb" theme?
How come you don't talk about these things in your theology class?
wow!!!
Thanks, Anonymous for the reminder that I was on a roll about non-violence before before I was distracted by summer. You raise huge, important questions, several at a time. I think I will continue my string of posts on the meaning of Jesus and nonviolence - and try to answer some of your questions there. I hope you will tune in and give feedback.
Let me try to answer one of the questions here however. Why don't I talk much about these issues in theology class? First, I would love to know who you are so I could determine which theology class you are referring to. I invite you to e-mail me if you would like and let me know where we have crossed theology class paths!
I assume that you either have taken classes with me at church or at FLAME.
There are basically two reasons that I haven't said much in those two environments. First, these issues are so fresh to me that I don't want to create confusion when I am still trying to learn how to articulate them well. And the issue is so emotionally charged at times (especially in times of war) that I want to practice and gain feedback from others.
Second, both teaching contexts are within the stream of Wesleyan theology (whether at church or at FLAME) and frankly, these points are not on the radar screen of most Wesleyans. The Wesleyan Church (as a denomination) thinks and says little about violence and war. So when I teach within these parameters I feel compelled to stay on topic with Wesleyan themes in the forefront.
Cop out??? What do you think?
Anyway, anonymous, I would love to hear more (through e-mail if you don't want your identity known) so that I could respond better.
And please, everyone, hold me accountable to write more - I really want to learn how to better articulate my positions.
Not a cop out. That last question was tongue in cheek, kind of. I know those classes were "intro" not "comprehensive". If that were not clear at the outset, it surely was when you had 15 minutes at the end of the course to discuss end time beliefs!
Your discussion of nonviolence on this site led me to read Consuming Passion. One little sentence in that has cost me no end of discomfort. It said the Bible doesn't really say the things I think it does. I am used to people who don't read the Bible saying it says this or that, but then I saw that I was reading things there that the Bible didn't really say because of my conditioning. I see what Calvin told me it said. Intriqued, I searched for more theology from the Annabaptists. There I found a brief respite because they don't seem to find systematic theology to be so important. Not leaving well enough alone, I came upon John Yoder. I cheated there. I did an online study guide of The Politics of Jesus, but did not read the book. I will - when I recover from the trauma. If they are right, as they well may be, I have a lot of adjusting to do. A whole shift from individual to community, from salvation as a decision to salvation as a way of life. Leads to a more comprehensive way of reading the Old and New though. Lots of questions. I would be happy to hear your thoughts on any of my questions or anywhere else you were going in this line. It seems that theology is like that Jenga game: You pull out the wrong plank and you get to start all over. I really love annonymousness - a real problem for community life.
i was tipped off by a friend that i should tune in to your site here again...an anonymous tip to go with the theme here! so, i'm back with you here - looking forward to another little bit of one fish,two fish. so, what about the blue fish? on another note, don't watch "war of the worlds" thinking is is "to end all wars"...very different movies and you'll really have cause to wonder about your friend who recommended it and called it beautiful!
-j
Thanks friends for the recent comments.
First, anonymous, thanks for re-commenting. Yes, my views were shaken by John H Yoder's, "The Politics of Jesus". It is not a difficult read - by not easy either. If you understand the context of the debate that Yoder was addressing - it truly makes it a remarkable book - one from which I will probably never recover. And yes again, theology is like building with dominoes - rearranging one usually requires adjusting all the other pieces. Please keep me posted of where it is all heading for you.
And now - to my friend Juli - thanks for tuning in again - I really will post soon. I am just clearing my throat before I really say something significant. And thanks for the movie tip - because of course - I am movie deficient - I know nothing of the movie that our friend recommended.
Nice to hear from you by the way. I haven't been a very good friend lately, and connected with you guys. Sorry.
D
Post a Comment