What Jesus Thought of Humanity

?In all Jesus? contacts with people never did He show a condescending attitude or think of man as ?mere man.? To him they all seemed savable. His deep respect for each person no matter who he might be, how evil he might be, what his response was to Jesus, did not show a hint of a ?superior complex.? The very anger He displayed toward some, the whip He wiled in the Temple, all said in effect, ?You are My equal. My anger shows My respect for you. Now, be the man you can be and ought to be.? He never forced himself on anyone. He did not call any man to Him under false pretenses?promising an easier yoke than would be the case. He called men to die with Him. He tried to push back all self-deception and faced men with what they were in themselves. He made people think for themselves?and think honestly. All this is Jesus? estimate of man.?

Mildred Bangs Wynkoop A Theology of Love 128.

What needs to burn?

I've been thinking about the Jewish sacrifical system and what it has to say to my life today. There are the conclusions that are often told like, "is your all on the altar?" or "we need to give our best to God".

But one that's been sticking in my spirit is how the sacrificial system connected the temporal things with eternal things. There was a unity of things that will last and those things that will last forever.

A sacrifice was always something important to the person making the sacrifice. It was something like grain or goats, things that were needed for sustenance and survival and and even for defining status. But as they were burning, they couldn't be used for any of those. By making the sacrifice, the person showed who really provides and defines sustenance, survival and status.

So I've asked myself. What in me needs to burn? What in my theology am I relying on for survival?

And this may be an extension of the previous conversation? What in our American theology and practice needs to burn in order for us to connect more fully to the heart of God?

For me, the first thing that pops into my head is busyness, the desire to always have something to do. Doing things isn't bad. But when doing the things becomes the object...something's gotta burn.

Another is the inclination to create an "us vs. them" attitude. Yes, there are differences, but there is also sameness. What needs to burn there?

Just more thoughts and questions...

[Edit] A funny photo sent by Tim Miller of one of his professors, Dr. Stone.

Does Theology Evolve?

That's it. It's a question with many implications. I'm asking in part because of my participation in a class that covers the "distinctive" doctrine of my denomination. I'm asking because I am wondering if our "distinctive doctrine" following John Wesley is a part of the evolution of theology. And if it is, are we called to stick to what Wesley said or to carry on what he continued, the evolution of theology?