WadeWatch Continues to Foster Burleson Nonsense
“Deb and Dee, that cold one is for you. That’s what you promote when you give credence to the likes of Wade Burleson.”
I believe Deb and Dee over at WadeWatch are Southern Baptists. As a Southern Baptist myself, I take great comfort in knowing that we are too doctrinally dumbed down to be completely take over by the New Calvinist movement. Wade Burleson, a kinder, gentler New Calvinist like Joseph Prince, may not be as much of a threat as I once feared in that venue.
The thing that drives me batty about Burleson is his make it up as you go theology. This ministry has already called him out on forming a theology based on a post-biblical Greek word. He shortly thereafter changed the subtitle on his blog that was the focus of our criticism. His former subtitle was a lame attempt to make a case for Redemptive Historical hermeneutics which is not just a mode of biblical interpretation, but Martin Luther’s epistemology for interpreting reality itself. Luther rejected the idea that reality is interpreted grammatically, but rather through redemption. This leads to a Gnostic indifference to human suffering and a devaluing of a sense of justice. Though Burleson’s behavior is un-Neo-Calvinist like, he shares their ideology.
Apparently, to the orgasmic delight of WadeWatch, Burleson actually posts comments on that blog from time to time and I was sent a particular one the other day. In regard to the usual burloney, it did not disappoint:
God makes His love for us so captivating, so alluring, so charming, so dazzling, so enthralling, so mesmerizing, so spellbinding (gospel comes from “good spell”), so magnetizing, so enrapturing, so gripping, so compelling, so hypnotizing, and so absolutely “sweep me off my feet” enamoring that I cannot, I must not, and I will not refuse, though I have the power to do so.
Where to start? Burleson makes salvation some road to Damascus event instead of a belief in the simple facts of the gospel. His kinship to the despicable John Piper is seen here in that Piper teaches that one is not saved unless he/she experiences Christ as an immense “treasure chest of joy.” I once knew a young man that I witnessed to who was being counseled by a certified NANC counselor who held to this view. This young man was living in the very bottom of human depravity. I later heard that he prayed on his knees for hours, begging God to save him while waiting on some ultra-joy experience. Deb and Dee, that cold one is for you. That’s what you promote when you give credence to the likes of Wade Burleson.
Much could be discussed in regard to this excerpt, the excellent points made by the reader notwithstanding, but I tend to have a special hankering for Burleson in regard to his make it up as you go theology. In this case, the idea that the “gospel” carries the idea of being put under a spell. Really? Am I here right now? Somebody google, “Gospel, Burleson, Cupid” and see if we get lucky.
The fact that Burleson would assign “gospel” a meaning from the spelling of the word long after the Bible was written, and on top of that not even the meaning of it at the time it was spelled that way to make a point speaks for itself. This is the same type of shenanigans that we have called him out on before. Here is the citation from Online Etymology Dictionary:
gospel (n.)
Old English godspel “gospel, glad tidings announced by Jesus; one of the four gospels,” from god “good” (see good) + spel “story, message” (see spell (n.)); translation of Latin bona adnuntiatio, itself a translation of Greek euangelion “reward for bringing good news.”
The first element of the Old English word had a long “o,” but it shifted under mistaken association with God. The word passed early from English to continental Germanic languages in forms that clearly indicate the first element had shifted to “God,” e.g. Old Saxon godspell, Old High German gotspell, Old Norse goðspiall. Used of anything as true as the Gospel from mid-13c. Gospel-gossip was Addison’s word (“Spectator,” 1711) for “one who is always talking of sermons, texts, etc.”
The first element of the Old English word had a long “o,” but it shifted under mistaken association with God. The word passed early from English to continental Germanic languages in forms that clearly indicate the first element had shifted to “God,” e.g. Old Saxon godspell, Old High German gotspell, Old Norse goðspiall. Used of anything as true as the Gospel from mid-13c. Gospel-gossip was Addison’s word (“Spectator,” 1711) for “one who is always talking of sermons, texts, etc.”
“Spel,” even when it was spelled that way long after the Bible was written, meant “story” or a “message,” not like a magic spell of some sort. Good grief. Now, true, I allow the Burlesons of the world to comment on PPT, but that’s for comparison and contrast, not endorsement.
And this is a great Segway into my idea for Deb and Dee. They could get rid of Burleson over time and not lose credibility. See, I don’t dislike them at all, just trying to help here. All they have to do is start disagreeing with him here and there when he comments on WadeWatch. Everybody disagrees with each other from time to time, right? So, they could ratchet this up slowly over time. They could eventually start treating him like Alex Guggenheim.
paul
Paul's Passing Thoughts 
Reblogged this on Clearcreek Chapel Watch.
LikeLike
Funny thing this afternoon I suggested to my son to say this verse every morning “this is the day that the Lord has made rejoice and be glad in it”! Why? Because guaranteed we will not be looking at everyday with this enraptured, amazing, mesmerizing, fantastic viewpoint. It is a daily (give me this day our daily bread thing) walk that if we don’t work at it tends to lean towards complacency- this unfortunately is the realistic and true part of humanity. The “John piper- 24 hour joyful Christian” view does not quite cut it; in fact, leads to more despair, guilt, and depression.
LikeLike
Oh yeh I did not (nor did any of my family) have the “knock you out, exciting, mesmerizing, far out” conversion experience. So I guess we are not saved……bummer.
LikeLike
Lol. That quote. Aside from not knowing that “spell” once meant “story,” Burleson has basically taken the “Jesus is my girlfriend” message out of modern worship songs and put it into theology.
LikeLike
Paul,
You are exactly right about Wade. He is little more than a smoother-talking Calvinist shill. I got the left boot of fellowship from Wartburg after going after Wade’s contradictory assumptions, much like the utter nonsense of his you just cited. I can’t believe that he didn’t have anything to so with me being consigned to the fringes of Wartburg moderation purgatory. I could be wrong, but “coincidence” I am not buying.
As I mentioned on my blog, the worst decision Dee and Deb made was bringing Wade on as e-pastor. Wartburg went from a place that really spoke to me-that vetted and ferreted out truth-to nothing more than a propaganda arm for Wade’s kinder and gentler despotism. Aside from a professed denial of his desire to lord authority-which is particularly irrelevant; for, given his acceptance of the doctrine of Total Depravity, he must concede his mandate to FORCE as God’s chosen gnostic proxy-he teaches the same stuff I heard in SGM Calvinist hell for 15 years. He is really a superficial thinker. The contradiction in the idea that you have “the power” to resist God’s call but as Wade declares “cannot and will not”, would be apparent to anyone with an ounce of reason.
Dee and Deb have unfortunately given in to the hypocrisy inherent in the acceptance of Calvinist “sound doctrine”. They do more harm than good now, I’m afraid.
LikeLike
Argo,
True that, but I just can’t get over the whole *God puts a spell on you* thing using a 13th century word that didn’t even mean that to begin with. Too much.
LikeLike
The verbiage also made me think of Piper.
“God makes His love for us so captivating, so alluring, so charming, so dazzling, so enthralling, so mesmerizing, so spellbinding (gospel comes from “good spell”), so magnetizing, so enrapturing, so gripping, so compelling, so hypnotizing, and so absolutely “sweep me off my feet” enamoring that I cannot, I must not, and I will not refuse, though I have the power to do so.”
There is another problem with this sort of presentation. Few believers have this experience. it sets up an impossible standard. He seems to also be trying to straddle the “free will” fence? He seems to be trying to say, I have the power to refuse it but cannot. Could he be trying to soften the determinist god paradigm he believes in? Make it more palatable?
LikeLike
Yes.
LikeLike
Lydia,
It is called “soft determinism”. Which…is just determinism, but made to give the illusion of some kind of “free” will. It is basically deception. A mask of the true fatalistic determinism which is utterly absolute.
LikeLike
“is called “soft determinism”. Which…is just determinism, but made to give the illusion of some kind of “free” will. It is basically deception. A mask of the true fatalistic determinism which is utterly absolute.”
Sort of like complemetarianism. Which wasn’t complimentary at all.
LikeLike
Wade’s mystic version of Christianity is predicated upon the idea that God’s grace is nothing more than the functional possession of man’s mind and will. It is utterly blasphemous at its core.
LikeLike
I disagree with soft determinism, hard determinism, all determinism. I have decided to look at actions to decide what I think of a person. I think Wade is a good man. I disagree love is irresistible. Adam & Eve had a choice. They were loved by God, walked with God & they disobeyed anyway.
I have friends that aren’t Calvinists but they make Calvinistic statements like “God is sovereign, God’s got it all under control, God can change so&so’s heart if He wants to” & I gently say why I disagree. But we love each other dearly. And they are honorable, decent & good Christians. Part of the problem is that Calvin-speak is so ingrained in the church culture where I live. It’s that way in non-Calvinistic churches. And amazingly, when I really started to listen up, I noticed unbelievers use deterministic language as well. So although some use these types of phrases (they do so in a thoughtless way) they don’t actually live that way or believe it.
LikeLike