Here are a few questions to ponder from a Friend of mine at EFC-ER, Wayne Evans:
1) Does Nietzche’s “God is Dead” (1880) fit into liberalism or have its own
2) What was the contribution of Quakers not making much use of discipleship
(especially Bible doctrines) to the polarization?
3) If divorcing from the past occurred (page 2), is it possible that some of
the original standings of the early Quakers was misguided? -or deficient?
I only had time to work out a brief response to number three, anyone else want to help?
In thinking about #3 specifically that I am hesitant to want to sign the earlier beliefs off because the Friends church was so influential on both continents – as you know much of the things we take for granted today (as American Protestant Christians) were pioneered by the Friends – so because of this first I want to find how to be faithful to our ongoing narrative. However at the same time I see that some emphases are lost in our times, while others need to be brought out more, refined for the age – this is what I hope to see happen and make as my own work. In that short article I quoted one of my (anabaptist) professors Nancey Murphy who talks about core beliefs – the things that are essential to being a Friend, without them we are just another anglo-protestant (nothing necessarily wrong with that but we have such a rich tradition). We would agree there is something important about the Friends “peculiar” testimony to the work of Christ – we need to find out what those core parts are, save those and leave the rest as dross. This of course, as you know, is a slow and difficult process but I think it needs to be worked out.