Jumpstarter 9 of 10

Ideas to help restart your discussion

Question 9

The Methodist standards include concrete prohibitions (credit purchases without “probability of paying,” “haggling,” “costly apparel,” certain amusements, “laying up treasure,” and even speaking evil of magistrates or ministers); which of these most exposes the ways modern Christians normalize sin or self-indulgence, and what rationalizations do we use to keep them from applying to us?

Another way to ask: Which Methodist rule most shows how today’s Christians excuse sin or self-indulgence? What excuses do we use to say those rules don’t apply to us?

Direct Answer Based on the transcript, several prohibitions expose ordinary habits as spiritual issues—especially “costly apparel,” “luxury and needless self-indulgence,” “laying up treasure,” and irresponsible credit—because they confront consumption and comfort. The transcript doesn’t list modern rationalizations, but it implies people downplay such rules by assuming standards are “unspiritual” or unnecessary.

Support from Transcript:

Wesley’s “doing no harm” list includes “the putting on of gold and costly apparel,” “luxury and needless self-indulgence,” and “laying up treasure upon earth.”
It also forbids “borrowing without a probability of paying, or purchasing goods on credit without a probability of paying for them.”
It names everyday commerce habits: “using many words in buying or selling, that is, haggling.”
It includes speech and attitude: “uncharitable… conversation,” including “speaking evil of magistrates or of ministers.”
Bercot notes, “Some Christians mistakenly think it is unspiritual to be subject to church standards,” hinting at a common reason people dismiss such applications.

Discussion Follow-ups Which of these standards hits closest to how we spend money and time? If we resist them, is it because we think they are irrelevant, or because they threaten our comforts?

Jumpstarter 9 of 10

Add your phone number?

Thank you!

Jumpstarter 9 of 10