THE HYMNS OF CHARLES WESLEY – Part 3 of 3

And can it be that I should gain
An int'rest in the Savior's blood?
Died He for me, who caused His pain?
For me, who Him to death pursued?
Amazing love! how can it be
That Thou, my God, should die for me?  (Charles Wesley)

I think Charles Wesley would be somewhat baffled by our [present day] controversies over the nature of the scriptures… In a sense, he hardly thought it necessary to defend the scriptures; they were a given, a taken-for-granted, and there was no need to plead their case.

But on the other hand, scholar though he was, he would wonder at the kind of biblical study which is more concerned with sources and settings and evidences of authenticity than with nurture. He was a poet, not a critic. He came to the scriptures for food and for the language of redemption and adoration. I am not saying that he would be unsympathetic with the scholar’s research, but he would be concerned lest in the process of measuring the sun’s rays we should miss the glory of its rising or setting.

And he would probably be troubled by the style of the modern pulpit. He would see that our language is an amalgam of politics, sports, sociology, psychology, economics, and faddish jargon. He had only one language, the language of Zion. The scriptures were his native tongue. 

-- J. Ellsworth Kalas in “Our First Song: Evangelism in the Hymns of Charles Wesley”

#5636