As of this date, we continue to be challenged for not revealing the author(s) who wrote the material for this website (sometimes challenged in very unkind terms). Believe me when I say that I really do understand the frustration over not knowing who wrote this critique. It was not a decision I came to easily. But several reasons compelled me to withhold that bit of information. Interestingly, a number of people have weighed in on this issue through various channels, and the issue for many of them seems to be one of whether or not they will trust the critique based on who wrote it. This is especially true of people who have benefitted from the teachings based on The Life Model. They find it so hard to believe that Jim could be mistaken about Dallas Willard that they will not even consider the content of the critique.
My question to them would be, Why not read the critique and weigh the various objections for what they say rather than who said them? And if you are unsure as to whether you know enough about what Dallas taught in order to discern what might be true, then at least come away with the realization that there are reasons to question the validity of Renovated. And then please consider this as well, that this critique was not written in a vacuum. Several people who are much closer to Dallas and who thoroughly understand his writings have provided ample confirmation that Renovated presents a severely distorted view of Dallas’ work and therefore engages in a completely unnecessary and misleading deconstruction of spiritual formation as envisioned by Dallas.
In reading any important document, the main value in knowing about the author(s) is that it can sometimes shed light on what presuppositions might underlie the writing. A reader may reasonably want to know, Through what lens does this author view reality, and what is the motive for writing? Well, that is something we can clear up here.
Our starting point is the undeniable fact that Dallas Willard gave us the best description of life in the Kingdom of God that can be found anywhere, as well as the means by which we can move in that direction. Personally, I have been studying the teachings of Dallas for over 20 years; it has been life-changing on so many levels it would take a book to describe the life-giving impact Dallas has had on my journey and my bond with God.
The motive for authoring this critique is our concern that the majority of Christians today are unfortunately still very much unaware of who Dallas was and what he taught, and Renovated is the single worst misrepresentation of Dallas’ work in print. That’s a terrible combination. Because if this is how people get introduced to Dallas Willard’s contributions, then they will suffer a great loss.
What makes this even more tragic, is that it could have been such a good book. Attachment with God is what we were designed for. And that truth is actually in perfect harmony with everything that Dallas Willard taught. It was therefore completely unnecessary to misrepresent Dallas’ work and then proceed as if it needed to be corrected in order to accommodate a focus on attachment. Yet so many people seem to buy this argument wholesale. It makes me sick at heart to even contemplate what that costs us in our efforts to recover the truths about life in the Kingdom of God.
That is why this critique was so terribly necessary. And that is why it really does not matter who wrote it.
