Letters

A Missed Opportunity

I enjoy reading Robert Coles and I appreciate what Joseph Sobran writes. Thus I greedily turned to these and others’ reflections on the impact of the Reagan White House on religion and society [“Sizing Up the Reagan Revolution,” Oct. 21]. The pieces were too “nice.”

Coles and Sobran disagree, as do Neuhaus and Reynolds. For the sake of understanding, CT missed a golden opportunity to let them disagree with each other, to criticize each other, and thus clarify each’s position and help readers come to better understanding and appreciation of the complexity of the religion-in-society issues.

REV. DAVID K. WEBER

Montana State University

Bozeman, Mont.

Robert Coles’s evaluation of President Reagan based on how well he has led the American people, with Jesus as a model, seems to forget that Reagan is not an ordained minister but the head of state—which, in the U.S., is not the church. He seems to forget further that if the church is in God’s right hand, the state, in its nature, is in his left and should serve God as such.

I did not start out with many expectations of Reagan in this presidency, but I and millions have been heartened over his release of many of our economic, political, and inalienable liberties that had become dangerously trammeled.

E. D. REED

Boston, Mass.

Of Mormons and geography

I just read “Rising Star at the Twirling Tomato” [Church in Action, Oct. 21]. At first reading I was annoyed that Rob Wilkins knows little about Utah geography—the people of American Fork may be surprised to find out they are so near to the people of Roy. As I continued, the phrase “Christianity that relies on the Bible as its sole authority is practically nonexistent” hit me. Ah, here we go again. There is a plethora of churches in Utah that exist solely to bash the Mormons. There seems to be a habit among many fundamentalist preachers and believers in Utah to seek out fulfillment for their own prophecies of oppression and fear. It seems an odd way to live for people who claim that Jesus won rather than lost the battle.

REV. GREG B. ANDERSON

Zion Lutheran Church

Salt Lake City, Utah

Wilkins did an excellent job in describing Lofquist’s ministry without the typical snide innuendos so often directed towards other denominations.

T. R. POCOCK

Fairfax, Va.

Discerning protest

Terry Muck’s editorial regarding well-publicized protests is insightful and provocative [“Holy Indignation,” Oct. 21]. Christian spokespeople often have been self-appointed individuals without clear motive, babbling rebuttals devoid of substantiation or offering a complete contextual misinterpretation of the issues at hand. Muck’s closing remarks are timely. The boiling point of protest isn’t a duel between activeness or passiveness, but of choosing to discern how I can be the most effective. God will be glorified amidst our limited, futile efforts.

DAN SCHERLING

Tacoma, Wash.

The word protest inaccurately describes what has been taking place in Atlanta and across the nation. A more accurate word would be rescue, from God’s command, “Rescue those being led away to death …” (Prov. 24:10–12, NIV). Because the goal is to save lives and not simply protest the killing, we should not use the word protest, which is the language of the media, but rather rescue, which accurately describes what is being done.

DANIEL R. DUFFY, JR.

Atlanta, Ga.

Two Western seminaries

I read the news article on seminary education with interest [Oct. 21]. But Joe Maxwell has confused Western Evangelical Seminary (Portland, Oreg.) with Western Theological Seminary (Holland, Mich.). The former is Wesleyan, while the latter is Calvinist.

REV. SIMON CHOU

Evangelical Chinese Church

Seattle, Wash.

Debatable Wisdom

My church took a lesson from the 1988 presidential campaign to help us call a new pastor. After the search committee narrowed the list to two names, we scheduled a debate.

Moderator (to the congregation): Please refrain from expressing your support for either candidate during our limited time together.

Panelist: Candidate #1, you have said you are tough on sin. How can we be sure this is not an empty promise?

Candidate #1: My record speaks for itself. In the past year I preached on sin 14 times. I believe sin is the most original problem the church has ever faced. My administration will do everything possible to fight sin right here in your community.

Candidate #2: We are all aware that last year my opponent’s Sunday school secretary redirected funds from the junior high bake sale to the purchase of vacation Bible school craft materials. So we must ask, Is he really tough on sin, or does he just talk tough?

Panelist: Candidate #2, you changed the rules at your last church so that saying the Lord’s Prayer was no longer mandatory. Why did you do that?

Candidate #2: I love the Lord’s Prayer as much as the next guy. My wife and I say it together after our devotions every morning. I simply believe it should not be imposed on a whole congregation.

Candidate #1: I am one who believes the Lord’s Prayer brings a church together. This is an issue on which my opponent and I have a very fundamental difference of opinion. This is a clear indicator of his stand on tradition, values, and ideology.

As you can see, nothing beats a debate for clarifying the important issues. I’m off to vote.

EUTYCHUS

Real bliss or real agony?

I did not appreciate “Rumors of Heaven” [Oct. 7]. I decided the point of the article was to portray the views of a book that minimizes hell. In the end, there is apparently no question about personal destiny. To say “It will be overwhelming bliss” really upsets me, because Satan’s favorite trick is minimizing what is really important in life.

Second, the article does not do justice to the orthodox Christian response, which would primarily be centered on the words of Christ in his story of the rich man and Lazarus (Luke 16). Does Christ’s after-death account sound like overwhelming bliss? It doesn’t even sound like underwhelming bliss to me. Let’s hear it for real agony.

DAVID G. TOUSSAINT

Fishers, Ind.

Infallibility and the true Jesus

I very much appreciated Kenneth Kantzer’s article “Why I Still Believe the Bible Is True” [Oct. 7]. I have one question: Kantzer stated that belief in the infallibility of the Bible was not absolutely necessary. However, if we are to believe in the true Jesus who reveals himself in the Word, and not in a Jesus of our conception, and if the fact that Jesus is really Lord means we are to live our lives for him as he says, isn’t the infallibility of the Bible necessary so that we know the true Jesus and know what he says about how we should live our lives?

REV. WM. G. BROUWERS

The Christian Reformed Church

Wisconsin Rapids, Wis.

A flaw in biblical inerrantism is revealed in the very illustration by which Kantzer seeks to demonstrate its validity. He feels that upon investigation, the two diverse accounts of an elderly lady’s death were satisfactorily harmonized so that both of them could be described as “inerrant.” If one wishes to allow that the Bible includes minute errors in reporting such as this, as it rather clearly does, and still describe it as “inerrant,” he may do so. He must be prepared, however, to realize that others of us will find in the use of this word just the slightest hint of dishonesty, which we cannot harmonize with our submission to the lordship of Jesus Christ.

REV. BURRELL PENNINGS

North Haledon, N.J.

False accusation

Your news report [Aug. 12] falsely accused me of charging Murray Harris of Trinity Evangelical Divinity School with “heresy” because he teaches that Jesus did not rise in a physical, material body. While I believe his view is unbiblical and inconsistent with the doctrinal statement he signs, I never called it “heresy.”

Then, although you apologized in a letter for not contacting me for comment, in the very issue in which you published an edited version of my letter of complaint [Oct. 21] you also published another letter right after it from Mike Andrus that repeats the false claim that I charged Harris with “heresy.” Doesn’t your right hand know what your left hand is doing?

Furthermore, the same letter contains the false and slanderous charge that I was under “disciplinary procedures” by the Evangelical Free Church. The truth is that no such procedures ever occurred. That was merely a personal threat by Mr. Andrus if I did not desist in my attempt to inform my fellow Free Church pastors of the denial of the physical, material nature of the resurrection body by one of their seminary professors.

Publishing defamatory evangelical garbage about a fellow Christian leader, especially without checking out its truthfulness, is inexcusable. Consider the very words you printed [Oct. 7] in the way another magazine handled the Swindoll issue: “We do not want to appear to be slanting the news, especially against those we know to be credible.” And “it would seem that the responsible thing for a journalist to do would be to check out the story he or she decides to print.” I fully agree.

NORMAN L. GEISLER

Dallas Theological Seminary

Dallas, Texas

We apologize for not contacting Dr. Geisler for comment before publishing this material.—Eds.

Changing views of Judaism

It was with much appreciation that I read the articles in the CT Institute, “Changing Views of Judaism” [Oct. 7]. As a Jewish believer in Yeshua, I have been touched on a personal level by virtually every issue therein discussed. Perhaps the greatest lesson I have learned over the years, through participation on a grassroots level in this “task of reconciliation,” is that we (Jews and Gentile church) need each other. The reconciliation of God’s people is more than mere pleasantry or moral rectitude; it is God’s purpose and heart that his people be one.

S. G.

El Toro, Calif.

David Rausch perpetuates an inaccurate accusation when he mentions Martin Luther and the Holocaust in the same breath, at least implicitly suggesting some level of cause and effect. Luther was not anti-Semitic. A careful reading of the sources will show that he made a distinction between Jewish people, who are fellow travelers on the road of life, and the Jewish religion, which tragically rejects the only Way to eternal life. The church today should have the conviction to do the same.

LAWRENCE O. OLSON

Loves Park, Ill.

Censorship vs. moral indignation

David Neff’s editorial “Scorsese’s Christ” [Oct. 7] neatly exposed the difference between “censorship” and moral indignation, while carefully analyzing the weakness of both liberals and evangelicals whenever Jesus is not accepted as our pre-existing Lord. Of course Jesus grew, learned, and made decisions as all boys and young men do. Of course he had to think through his relationships regarding “sexual attraction” and “his calling.” The only advantages he had were that he chose his own mother, and he did not carry the extra burden of self-inflicted bad habits.

HERBERT E. DOUGLASS

Weimar, Calif.

The other side of Yasir Arafat

In the intriguing review by Bob Hitching of the Alan Hart book on Arafat [Books, Oct. 7], the reader is left with several nagging questions. If Arafat “finds death abhorrent,” why does he actively and proudly continue to promote it? If he is such “an intensely sensitive man with a passion for justice and equity,” why do we still read of Fatah leaflets which attack supporters of a political solution with Israel? The “other side of Arafat” found in the book and review are not new, they are merely the side he shows the Western media.

DR. JOHN FISCHER

Menorah Ministries

Palm Harbor, Fla.

Wake Forest or Louisville?

A report on the recent troubles at Southeastern Baptist Theological Seminary incorrectly located that school in Louisville where the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary is located, rather than in Wake Forest, North Carolina, where Southeastern is located. To set the record straight, the committee of the Association of Theological Schools in the U.S. and Canada visited Southeastern in Wake Forest. As for Southern Seminary’s accreditation, the last visit of an evaluation team resulted in a recommendation for reaffirmation of full accreditation for the institution.

DAVID R. WILKINSON

Vice President for Seminary Relations

Southern Baptist Theological Seminary Louisville, Ky.

Swindoll’s troubles

I read with interest CT’s account of “Swindoll’s House Woes” [News, Oct. 7]. Swindoll would have us believe “we were naïve.” No way. Out of touch, perhaps, but not naïve.

WALTER R. PETERSON

Huntsville, Ala.

I think he was a bit smug.

ANITA MIDDLETON

Duluth, Minn.

Have something to add about this? See something we missed? Share your feedback here.