Letters

No Lasting Impact?

Donald Wildmon Taking on TV’s Bad Boys,” Aug. 19] may not be an “ignorant fundamentalist preacher,” but neither is he likely to have a lasting impact on American culture. Like it or not, the films, programs, and magazines against which he rails are popular and widely accepted. Efforts by one segment of society to limit another’s viewing choices are going to alienate, not evangelize, those who disagree.

Wildmon’s efforts, like those of all Christians, would be better spent trying to identify and encourage positive entertainment choices. Scholarships, grants, and recognition of worthwhile programs could do more to challenge the status quo than Wildmon’s boycotts.

John Carney Wartrace, Tenn.

Your article on Don Wildmon has restored my faith. There are conservative Methodists.

Alan K. Henderson

Arlington, Tex.

Boycotts and prolifers

Esther Byle Bruland’s article, “Voting with Your Checkbook: What Every Christian Should Know About Boycotts” [Aug. 19], referred to the boycott of Dayton Hudson stores. It may have left readers with the idea that the company stopped supporting Planned Parenthood, then resumed funding because it was in a “no-win situation.” Nothing could be further from the truth. Dayton Hudson’s hierarchy is filled with active supporters of legal abortion. We believe the Dayton Hudson ruse was orchestrated—possibly to show other companies that even if they agreed to stop funding Planned Parenthood, the decisions could always be reversed.

One final point: Those who oppose corporate funding of Planned Parenthood are not demanding money. Abortion apologists insist that corporations give them money or they will start a boycott. Arguing that these approaches are in any way similar is ludicrous.

Douglas R. Scott

Vice President for Public Policy

Christian Action Council

Falls Church, Va.

Retired, not resigned

The article concerning the “resignation” of Seattle Pacific University President David Le Shana [News, Aug. 19] contained distressing inaccuracies regarding both Dr. Le Shana and SPU.

First, Le Shana did not resign; he retired. In fact, he was unanimously named “President Emeritus” by the board of trustees and will have a continuing relationship to the university in that capacity. The status recognizes his nine years at SPU and his 31 years of service to Christian higher education.

Second, his retirement was in no way tied to discussions surrounding a human-sexuality course at SPU. Dave’s decision to accelerate his retirement was made to protect his wife, Becky, who has had cancer, from the stress related to his intensified fund-raising activities and other ongoing duties. CT’S references to the course’s content and SPU’s position on the issue were inflammatory and incomplete. We deem it appropriate to offer a human-sexuality course in the context of our overall academic curriculum. But, as a Christian university, we also affirm our responsibility—and desire—to teach all courses within the biblical framework of orthodox Christian thought.

V. O. “Bud” McDole

Chairman, Board of Trustees

Seattle Pacific University

CT regrets any unwarranted inferences readers may have drawn from the article. Le Shana’s retirement crowns a long and distinguished career in Christian higher education.

—Eds.

Overlooked truth

Isn’t it a shame that the rightness of Donald Bloesch’s article “Lost in the Mystical Myths” [Aug. 19] will be overlooked by so many? There is so much truth in what he says, yet because of the I-ism we have let into the Christian community, many will miss it.

Phyllis Taulman

Gallatin, Tenn.

Will vouchers really help?

I appreciate your desire to print both sides of the issue [“Parental Choice: Will Vouchers Solve the School Crisis?” Aug. 19]. My wife and I teach at a Christian private school. We attended public schools as children, and my wife has taught in public schools. Christians in public schools have a very important ministry and it needs to be recognized as such. However, it must be acknowledged that many public schools have some serious problems. Perhaps the voucher system would force the present system to improve. If parents are going to pay taxes to support education, surely they have the right to decide what type of education their children should receive.

Gerry T. Parker

Grand Bay, Ala.

Frank C. Nelsen’s “sound reasons” against parental choice contain some large holes. He implies there would be a shortage of private schools because parents would all choose to send their children there. In fact, every public-school district has some schools that are doing a better job of educating students than others. Parental choice would open the door for parents to send their children to higher-quality public schools.

Second, Nelsen states that the transition to choice would cause students serious psychological and social problems. Do I need to point out that many of today’s public-school students are developing these same problems without ever transferring schools?

Finally, Nelsen would have us believe the market incentive involved in choice is that teachers would work harder to earn more money. Actually, the incentive is for administrators, who gain more money to use either to hire better teachers or provide better resources—either of which provides a better education for the child.

John S. Walker

Family Research Council

Washington, D.C.

Slain giant

I was surprised your review of Phillip Johnson’s book Darwin on Trial [“A Professor Takes Darwin to Court,” Aug. 19] read as if his was the first serious challenge to Darwinian evolution. For anyone with “ears to hear,” Dr. Henry Morris and others slew that giant decades ago.

Jerry Cole

Dallas, Ga.

Important distinction

In his article “The Biography of God” [July 22], Alister McGrath confuses or ignores the important distinction between narrative theology (the whole Bible is just a story to make a point) and narrative communication device. He implies that since Jesus used stories to illustrate his points, all the stories of the Bible must be mere illustrative stories. But illustrations of what? The genius of the Bible-as-narrative hermeneutic is the old game of putting God back in his box and us back into the driver’s seat when it comes to the authority of Scripture. Are such narrative accounts as Creation, the birth of Christ, and the Resurrection to be seen in the same light as the parables just because the term narrative applies?

Narrative history and narrative illustration (parables) are so obviously different that to treat them alike is just silly.

David Van Boven

Bellingham, Wash.

Balance needed

I got a lot of mileage out of “The Jogging Monk and the Exegesis of the Heart” [July 22]. Currently being in a doctoral program at Fuller, the quest for balance between theological exegesis and a deepening and growing spirituality is always a challenge. The article was an encouragement concerning the challenge and the work necessary to break through to warmth and ongoing growth in our spiritual walk as pastors.

Pastor Ronald B. Martoia

Charis Christian Center

Jackson, Mich.

The American way?

Guy Condon’s goal of changing our nation’s abortion policies is an admirable one [“You Say Choice, I Say Murder,” June 24]. But his suggestion that Christians can accomplish this by simply altering their rhetoric is ethical only if they actually mean what they say. Do evangelical Christians really “understand that caring for a mother with an unwanted pregnancy—unconditionally protecting and caring for her unborn child before and after birth—is the ultimate in compassion … is intelligent … and the American way”?

I think not.

Pamela Urfer

Soquel, Calif.

I agree with Condon’s insistence that we must choose our language well in order to influence our society and government in opposition to abortion.

I have a suggestion: We can stop using the word it in reference to babies when what we really mean is he or she or he and she, and we can stop using the words that and which when we really mean who and whom.

Duane J. Einfeld

Seattle, Wash.

The real George Bama

Craig Parro’s recent guest editorial [“Church Growth’s Two Faces,” June 24] argues that church marketing can be at odds with Scripture because it switches our trust from God to techniques. As ammunition for this argument, he quotes Christian researcher George Barna. “Barna writes: ‘If a church studies its market, devises intelligent plans, and implements those plans faithfully, it should see an increase in the number of visitors, new members, and people who accept Christ as their Savior.’ God is not even part of this equation!”

I have worked with George Barna as part of the Barna Research Group and been involved in research for churches and in putting together Barna Research Group publications. Readers of these publications can easily tell you that in all reports it is made clear that any marketing technique is a distant second to the importance of the gospel.

To give CT readers a more realistic view of the Barna Research Group, let me provide a few representative quotes from company publications that Parro overlooked:

“There may be times when you are tempted to engage in practices that will almost certainly appeal to the unchurched, even if it ‘bends the rules’ a little bit. Always remember that once we compromise what we believe in or what we stand for, we have lost the battle.” (Never on a Sunday: The Challenge of the Unchurched)

“[P]rayer is indisputably one of the greatest and most underutilized weapons we have at our disposal. If successful churches teach us nothing else, they demonstrate the importance of having a vibrant prayer ministry.” (Successful Churches: What They Have in Common)

“[N]umerical growth … should never be considered to be the church’s sole objective. It is only one of the goals that a church must strive to satisfy if it is to maximize its impact … for the Kingdom of God.” (Church Growth: New Attitudes for a New Era)

Marketing disciplines are simply tools we can and should use properly to further God’s kingdom. To suggest that George Barna and the Barna Research Group believe anything else is, simply, incorrect.

Ron Sellers

North Hollywood, Calif.

AA’s challenge to the church

We were pleased to read “The Hidden Gospel of the 12 Steps” in the July 22 issue. The Faith at Work movement Sam Shoemaker founded is still a vital Christian ministry where many “12-steppers” come to faith in Jesus Christ. Often Faith at Work is a bridge back to the church for addicts who could not find enough acceptance and honesty for healing there. The challenge AA presents to the church is not just the potential for evangelism, but that our goodness often shuts out the very sinners Jesus came to save.

Marjory Zoet Bankson, President

Faith at Work, Inc.

Columbia, Md.

Tim Stafford’s article gives a solid example of how profit can be obtained at the forfeit of one’s soul. In the raging battles of spiritual warfare, Satan can easily afford to exchange sobriety for a person’s soul. Alcoholism is a crippling condition, as are cancer and AIDS, but while these only destroy the body, lack of faith in Jesus Christ brings the punishment of eternal destruction as well. Reformed alcoholics may fight the good fight and complete the course, but without keeping the faith in Jesus, the final prize is not theirs.

Paul Mega

Murrieta, Calif.

We do not need to fit the disease concept into our thinking for the 12-step programs to work, just as we do not need to realize that we have merely changed from sinful to sick in order to get help.

Donald C. Thompson, M.D. Morristown, Tenn.

Stafford was right on the money. We usually assume that Christians overcome besetting sins by making a crisis decision or walking an aisle. Alas, those who do so normally fall right back into that sin within a week, AA, in the spirit of Romans 6, reminds us that besetting sins need to be turned over “a day at a time.” My fear is that with the fad of 12-step manuals and workbooks, Christians will try to recover in the isolation of their own study.

True 12-step groups urge attenders: “Take what you like … and leave the rest.” The believer can worship the one God as his Higher Power and still find the tools for recovery. It is better for Christians to swallow their fear and pride and try the real thing rather than use half-measures.

Gary S. Shogren

Biblical Theological Seminary

Hatfield, Pa.

Dale Ryan [“Addicts in the Pew”] did not “set up” a support group for addicts. In 1983 I joined Overcomers, an existing group for Alcoholics, addicts, codependents, and ACoA’s, which had been meeting since 1977, before Ryan joined the Whittier Area Baptist Fellowship staff.

Frances Holt

Hacienda Heights, Calif.

Discussion and balance lacking

The review by John Stackhouse of Norman Geisler’s book The Battle for the Resurrection (Books, May 17) lacked the discussion and balance necessary for a fair review. Stackhouse erroneously states that Geisler and Harris differ only slightly concerning the Resurrection. If one reads Harris’s Raised Immortal, to which Geisler’s book responds, it is clear their views are strikingly different. The review claims that chapter seven of Geisler’s book advocates the very position he attacks. Not so, for Geisler is claiming that Christ’s body, though spiritual, was not immaterial.

The tone of the review suggests Stackhouse does not appreciate the seriousness of the discussion. Historically, theologians of Catholic and Protestant traditions have placed great importance on the Resurrection and its particulars. The concerns shared by Geisler and other theologians and philosophers are not trivial but are compatible with historic Christianity.

Stephen Rost

Liberty University

Lynchburg, Va.

Letters are welcome. If intended for publication, they must include a signature and address. Letters may be edited for space and clarity. Write to Eutychus, CHRISTIANITY TODAY, 465 Gundersen Drive, Carol Stream, Illinois 60188.

Healthy Eating and Heresy

Every once in a while, I get an urge to exercise. I just used to lie down till it went away. If that didn’t work, eating a candy bar or a bag of potato chips would clear my mind of such thoughts.

But all that’s changed. Several months ago, I offered what I considered a convincing theological justification for my paunchy profile. At the urging of my readers (thanks to both of you for writing), I’m now a man on a mission: Lose 25 ugly pounds in three months.

I’ve discovered that losing weight is no piece of cake. And by far the toughest hurdle is the dietary dilemma posed by my own fellow conservative, Bible-believing, evangelical eaters. Some of them are convinced that, somewhere in Scripture, God commanded mankind to eat meat and potatoes for the evening meal. End of menu.

Deacon Leonard Hoke caught me downing some alfalfa sprouts at a fast-food salad bar the other day and asked if I’d joined the New Age movement. Tom, the butcher, sounded like a preacher calling on a truant member when he cornered me the other day: “I haven’t seen you in my shop lately.” I can’t begin to tell you the stir I caused at the last church potluck.

So for now, I’ll have to play it a little safe. I put on my Halloween toupee and some sunglasses when I go to the health-food store. And, with my apologies to the environment, I’m going to hold off on my proposal that the church quit using unrecyclable plastic foam cups. Old Leonard had the fire of a Salem judge in his eye when he spotted those sprouts on my plate. The last thing I want is to get hauled before the deacon board. They might ask me to prove my orthodoxy by eating a bacon double cheeseburger with a side of fries. And I don’t have the will power to resist that sort of temptation.

EUTYCHUS

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