Letters to the Editor

Understanding God as Father

I agree completely with the conclusions that Elizabeth Achtemeier reaches in her article “Why God Is Not Mother” [Aug. 16], but not with the route she travels to get there. She argues that “if the creation has issued forth from the body of the deity [as some feminist theologians argue], it shares in the deity’s substance.… Therefore everything is divine.”

Non sequitur! Arguing this way, Achtemeier is going to “prove” the very thing she wants to disprove. Not knowing about the biological union of sperm with ovum, our ancient forebears thought a mother merely provided the incubator in which the father’s seed was gestated. Hence, in Jesus’ geneology in Matthew 1, it is only the fathers who do the begetting. Achtemeier’s specious line of reasoning would point to the concept of God as Father [rather than Mother] as promoting a view in which God is identified with his creation.

We had best leave the reason why God is Father instead of Mother in the sovereign mind of God who so chose to reveal himself, rather than try to conceive of humanly devised reasons why he did so.

Rev. Burrell Pennings

Zeeland, Mich.

One point seldom mentioned when discussing this issue is the Bible’s description of the church. The same writers who described God in masculine terms, described the church in a feminine term, that is, the bride of Christ. It is interesting how these so-called sexist writers chose to identify themselves (and every Christian man) with a clearly feminine term.

Craig A. Clark

Minneapolis, Minn.

Hinn’s “medicine”

Thank you for keeping the Christian public informed on Benny Hinn [News, Aug. 16]. Benny is so crass that he claimed in Philadelphia (a meeting I attended and taped in Feb. 1993) that if you bought and read his book on healing you would be healed by reading it! For $15.99 you could buy a miracle. He needs to “repent” of practicing medicine without a license.

Rev. G. R. Fisher

Laurelton Park Baptist Church

Bricktown, NJ.

Unbiblical “demand feeding”?

Regarding Gary and Anne Marie Ezzos’ Preparation for Parenting [Aug. 16]: So what’s unbiblical about the “primitive” system of “demand” feeding for infants? In all likelihood, Abraham’s, Moses’, and Jesus’ mothers used this system. A newborn can’t possibly understand law and discipline but can respond to God’s love and care, modeled by parents who are attentive to their child’s need for food and comfort.

Paula F. Cardoza

Speedway, Ind.

Did Satan cause Cowper’s mania?

Virginia Stem Owens lists possible causes of William Cowper’s suicidal depression in her great article “The Dark Side of Grace” [July 19]. One more should be added to the list: satanic attack. Known as “the father of lies” and “the accuser of the brethren,” Satan could certainly have been the originator of Cowper’s mania and melancholia, attempting to prevent him from writing hymns that would endure in successive generations.

Cowper endured the worst kind of spiritual warfare. In some traditions he would have been exorcised in the name of Jesus.

Marilyn Fanning

Lynchburg, Va.

I take exception to Owens’s characterization of Cowper as heretical because of his claim to be a “special case to which scriptural assurances could not apply.” Admittedly, this was “bad theology”; but to say that this was a “perverse will” I think is most unfair.

Only one who has passed through the horror of a deep depression can appreciate the bizarre conclusions reached by those in such a state—even dedicated Christians. Cowper’s attempts at suicide failed. Tragically, however, other depressed believers have succeeded in their self-destruction, mistakenly thinking God had abandoned them or that they were beyond hope. I can’t believe Owens would label these sick individuals perverse or heretical.

Pastor Charles F. Kiloski

First Baptist Church

Altoona, Pa.

The Jurassic Church Comes Of Age?

The Jurassic Park craze has given our pastor some new ideas on how to boost church attendance. He wants to display our own living dinosaurs in prominent places for public viewing. His plan won’t involve genetically engineered prehistoric animals. No messy gene splicing or complicated dinosaur DNA cloning here. He’s talking about our church board.

“We’re turning our seeker services into seeker safaris!” he says. “It will be just like the fictionalized theme park.”

I suggested to our pastor that he include himself as the original “thunder lizard.” I thought he’d be a great tyrannosaurus rector. The list of displays is impressive p nonetheless.

The announcer will say, “Welcome to Jurassic Church. You are now entering the lost world of the prehistoric past. Our tour begins in the church library. Here we notice two rare species. First, the board member always pushing for more exegetical sermons from the Old Testament, the bron-Torah-saurus. Next to him you can see this creature’s rival, the board member who likes lighter sermons, the triceratopical.

“On your right you can see the board member who loves to study the end times, velocirapture.

“Next, we proceed to the church kitchen. Here we find a board member who loves grazing at potlucks, socials, and outdoor picnics, the barbequesaurus.”

It is doubtful whether our pastor will be able to sell this attendance-boosting concept to the board. What church board would like to be considered cold-blooded?

The question is asked, “How could William Cowper write hymns extolling the goodness of God while on the edge of suicide?” Apparently he was able to cling to the objective truth of God apart from his devastating “feelings.” Elizabeth Barrett Browning has given us insight into this enigma in her masterful poem “Cowper’s Grave”:

O poets, from a maniac’s tongue was poured the deathless singing!

O Christians, at your cross of hope a hopeless hand was clinging!

O men, this man in brotherhood your weary paths beguiling,

Groaned inly while he taught you peace, and died while ye were smiling! (v. 2)

I thought of The Wounded Healer, the biography of J. B. Phillips written by his widow and close friend. It reveals “the private turmoil that Phillips endured, even while he was guiding others through the dark places of doubt and loss of faith.” It is gratifying to realize that both Cowper and Phillips are in glory, fully aware that their being there didn’t depend one iota on themselves!

Mrs. Robert W. Teague

York, Pa.

U.S. not marching to Zion

Hurray for Philip Yancey’s column “Why Clinton Is Not Antichrist” [Aug. 16]. With all of the confusion over pluralism in America, Yancey touches an important point. The promises made to Israel (especially the one concerning the land and blessing in 2 Chron.) is not extended to believers here, today. America is not the New Israel. As a nation, we are not marching to Zion. The future of the church is much more glorious. Until then, the challenge is, as Yancey states, to strive to be Christ’s church in an increasingly hostile world.

Terry Tolleson

Independence, Kan.

Trendy anti-intellectualism

The same issue that reviewed David Wells’s prophetic No Place for Truth [Books, July 19] also supplied a sad confirmation of his thesis regarding the trendy anti-intellectualism of much of evangelicalism: We read of Thomas Nelson’s comic-book series, of which Pilgrim’s Progress is the first. Instead of dumbing down and selling out in comic-book form, what about promoting the reading—that vanishing intellectual art—of Christian classics like Pilgrim’s Progress? Are we incorrigibly helpless before a page of written words?

Doug Groothuis

Denver Seminary

Denver, Colo.

The inability to receive critique will contribute to evangelicalism’s demise. Wells’s analyses of CT and LEADERSHIP should jolt their editors from slumber. Theology is food for the soul, not the self, and evangelicals are starving to death. Please feed us.

Jana Brazeal

Arnold, Mo.

God’s loving design for humans

Many thanks to Stanton L. Jones for placing the issue of homosexuality in the larger context of biblical truth [“The Loving Opposition,” July 19]. I have found it antagonizing and unprofitable to discuss homosexuality on the basis of arbitrary scriptural commands alone. Taking in the greater perspective of divine grace and God’s purposes for human sexuality lowers defenses and allows a glimpse of our Father’s loving design for mankind. How much more winsome and convincing that is to those sinking in the morass of acute sexual crisis.

Pastor Melvin Johnson

Glad Tidings Temple

San Francisco, Calif.

Jones’s statement that “evidence suggests that genetic factors, possibly operative through brain differences, may give some push in the direction of homosexual preference” overinterprets the findings of two studies that have made national media headlines in recent months.

First, these two studies have not been verified. Second, no human behavior ever has been totally linked to a genetic trait or gene. Third, twin studies have shown that the occurrence of homosexuality in identical twins is only about 50 percent. Fourth, even if science someday verifies that homosexuals are hereditarily predisposed in their sexual desires, it is important to remember that sexual desires are powerful, but not uncontrollable, determinants of behavior.

Larry and Joyce Armstrong

Chaplin, Conn.

What gives Jones the right to pick and choose among the Bible’s clear commands? Leviticus not only calls homosexual acts an abomination but also condemns the wearing of blended fabrics, not to mention the well-known list of non-Kosher foods. Only seven verses form the explanation of sex causing a married couple to become “one flesh,” on which Jones bases his ethical system; Ephesians endorses slavery. Perhaps Jones is closer than he thinks to the gay Christians and their “misrepresentation” of the Bible.

Bert Thompson

Chicago, Ill.

Jones wrote in his opening paragraph that when he thinks of homosexuals, he thinks of a friend who seduces teenage boys. By so doing, he lent credence to an ugly and untrue stereotype and fanned the flames of homophobia. Jones knows better than to do something like this, and CT should know better than to print it.

Anthony Campolo, Ph.D.

Eastern College

St. Davids, Pa.

Many of us who believe the Bible to be the inspired Word of God also believe that both the sexual identities and the committed relationships of our homosexual sisters and brothers are cause for celebration, rather than either regret or condemnation. I am grateful to Stanton Jones for stating the basis of what we believe so clearly. He points out that what the Bible condemns is the “isolated act” of people of the same gender having sex with each other. Homosexuality, as a fundamental element of personal identity, is not what the Bible condemns.

Peggy Campolo

St. Davids, Pa.

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