I would like to add some thoughts that I had after my email conversation with Beth (see Part 1 and Part 2) but I’m not in the mood right now. What was funny about the emails I received from Beth is that they came at the same time I had been exchanging some comments with a Catholic apologetic (which I didn’t even know existed before this) on this post at Challies. I then read this post and this post at Pyromaniacs, which really spoke to me.
I really have little interest in debating the issues I see In Roman Catholicism or Mormonism but yet I have managed to bring up both on this blog. I am not theologically-trained nor I am one of those people that can quote scripture well to make my points, so I feel like I’m not qualified to get into these debates. But I do have a good basis of biblical knowledge and (I think) the gift of discernment, so I know when something is amiss.
The issues I see with Mormonism, Catholicism, Jehovah Witness (ism?), and for the most any religion outside of biblical Christianity all boil down for the most part to The Bible. The latter groups do not consider the Bible the Word of God and former groups don’t believe the Bible is sufficient – they need to add to it (Book of Mormon, traditions, etc.).
Therefore, it seems to me there isn’t much point in arguing the small points. The argument needs to be around the sufficiency of scripture (Sola Scriptura). I can’t convince someone that their religion is incorrect because it does not keep with biblical truths if they either don’t believe in The Bible as the ultimate authority or they believe that they can add “truths” to the Bible based on things like tradition.
I find this idea comforting because I don’t want to spend my time researching other faiths so that I can argue against them. I want to know God’s Word so well that I can make a great argument for Him – the true Him. Which reminds me, Challies had another great post on identifying counterfeit money which ties in great with this idea of knowing the True to identify the False. I highly recommend it (be sure to read part 1 & 2) along with the posts I mentioned at Pyromaniacs.
"The grass withers and the flowers fall, but the word of our Lord stands forever. Isaiah 40:8
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Christian Women Blogging
Articles for Christian Women
Blog Archive
-
▼
2006
(93)
-
▼
July
(18)
- A Sign for My Friend?
- Sola Scriptura Prelude
- Circumstances Converge, Part 2
- Circumstances Converge, Part 1
- Is it from God?
- How to Increase Comment Counts
- Still on the Horizon...
- What I'm thinking about Today
- Response to Comments - Catholicism
- Christian Women Bloggers
- Extra-Biblical Teaching
- Where Acknowledging Ends and Disowning Begins
- Blogger Stinks, Take a Number
- Finding Christ
- I Changed My Template...
- Can Christian Women Not Debate?
- The True or False Test - What is the Key?
- Dialogue with a Catholic, Part 2
-
▼
July
(18)
Blog Roll
5 comments:
Carrie,
I think you’re right that a great deal of the differences between what you believe and what Mormons believe has to do with the Bible. I am a Mormon and I have a hard time understanding your paradigm of accepting only the Bible. The founder of Mormonism, Joseph Smith, wrote that when he was confronted with a question it was impossible to resolve it by going to the Bible. “…for the teachers of the different sects understood the same passages of scripture so differently as to destroy all confidence in settling the question by an appeal to the Bible.”
As I said, I have trouble understanding your (the Protestant) paradigm; because it seems like such an artificial position—even approaching idolatry. Given the fact that the Bible did not exist in its current form until well into the Christian era, and that people were saved long before that time, what do you think the Bible is sufficient for? Since the Bible never refers to itself, why subscribe to a position that says, “This is all that is inspired, God hasn’t or could not provide any more scripture than what has been compiled since _______?"
Was Christian scripture sufficient in 75 A.D. or not until around 400 A.D. when the book of Revelation was added? Was the Bible sufficient when it included the Apocrypha or only after those books were deleted? What is the difference between Jews concluding that the Bible was sufficient without the New Testament and you concluding that it’s sufficient without anything else?
Your profile says you are a scientist by day. Think about this like a scientist. Would you exclude data from an experiment simply because it's been done that way for hundreds of years?
Alma
I applaud your blog
The core dogma of the Watchtower organization is that Jesus had his second coming 'invisibly' in the year 1914.Their entire doctrinal superstructure is built on this falsehood.
Jehovah's Witnesses door to door recruitment is by their own admission an ineffective tactic (nobody's home). They have lost membership in all countries with major Internet access because their false doctrines and harmful practices are exposed on the modern information superhighway.
There is good and valid reasons why there is such an outrage against the Watchtower for misleading millions of followers.Many have invested everything in the 'imminent' apocalyptic promises of the Jehovah's Witnesses and have died broken and beaten.
Now if you wanted to know about the quality of a product,would you listen to the seller's pitch or a longtime customer?
---
Respectfully,Danny Haszard http://www.freeminds.org (consumer report on the Watchtower organization)
Hi Alma,
I want to try and answer you but have been busy. Not that I will have all the answers necessarily but I can at least share my viewpoints.
But the main thrust of this post was that I don't really want to debate because I just don't feel qualified. I know that there are good answers to your questions and scripture to back it up, but I just don't have those answers at my disposal right now. That is something that I am working on.
As far as your question about throwing out data as a scientist, I'm just not following.
I'll try to post some of my thouhts based on your comment soon.
What is the difference between Jews concluding that the Bible was sufficient without the New Testament and you concluding that it’s sufficient without anything else?
The Jews don't have Christ alone as their Savior, by grace alone, through faith alone - they are not saved.
The Jews were promised a Messiah; they did not recognize Him. The Bible that the Jews had promised a Messiah, it promised a new covenant, it promised a better way through the seed of a woman. It also told them that covenant would be opened to the entire world.
They're still waiting.
Best regards from NY!
» » »
Post a Comment