We pondered sub-titling this issue "Not for Christians,"
but some people might have misunderstood, not that that has ever
stopped us before! But it is true, we are attempting to write everything
in this issue for those who are not Christians. We do hope, though,
that our fellow Christians, our regular readers, may find some benefit
as well. Perhaps our regular readers could make sure that this issue gets
into the hands of some unbeliever willing to work through all or part of
our discussion. As always, readers are welcome to photocopy and distribute
any of the columns that might be helpful.
Perhaps you are one of those non-Christians who has stumbled upon this issue inadvertantly, or maybe some well-meaning friend passed it along. Whatever the case, we don't believe it came into your hands by accident. God controls all things and may even use this meager effort at explaining the Christian message to draw you to Himself.
The danger in reading all or part of any presentation of the Christian gospel is that you will become even more accountable to God than you are now. You won't be able plead ignorance of Christ. You've heard it, and you will be morally culpable for rejecting it, if you do.
Even more, if God chooses to bless our attempt in these pages, then you should expect to be plagued by your conscience. Perhaps God's Spirit will harangue you, constantly pointing out your sins, perhaps ruining your concentration at work and making sleep difficult. Oh, how we hope this will happen to you. It happened to many of the writers in these pages in just that way. God showed us mercy and transformed us from His enemies into friends, but not because of anything in us. We, like you, have nothing to offer God, no personal goodness or wisdom. The Christian God has a long history of using foolish things ( i.e. , Christians) to expand His kingdom.
If you're like most of us, you wonder about the source and background of strange magazines like this one. Who are these folks? Are they some cult? Moonies? No, cults never rejoice in the ancient doctrines of Christianity like we do. To be more specific, we're old fashioned, historic Protestants, seeking to be faithful to God's Word in every area of life. If you look around in your part of the world, you'll probably find people just like us, people who actually think that Christianity is true (banish the thought!) and not just some convenient cultural pastime. We would probably share some of your contempt for much of contemporary Christianity, its shallowness, its trendiness, its shrillness. Nonetheless, you probably won't like what we say, but that's expected. We're in two different worlds, and, for good reasons, we're asking you to give up yours as false. Christianity shouldn't be attractive to its enemies, but it should challenge their assumptions about life.
So, we hope to be just one stepping stone on your way to knowing the true God. Come and welcome.
Dear Editors,
I continue to enjoy your magazine and find your articles most stimulating,
especially here in the third world where good Christian literature is difficult
to find. Please keep the magazine coming. Some deprivations I can live
with, but not the absence of Credenda.
Dave Rousseau
Harare, Zimbabwe
Dear Editors,
I am writing in regard to derogatory remarks regarding Roman Catholic
Christians and Eastern Orthodox Christians in your last issue. The tone
of hatred in comments about "tyranny of Rome," "apostatized,"
"not at all faithful to the gospel," etc. is one I do not expect
to find in a Christian publication. . . . [Y]our tone is foreign to any
Christianity I have ever experienced in any denomination. Therefore, I
cannot continue to read your publication.
Name withheld upon request
Douglas Jones replies: The term "hatred" is so abused these days. At one time, you would have to know a person very well to hate him. As the above letter shows, now, if you merely think that another is wrong on some point, then, of course, you must hate him. How strange, but it is a popular and persuasive way to silence any criticism, however true. But the thought that any critical tone "is foreign to any Christianity" the writer knows is certainly curious. Christ and His apostles made regular nuisances of themselves by boldly arguing against the false views of their day. Even Roman Catholicism and Eastern Orthodoxy have publicly damned Protestant theology in their historic creeds. We think they are clearly wrong, but we don't accuse them of hating us. Rightly, they too seek to distinguish truth from error. However annoying some find this process, it has always been part of Christianity and, in fact, every world view.
Dear Editors,
. . . . I have no bones to pick with Jim Nance, but I couldn't help
wondering why he chose to argue his case for Mary's not continuing as a
virgin the way he did. We don't have to assume anything in this regard,
because Scripture is clear. In Matt. 13:55-56 and Mark 6:3, the people
of Jesus' home town could not believe in Him because He and His siblings
had grown up in their midst. . . . This raw evidence of a physical relationship
is much stronger argument in my mind than the suggestion that "Joseph,
as a godly husband, [would have] fulfilled his marital duties to his wife
(1 Cor. 7:5)." It is my understanding that most husbands, even godly
ones, don't need the duty factor.
Jeanne Damoff
Marshall, TX
Jim Nance replies: Thank you for your kind letter. The fact that brothers and sisters of Jesus are named in these verses is not convincing evidence to most Eastern Orthodox, who believe that they were either siblings through a previous marriage of Joseph or perhaps cousins or other near relatives (cf. Gen. 13:8).
Dear Editors,
Thank you for sending me a copy of your recent magazine on the subject
of the Orthodox Church. . . . I'll try to respond briefly to some of the
ideas presented in the magazine. Perhaps most amazing to me is this: "God
forbids us to worship Him on our own terms. He sets the terms of worship."
When I saw this I couldn't believe my eyes. It seemed like a bad joke.
Do you honestly (honestly, now) believe that Protestants worship
God on His own terms? All I can say is that we pray as Our Lord and the
saints have taught us to pray. We worship as the Church teaches us to worship.
One never knows how Protestants may decide to worship or pray. Sit in a
circle and hold hands? Raise your hands above your heads and kind of squint
your eyes? Mutter things like "Yes, Lord" under your breath.
Say "Lord we just. . . we just. . . we just lift you up, we just praise
you, we just thank you, we just praise you Lord, we just. . . we just.
. . we just. . . ." Are these forms of worship divinely received,
or is it you who worship God on your own terms? . . .
On icons, so much has been written, there's really nothing that I can add if you really think the iconoclasts were right. I will say that your cover is irreverent and disrespectful, but that is another natural fruit of Protestantism. Nothing is holy if one can see itonly invisible things can be holy. So sad. Interestingly, serious Protestants often instinctively feel a need for something to remind them of their faith to hang on their walls, thus the "footprints" calendars, various "artists conceptions" of Christ (some better than others), framed calligraphy of Bible verses, etc. And I can't take seriously your appeals to the second commandment. Do you have any representations of anything in your house?. . .
Thomas Webb
Editor, Orthodox Voices
Douglas Jones replies: Your full letter often assumes that we are defenders of everything in contemporary evan-gelicalism, which we are far from doing. Historic Protestantism has little to do with your complaints. As much as Eastern Orthodox adherents tire of the point, the Pharisees also tried to point to divinely sanctioned church traditions to justify their abuses. And simply dismissing the second commandment and our arguments is really not an argument, though this type of table-pounding assertion is common to Eastern Orthodoxy. And we picked up the irreverence for paganism from Elijah.
Dear Editors,
[This letter has been subsequently removed from the web version. It
was a personal letter inadvertantly published in the hard copy issue. Our
apologies to the author. ]
Douglas Jones replies: First, the quotes from the fathers were intended to show that the fathers had a much more complex view of Scripture and tradition than either Rome or the East recognizes. Second, we didn't claim and don't believe that apostasy set in at the death of the apostles. The Old Testament, like Matt. 16, promised a triumphant people, though they faced deep apostasy along the way. Just waitChristianity will indeed triumph in the East too. Third, no we didn't accuse Eastern Orthodoxy of merely using terms common to pagans, we accused it of embracing pagan metaphysics. If you transform the terms, you must remember to purge the substantive paganism. Fourth, read Florovsky and his followers for an Eastern Orthodox rejection of St. Vincent. Fifth, your filling in of the term "Orthodox" now openly shows the question-begging nature of that criterion.
