Skip to comments.If Paulís Epistle to the Galatians was Published in Christianity Today
Posted on 03/12/2009 1:52:23 PM PDT by colorcountry
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Dear Christianity Today:
In response to Paul D. Apostles article about the Galatian church in your January issue, I have to say how appalled I am by the unchristian tone of this hit piece. Why the negativity? Has he been to the Galatian church recently? I happen to know some of the people at that church, and they are the most loving, caring people Ive ever met.
Phyllis Snodgrass; Ann Arbor, MI
How arrogant of Mr. Apostle to think he has the right to judge these people and label them accursed. Isnt that Gods job? Regardless of this circumcision issue, these Galatians believe in Jesus just as much as he does, and it is very Pharisaical to condemn them just because they differ on such a secondary issue. Personally, I dont want a sharp instrument anywhere near my zipper, but that doesnt give me the right to judge how someone else follows Christ. Cant we just focus on our common commitment to Christ and furthering His kingdom, instead of tearing down fellow believers over petty doctrinal matters?
Ed Bilgeway; Tonganoxie, KS
Ive seen other dubious articles by Paul Apostle in the past, and frankly Im surprised you felt that his recurrent criticisms of the Church deserved to be printed in your magazine. Mr. Apostle for many years now has had a penchant for thinking he has a right to mark certain Christian teachers who dont agree with his biblical position. Certainly I commend him for desiring to stay faithful to Gods word, but I think he errs in being so dogmatic about his views to the point where he feels free to openly attack his brethren. His attitude makes it difficult to fully unify the Church, and gives credence to the oppositions view that Christians are judgmental, arrogant people who never show Gods love.
Ken Groener; San Diego, CA
To the Editors:
Paul Apostle says that he hopes the Galatian teachers will cut off their own privates? What kind of Christian attitude is that? Shame on him!
Martha Bobbitt; Boulder, CO
Dear Christianity Today:
The fact that Paul Apostle brags about his public run-in with Peter Cephas, a well-respected leader and brother in Christ, exposes Mr. Apostle for the divisive figure that he has become in the Church today. His diatribe against the Galatian church is just more of the same misguided focus on an antiquated reliance on doctrine instead of love and tolerance. Just look how his hypercritical attitude has cast aspersions on homosexual believers and women elders! The real problem within the Church today is not the lack of doctrinal devotion, as Apostle seems to believe, but in our inability to be transformed by our individual journeys in the Spirit. Evidently, Apostle has failed to detach himself from his legalistic background as a Pharisee, and is unable to let go and experience the genuine love for Christ that is coming from the Galatians who strive to worship God in their own special way.
William Zenby; Richmond, VA
I happen to be a member of First Christian Church of Galatia, and I take issue with Mr. Apostles article. How can he criticize a ministry that has been so blessed by God? Our church has baptized many new members and has made huge in-roads in the Jewish community with our pragmatic view on circumcision. Such a seeker-sensitive approach has given the Jews the respect they deserve for being Gods chosen people for thousands of years. In addition, every Gentile in our midst has felt honored to engage in the many edifying rituals of the Hebrew heritage, including circumcision, without losing their passion for Jesus. My advice to Mr. Apostle is to stick to spreading the gospel message of Christs unconditional love, and quit criticizing what God is clearly blessing in other churches.
Miriam Betty Ben-Hur; Galatia, Turkey
EDITORS NOTE: Christianity Today apologizes for our rash decision in publishing Paul Apostles exposé of the Galatian church. Had we known the extent in which our readership and advertisers would withdraw their financial support, we never would have printed such unpopular biblical truth. We regret any damage we may have caused in propagating the doctrines of Christ.
Ping to the list.
First of all, CT wouldn’t publish it.
UnChristianity Today would not touch that
Paging Rick Warren...
He wouldn’t get it ... don’t bother pinging him.
This would be funny, if it wasn’t so true. Lord, help us!
LOL - this will go viral among ministers..
If Romans was published you would see comments like this:
“What kind of a God arbitrarily shows mercy on some but not everyone? Doesn’t Mr. Apostle know God has given us free will?” blah, blah, blah
Excellent! Romans 9. That would get a rise out of most of the posters here on FR.
I just sent it off!
“Rogueries, absurdities and untruths were perpetrated upon the teachings of Jesus by a large band of dupes and imposters led by Paul, the first great corrupter of the teaching of Jesus.” -Thomas Jefferson
You’ll not get a rise outta me! Romans 9 is wonderful. It makes it even more wonderful that God chose me, and not I that chose Him. He alone has the power, the glory and the honor - !
I think you meant, “why God arb. shows mercy on Jacob, who emobdies the Jewish children of the flesh, but not Esau, who embodies the Jewish children of promise.”
Too bad such a good man was so sorely mistaken.
Indeed. Too smart by half is the expression that comes to mind.
I’m sending it to my pastor. Course, he’s probably already seen it.
Woops, got my mords wixed up:
I think you meant, why God arb. shows mercy on Jacob, who emobdies the Jewish children of promise, but not Esau, who embodies the Jewish children of the flesh.
Let me invite you to choose him since he had already chosen you.
Been there. He already did it all, and I accepted.
I think you meant, why God arb. shows mercy on Jacob, who embodies the Jewish children of promise, but not Esau, who embodies the Jewish children of the flesh.
Careful. You'll get "certain parties" on FR all riled up at you.
Amen, amen, and amen. Laid hold of before the foundation of the world, and now not clothed in a righteousness of our own, but of His. To Him alone be the glory...
Looks like TOM was a PIKER!!
I used the word “arbitrary” because thats usually the argument from RC and Arminian folk. Of course nothing is “arbitrary” but God’s will is holy and perfect and sometimes beyond our comprehension.
True. We look upon most events and they only occasionally look like they were the well-oiled gears turning on a perfect plan. Our vision is so clouded, so shrouded. I’m sure Joseph thought that the “arbitrary” nomadic slave traders that hauled him off to Egypt were just coming by “happenstance”. But, then many years later he sees just how carefully God had maneuvered that particular gang of thugs through the desert to the precise hole where he was kept at just the hour his brothers are deliberating about killing him. Abdul and Hashiim decide, “Let’s turn over here to this truck stop and stretch our legs. Hey, what’s this? A kid for sale. Cool.” And the rest is history.
How does He maneuver every man physically, mentally, spiritually? Because His mind is so utterly beyond the universe, so transcendent, so powerful beyond comprehension that He simply wills this stuff and it plays out. What kind of arrogant creatures would believe that our 2 lb. brains could actually be the only things in the universe outside of this influence? Amazing.
Yeah, I hear you. It is very clear in Romans 9.11 that Gods choice is not arbritary; he clearly is said to have a (definitive) purpose (which accords with his choice of both of the fetuses).
I do not read Romans 9 either Calvinistically nor in an Arminian fashion for they both understood Paul to be speaking primarily of the eternal salvation/damnation of all humankind; it is abundantly clear to me that this is not Pauls primary point (in Rom 9.6-23).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.