Concerned About the Record
posted on February 1, 2010 in Letters | 
2 Comments to Read | Print
Share : 
It concerns me deeply that a significant number of the members of my congregation are discontinuing their subscriptions to the Record. Many are rightly concerned with what passes for theology in the pages of a magazine that most of us believe ought to be upholding the Reformed teachings and standards of our denomination.
Dr. McLelland’s theological/philosophical discourses which appear to place the Christian faith as one of many belief systems that orbit inside some overarching sphere of greater truth, is disconcerting, to say the least. Zander Dunn’s universalism, given that he is an ordained minister within the PCC, is also troubling.
I may be wrong, but the Record appears to be endorsing and even promoting positions on human sexuality that are incongruent with our denomination’s statements regarding the same.
These are just several of the ways we perceive our denominational publication to be straying from God’s truth and from credible Christian witness in the world. I will continue to read the Record in hopes of better things, and in appreciation of contributors such as David Webber, Calvin Brown, John Vissers and others.
Liz Campbell said,
It concerns me that religious pluralism creates such pain and turmoil within the P.C.C.How can we live in a multi -faith, multi- cultural society like Canada, and indeed within a world of global communication, and not accept that other faiths are legitimate. Do we greet our neighbours with the message that Christianity is the only true faith,and that theirs must of necessity be inadequate? Is that ecumenism, or the way to further disenfranchise Muslim youth?
I find the letters and articles on such topics as religious pluralism and human sexuality reassuring,in that the faith which I practice is open and welcoming.
Many of our standards were from another time and another place, and are we as Reform Christians not ‘always reforming, according to the will of God?’
[Reply]
Dennis Kim said,
There’s a difference between recognizing the value of all people regardless of their religious beliefs, and the view that all faiths are equal. The first is descriptive while the second is prescriptive. To the extent that a Christian opts for the prescriptive, he has strayed from what Jesus himself teaches.
Since there is ample reason for believing the veracity of the bible over against the scriptures of other religions, both reason and faith ought to impel us to the former and not the latter.
In any case, pluralism is self-refuting. There are fundamental and incompatible differences in the essential beliefs of different religions that separate them from each other. For example, some religions believe in one god, others in many gods. Some believe in a personal god, others an impersonal one. Some believe god is totally distinct from the universe, others believe that the universe and god are the same. These beliefs are mutually exclusive and cannot all be true at the same time.
The pluralist believes that his view is exclusively true and that the religious exclusivist is wrong. Thus, pluralism is just as exclusivistic as the religious exclusivism that the pluralist opposes. The pluralist, then, is left with two possibilities: 1) Live with a self-contradictory belief; or 2) Abandon pluralism.
Is it possible to know if one of the religions is the true one? Any true religion will most likely be logical and fit the facts known through experience. I follow the lead of those who think that any religion worth following will be open to (indeed, invite) critical examination of its truth claims. And any view about religion, such as pluralism, ought to do the same.
[Reply]
Add A Comment