Jump to content


Photo
* * * * * 1 votes

Trustworthiness of particular books


  • Please log in to reply
94 replies to this topic

#61 Rebel

Rebel

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,596 posts

Posted 27 April 2009 - 12:04 PM

So the new edition, I would deal with caution in sending such to new contacts.

It has been said before, but i will say it again. I strongly think (please show me if I am wrong) that it should NOT be recommended to anybody at all (not even the earlier versions), as the reader is very likely to contact the author, which you know yourself, leads to disasters. Spare the flock, please, think twice before recommending it.

#62 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 27 April 2009 - 12:17 PM

I must say, I do agree with Rebel because people could contact the author.

#63 nsr

nsr

    Order of the Golden Pedant 2nd Class

  • Forum Manager
  • 6,370 posts

Posted 27 April 2009 - 03:55 PM

I didn't contact the author.
"But you have come to Mount Zion and to the city of the living God, the heavenly Jerusalem, to an innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly and church of the firstborn who are registered in heaven, to God the Judge of all, to the spirits of just men made perfect..." (Heb 12:22-23)

#64 composer

composer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,065 posts

Posted 27 April 2009 - 11:47 PM

I did, several times.

#65 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 28 April 2009 - 12:25 AM

Pays to err on the side of caution.

#66 Dawn

Dawn

    Chi

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,318 posts

Posted 28 April 2009 - 09:37 PM

The author is entitled to make changes in his book of course. That doesn’t bother me quite so much as how it is used by the author in his preaching and pastoring of his followers.

Human behaviour is interesting to observe sometimes because while the author claims to be a “died in the wool Christad” (DH on CWW Facebook Holy Spirit thread April 28, 2009, 08.28am), when he preaches and pastors his followers he apparently does not believe that the word “Christadelphian” is necessary :

Where will you bring them to... your own front room or a McDonalds. If we're preaching Christ, there's no *need* to mention the word Christadelphian; Paul didn't, Jesus didn't. Of course this means that you effectively become their pastor, and as such you'll maybe in due time guide them to an appropriate ecclesia if there is one. If not, you have to start one. This of course throws up the question- are we preaching Christ , or is our 'preaching' a PR job for the Christadelphian organization. For me, preaching isn't saying 'I'm a Christadelphian, in our church we believe X and we do Y', it's rather about confronting people with Him. Which pastoral path is best for people after their conversion is something which circumstances dictate.

As to extremist forums being the face of Christadelphia... well the more non extremists get out there on the net the more multi-faceted the face appears to onlookers. But in my experience those who are doing a search on 'Christadelphians' often aren't the ones we end up baptizing. And anyway not so many people are interested in joining denominations these days. Those searching for salvation, forgiveness, wholeness... are the ones to whom we have something to offer


……yet the author is quite happy to accept money from “Christadelphia” and be fully associated with the very community he derides and despises (whether they are “exclusivists” or “extreme” or not) to fund his job as pastor of his worldwide followers (though of course what Christian wouldn’t get a buzz out of baptising people and delivering humanitarian aid. I would certainly like to do that). But there we are. The Lord will reward each according to their work. There is nothing new under the sun.

Edited by Dawn, 23 June 2009 - 01:18 PM.

"....when you Think of Things, you find sometimes that the Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it" (A A Milne)


"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves" Philippians 2:3

#67 Tracer

Tracer
  • Christadelphian MD
  • 3 posts

Posted 29 April 2009 - 03:43 PM

It has been said before, but i will say it again. I strongly think (please show me if I am wrong) that it should NOT be recommended to anybody at all (not even the earlier versions), as the reader is very likely to contact the author, which you know yourself, leads to disasters. Spare the flock, please, think twice before recommending it.

Same understanding here, 101%

#68 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 05:49 AM

Would you recommend this book for someone who hasn't got a watertight understanding of the Holy Spirit?

It was published about 30 years ago and has since been republished by Nathan Trevor Brierly .

"The Holy Spirit - An exploratory survey of Scriptural Teaching" by Edgar Wille

#69 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 05:57 AM

Er, no. I would stay away from anything written by Edgar 'ex-Christadelphian-and-now-Anglican-former-enthusiastic-supporter-of-Steve-Cook-until-he-realised-Steve-was-off-his-face' Willie.

Edited by Fortigurn, 02 May 2009 - 05:57 AM.

Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/htm/beliefs/basf.htm" target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">Apologetics

#70 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 06:06 AM

:)
Phew!
:yep: Fort!

#71 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 06:07 AM

Believe me, you don't know the half of it.

:) :yep:

BTW, is my sig OK now? Fitting people's screens without any trouble?
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#72 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 06:11 AM

Would you recommend this book for someone who hasn't got a watertight understanding of the Holy Spirit?

It was published about 30 years ago and has since been republished by Nathan Trevor Brierly .

"The Holy Spirit - An exploratory survey of Scriptural Teaching" by Edgar Wille

Only if don't you want that person to have a watertight understanding of the Holy Spirit.
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#73 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 06:12 AM

BTW, is my sig OK now? Fitting people's screens without any trouble?

Fine for me, but it's pretty ugly, mate.
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#74 Kay

Kay

    Phi

  • Admin
  • 5,934 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 06:14 AM

Believe me, you don't know the half of it.

:) :yep:

BTW, is my sig OK now? Fitting people's screens without any trouble?


Perhaps you should have a look at the Armoury, the threads you have started, and finished, and are the sole poster in?

The problem with large signatures, and it is still large, huge, is that is all you see - you have to make an effort to look and see what has been written, especially if it is just one or two lines or even a smilie.

Edited by Kay, 02 May 2009 - 06:15 AM.

"seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" Matthew 6:33

#75 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 06:14 AM

Righto.

:yep:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#76 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 07:11 AM

I've just been sent a copy of Bible Basics - 'Library :) Edition 2001'. What (if anything) has been :) omitted from this edition?
:rose:
Is the book ok as far as a book about the basics of the Bible go (irrespective of its author)? Are there any dodgy :book: bits in it?
:yep:

#77 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 07:25 AM

Attached File  Evans_signature.JPG   40.34KB   19 downloads

Ev: your page looks like this from my end of the world.:)

:yep:

#78 Evangelion

Evangelion

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,352 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 09:33 AM

Yep, I did some more tweaking and replaced the giant fractal picture with a nice little abstract one in blues which match the forum.

:yep:
In necessariis unitas, in dubiis libertas, in omnibus caritas
Imago
Credo

#79 Dawn

Dawn

    Chi

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,318 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 03:40 PM

Would you recommend this book for someone who hasn't got a watertight understanding of the Holy Spirit?

It was published about 30 years ago and has since been republished by Nathan Trevor Brierly .

"The Holy Spirit - An exploratory survey of Scriptural Teaching" by Edgar Wille

Only if don't you want that person to have a watertight understanding of the Holy Spirit.

Do you not think though that there is a bit of room for diversity on how people understand the Holy Spirit? Only at a Praise Day recently I heard a brother give a lovely prayer about wanting more of the power of the Holy Spirit in our lives and of course there are Scriptures which say unless we have the Spirit of Christ we are none of His.

But I think with things concerning this kind of stuff "birds of a feather stick together" and ine one corner you have one type of worshippers and in another corner you have another type - that's why in mainstream Christianity you have all spectrums from very trad and staid forms of Christianity through to total bedlam in the worship place. I dunno what the Lord makes of it all I'm sure. I guess we have to find what we are comfortable with and discern what we believe to be truth by the plumbline of God's Word on it.
"....when you Think of Things, you find sometimes that the Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it" (A A Milne)


"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves" Philippians 2:3

#80 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 03:43 PM

Do you not think though that there is a bit of room for diversity on how people understand the Holy Spirit?


Sure, but there's a difference between 'a bit of room for diversity' and 'a free for all'. :yep:
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/htm/beliefs/basf.htm" target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">Apologetics

#81 Matt Smith

Matt Smith

    Upsilon

  • Forum Manager
  • 4,619 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 03:47 PM

Would you recommend this book for someone who hasn't got a watertight understanding of the Holy Spirit?

It was published about 30 years ago and has since been republished by Nathan Trevor Brierly .

"The Holy Spirit - An exploratory survey of Scriptural Teaching" by Edgar Wille



Bro Crawford's book... (here here or here) ...is far better.

Bro Graham Pearce also has a book, which I've found helpful too.

Edited by Matt Smith, 02 May 2009 - 03:54 PM.

Matt Smith
Arizona Christadelphians

Study to shew thyself approved unto God, a workman that needeth not to be ashamed, rightly dividing the word of truth.

#82 Dawn

Dawn

    Chi

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,318 posts

Posted 02 May 2009 - 10:53 PM

Do you not think though that there is a bit of room for diversity on how people understand the Holy Spirit?


Sure, but there's a difference between 'a bit of room for diversity' and 'a free for all'. :yep:

True. For some reason (in my experience anyhow) people seem to confuse the Holy Spirit with their own personal freedom to express themselves. I do not know why this is - they equate their own ability to express themselves as being a move of the Spirit. In actual fact it is very often just the human spirit at work and not the Holy Spirit at all (since Paul says that things must be done decently and in order, and Paul says the Holy Spirit can only really work when things are done orderly and not in a "free for all" manner!).

I've been to a few "free for alls"(in the "Spirit") and from my observation they range from being totally manufactured to being rather, well, a bit twee. At one, a chap started singing out of the blue "All things bright and beautiful" (which gave me the giggles as this is an old 1960's Anglican kidies song I used to sing in assembly!) - to which a few people half-heartedly joined in. Hardly inspiring.

(....and a prayer I heard once "Lord we want the belt of truth, and help us to tighten the belt of truth so that we're not caught with our spiritual trousers down Lord :) .....lol..... I know what he meant though).
"....when you Think of Things, you find sometimes that the Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it" (A A Milne)


"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves" Philippians 2:3

#83 daysha

daysha

    Rho

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPip
  • 1,964 posts

Posted 03 May 2009 - 12:31 AM

[I've been to a few "free for alls"(in the "Spirit") and from my observation they range from being totally manufactured to being rather, well, a bit twee. At one, a chap started singing out of the blue "All things bright and beautiful" (which gave me the giggles as this is an old 1960's Anglican kidies song I used to sing in assembly!) - to which a few people half-heartedly joined in. Hardly inspiring.

(....and a prayer I heard once "Lord we want the belt of truth, and help us to tighten the belt of truth so that we're not caught with our spiritual trousers down Lord :rose: .....lol..... I know what he meant though).


:) :book: :rose: :) . . :yep:


BTW, is the 'Library Edition 2001' of Bible Basics ok - no dodgy bits - nothing missing from earlier editions?

Edited by dayshakiwi, 03 May 2009 - 12:32 AM.


#84 Fortigurn

Fortigurn

    Omega

  • Christadelphian MD
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 34,244 posts

Posted 03 May 2009 - 04:34 AM

Do you not think though that there is a bit of room for diversity on how people understand the Holy Spirit?


Sure, but there's a difference between 'a bit of room for diversity' and 'a free for all'. :yep:

True. For some reason (in my experience anyhow) people seem to confuse the Holy Spirit with their own personal freedom to express themselves.


Very astute. :)
Miserere mei Deus,
Secundum magnam misericordiam tuam.
Et secundum multitudinem miserationum tuarum
dele iniquitatem meam.

______________________________________________________________________
http://www.thechristadelphians.org/htm/beliefs/basf.htm" target="_blank">I am a Christadelphian. Click here to see my confession of faith.
______________________________________________________________________
‘John Wesley once received a note which said, “The Lord has told me to tell you that He doesn’t need your book-learning, your Greek, and your Hebrew.”

Wesley answered “Thank you, sir. Your letter was superfluous, however, as I already knew the Lord has no need for my ‘book-learning,’ as you put it. However—although the Lord has not directed me to say so—on my own responsibility I would like to say to you that the Lord does not need your ignorance, either.”

Osborne & Woodward, ‘Handbook for Bible study’, pp. 13-14 (1979)

______________________________________________________________________
http://bibleapologetics.wordpress.com/" target="_blank">Apologetics

#85 Jeremy

Jeremy

    Order of the Golden Pedant

  • Christadelphian Armoury
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 8,434 posts

Posted 03 May 2009 - 08:16 AM

(....and a prayer I heard once "Lord we want the belt of truth, and help us to tighten the belt of truth so that we're not caught with our spiritual trousers down Lord :) .....lol..... I know what he meant though).

:yep: Gird up your loins?
And, behold, I am with thee, and will keep thee in all places whither thou goest, and will bring thee again into this land; for I will not leave thee, until I have done that which I have spoken to thee of.

#86 Dawn

Dawn

    Chi

  • On Vacation
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,318 posts

Posted 04 May 2009 - 02:03 PM

Do you not think though that there is a bit of room for diversity on how people understand the Holy Spirit?


Sure, but there's a difference between 'a bit of room for diversity' and 'a free for all'. :yep:

True. For some reason (in my experience anyhow) people seem to confuse the Holy Spirit with their own personal freedom to express themselves.


Very astute. :)

Well I wouldn't say it was astute particularly - just being open-minded about it anyone would see that Christians can get confused.

I do try to be open-minded about these "Holy Spirit-led" meetings because I think well if it really IS the Holy Spirit then yes, "bring it on" I say as we can all do with more of the Holy Spirit and Holy Spirit guidance in our lives: so I always try to be expectant, but to date i have always been disappointed. It hasn't been the Holy Spirit at all. However God can still use people's thoughts and wot nots, but really they shouldn't be ascribed as being the Holy Spirit.

So often Christians misquote Scripture to support their desire to vent their own personal spiritual freedom to express themselves - mainly from 1 Cor 3 where it says "Where the Spirit of the Lord is their is liberty" - forgetting that the context of this quote is Moses with vail over his eyes!

.......and they also conveniently FORGET the "liberty" Scriptures which say:

"only USE NOT liberty for an occasion to the flesh, but by love serve one another" Galatians 5:13.

"NOT USING your liberty for a cloke of maliciousness, but as the servants of God" 1 Peter 2:16.

"While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption" 2 Peter 2:19

.....notice how "liberty" is equated to "servanthood". They forget that. True Christianity uses liberty correctly to serve God and to serve each other (which is costly and sacraficial), but false teacher, while promising "liberty" on the surface which all looks very nice and cosy, become servants of corruption.

Edited by Dawn, 04 May 2009 - 02:05 PM.

"....when you Think of Things, you find sometimes that the Thing which seemed very Thingish inside you is quite different when it gets out into the open and has other people looking at it" (A A Milne)


"Let nothing be done through strife or vainglory; but in lowliness of mind let each esteem other better than themselves" Philippians 2:3

#87 composer

composer

    Banned

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 2,065 posts

Posted 05 May 2009 - 01:24 AM

Yes it is difficult to combat those who claim " WE have the Holy Spirit " so we are only doing what the Holy Spirit is showing us to do, then they accuse those who will not join them that obviously they DON'T have the Holy Spirit so they are inferior and to be rejected.

#88 Kay

Kay

    Phi

  • Admin
  • 5,934 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 03:21 AM

And just because there are many issues with the author does not mean there are with the book as well. That's only an issue with people who seem to think that if the book is good, the author must be as well.

So you would recommend his books to outsiders, event though the man continues to sow discord in the brotherhpood?

I was wrong thinking that the article I had in mind was about mistakes in 'Bible Basics'. It's about mistakes in 'Beyond Bible Basics'.


Rebel, there was a review in one of the Magazines about 'Bible Basics' - did a search on 'The Testimony' and also 'The Christadelphian' and couldn't seem to find it, it may be there, or may be in another magazine?

I do have a printed copy of somewhere so will see if I can find it, though over-all don't think that it was a real negative review - but I do know that there has been problems in regard to God and the physical body, and besides the brother Weasley mentioned another translator changing this and there was fallout there too I believe.


I was looking for a few things today - the the Review of Bible Basics was among them - so have scanned it and have posted it here.
"seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" Matthew 6:33

#89 Kay

Kay

    Phi

  • Admin
  • 5,934 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 03:23 AM

The Bible Student

Volume 23 No. 5

Review of Bible Basics - pages 173 to 175

Subsequent Edition

Volume 23 No. 6

Letter from the Author of Bible Basics – pages 213 to 214

Comments in response by Reviewer, brother E.G. Walker – pages 214 to 215

REVIEWS

“BIBLE BASICS”


BY DUNCAN HEASTER

Published by: The Dawn Book Supply, 66 Carlton Rd., Nottingham, NG3 2AP. 360 pages. Paperback. Price £3.95, including postage.

I have been requested to review this book. The motivation for writing it seems to have been the author’s work overseas in many different places. He writes in the “Introduction” that his purpose is to analyse the Bible message in a business-like, systematic way.

The book is divided into two main sections: “The things concerning the Kingdom of God” and “The things concerning the name of Jesus Christ”. Each part consists of several studies. At the end of most of the studies are “Digressions” which deal with a variety of topics designed to amplify points, or answer possible problems from points raised in the studies.

At the end of the book there are four appendices: “A Summary of Basic Bible doctrines”; “Our Attitude to learning Bible Truth”; “The Nearness of Christ’s Return”; “The Justice of God”. The structure of the book seems well conceived and the conception faithfully executed.

This is a large work (360pp.) for a young brother to plan and write. It is overflowing with Scripture quotation - the writer must be extremely conversant with the Scripture. It must have been written in a comparatively short time and yet covers all the “Bible Basics”, putting emphasis, I feel rightly, on present-day popular misconceptions such as “possession of the Holy Spirit” and “the nature of God”. Not only does it expound what we might call doctrinal basics, but shows how these are related to faithful living. This is a welcome feature.

Seeing that there is so much to be applauded about the book, I feel reluctant to make any criticism; yet I should be failing in my duty if I did not do so, especially because it is about basics.

It seems to me that its weakness stems from its very size, from the proliferation of the quotations, from the very enthusiasm with which the author approaches his task, and from the seeming haste in production; for in places, the argument is not as rigorous as one would have hoped, and many of the quotations are used as texts and not seen against their Scriptural background. There is an apparent lack of care in production. Dealing first with relatively minor matters, I might point out that “Jesus” is not a Hebrew name (p.10) and that the Greek for “before” in John 8 v.58 is not ‘pro’ (on which supposition a whole argument is built), but ‘prin’. However, there are more serious examples of this loose approach.
"seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" Matthew 6:33

#90 Kay

Kay

    Phi

  • Admin
  • 5,934 posts

Posted 19 February 2011 - 03:26 AM

After showing, properly in my view, that the gifts of the Spirit promised by Peter in Acts 2:38 had died out by the end of the 1st century, the author goes on to indicate that:

“the gift of the spirit after baptism, can still be read with reference to us today” (p.73). The whole of this section then seems to me to be very loosely reasoned, coming to the remarkable conclusion that today the promise of the gift of the Spirit can also refer to:

(1.) Salvation through forgiveness,

or

(2.) Answered prayer,

or

(3.) The manifestation of the Spirit through the written Word of God in the Bible.

These three conclusions arise from the author’s reading of the phrase “the gift of the Holy Spirit” (Acts 2:38). Rightly, he points out that it may be viewed in two ways, meaning either “the gift which is the Holy Spirit” or, “the gift which the Holy Spirit speaks about”. But it is bad exposition to use both ways to arrive at the meaning of the phrase. Peter originally spoke the words in a particular circumstance with one meaning in mind. That meaning must be accepted, and we are not at liberty to bring texts from all over the Scripture to force some other meaning in addition to that one meaning. But that is what is done in this section of the book.

In order to present his view the author has a paragraph (in which he uses at least 20 references from all over the Bible), in the middle of which he writes:

“There is a parallelism in Romans between us receiving ‘grace ... the atonement ... the Spirit’ (1:5; 5:11; 8:15), showing the connection between the gift (‘grace’) of the Spirit and the forgiveness which leads to atonement”. The reason for making this “parallelism” (a loose word in itself) is based on the fact that the three (grace, the atonement and the Spirit) are said to be “received”. But, in fact, each comes in a different context in a highly reasoned letter; would a learner of basics realise this? Why, indeed, should there be any connection between them, simply because they were all “received”? Note also that they were not all received by the same persons. This passage well illustrates the careless exposition that exists in many places in this book.

Perhaps a more serious defect is found in the same paragraph, where attention is drawn to “the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee to possess it”. Then comes the quite unsubstantiated statement:

“The counterpart of the land under the new covenant is salvation; that is therefore the gift of God seen in prospect, with its associated forgiveness of sins”. Apparently the land itself is not promised to those under the new covenant!

I cannot but think that this paragraph is any other than loose writing expressing only partly digested ideas. Yet it is essential, when presenting a learners’ manual, that not only should the basic doctrines be presented (which this book, in many ways, does well), but that the Word of God should seen to be carefully and properly treated; and basic teachings should never depend on doubtful exposition. The whole Christadelphian case surely rests entirely on plain, straightforward Scripture statements, and any book of basics should reflect this.

The same loose approach is manifest in some of the author’s dealings with the nature of Jesus, a subject that needs most careful treatment. Commenting on Romans 8:3, he writes,

“‘Sin’ refers to the natural proneness to sin which we have by nature. We have given way to this already, and continue to do so, and ‘the wages of sin is death’” (p.254).
"seek ye first the kingdom of God, and his righteousness" Matthew 6:33




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users