Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement

 
 
Saturday, 5th July 2008 Change Date

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register

Church must look to bible



Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Jean Price gets it wrong in the cause of falling membership in the Church of Scotland (Letters, 15 May).
The CoS has an older membership which is dying off and not being replaced by younger people. On the whole this is because of the liberal stance taken by the CoS on many issues and trying to be all things to all men. The CoS needs to get back to a more biblical stance which many other, growing Churches preach. .

GORDON BUCHAN, Morven Place, Aberdeen





The full article contains 89 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 16 May 2008 8:56 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Gilbert McAdam,

Manila 17/05/2008 02:59:30
I agree that getting back to a biblical message is more fundamental than the question of which hymns we sing. But is there not a close connection between preaching a biblical message and the desire to sing psalms, hymns and spiritual songs which truly reflect that message?
2

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 17/05/2008 07:44:09
The fact is that the Abramic religions are alien ones in Scotland. The Romans tried to destroy a very successful indigenous religion. Let's get back to our roots. One building we won't then need are churches as we traditionally worshipped in the open air. The move away from Churches is entirely sensible.
3

Martinh,

17/05/2008 08:37:49
The reason for falling membership in the COS is that most people no longer believe in the God delusion.
4

Infidel,

Dar ul harb 17/05/2008 08:48:34
Of course they must return to the Bible. The moral decay of society around us is clearly a result of abandoning Biblical teachings. A sign of our decadence is the open wearing of garments made from two types of fibre (Lev. 19:19). Polyester/cotton mixtures should be banned forthwith. Homosexuals must be slain (Lev. 20:13) as should people who pick up sticks on the sabbath (Num. 15:35). Stoning being the preferred method. Indeed any work on the Sabbath must be punished with death (Ex. 35:2). Now this gives me a problem. My neighbour insists on doing the gardening at weekends. He is a big, strong man and I would be no match against him. Will the local church send a mob around to deal with him? Or maybe Gordon Buchan himself will assist? Also, I wonder, what is a good price for one's daughter these days (Ex. 21:7)?
5

Gilbert McAdam,

Manila 17/05/2008 09:14:51
Infidel - You are an intelligent man. Why do you persist in bringing up laws which were intended for the nation of Israel alone and which the apostles refused to impose upon Gentile believers? If you know the New Testament as well as you seem to know the Old, you must be aware that the apostles regarded such laws as 'a yoke which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear' (Acts 15.10). Paul exhorted the Galatians not to be 'entangled again with a yoke of bondage' (Gal 5.1) and said that 'if you become circumcised [and start keeping all the OT laws] Christ will profit you nothing' (Gal 5.2) The Bible itself tells us that many OT laws have no place in the Christian church today.
6

Infidel,

Dar ul harb 17/05/2008 09:36:21
Gilbert 5:
"Infidel - You are an intelligent man"
Agreed. And witty, charming, good looking, modest ...

"laws which were intended for the nation of Israel alone"
I'll quote Christ on this one: "If any man sets aside even the least of the Law's demands ... he shall have the lowest place in the Kingdom of Heaven" (Matt. 5:19). He stood by every last letter of the law (and yet proceeded in the same sermon to revise some of them!) Jesus repeatedly referred to the OT, regarded it as authoritative and is portrayed as fullfilling its prophecies. You can't dismiss the OT so easily. It is part of Christianity whether you like it or not.
Unfortunately many Christians still stand by those OT laws that suit their agenda, whether the Exodus one on witches (22:18) or the prohibition on gays. And if the OT laws were for Israel alone then that applies also to the 10 Commandments, and to any other laws you think are good.
I could cite the NT if you prefer. The homophobic bits are well known, and there are even passages supporting slavery. "Slaves obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling" (Eph. 6:5).
7

Infidel,

Dar ul harb 17/05/2008 09:45:58
Continuation of my post #6:

Further parts of the NT which demand obedience to the Old:

"It is easier for Heaven and Earth to pass away than for the smallest part of the letter of the law to become invalid." (Luke 16:17)

"All scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for refutation, for correction, and for training in righteousness..." (2 Timothy 3:16)

“...the scripture cannot be broken.” (John 10:35)

In Mark 7 Jesus criticises Pharisees for eating with defiled hands in defiance of the law, and maintains that children who curse their parents should be executed. Again in accordance with the law.

Sorry Gilbert, but you are stuck with the Old Testament.
8

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 17/05/2008 11:17:08
"On the whole this is because of the liberal stance taken by the CoS on many issues"

It's no so much this, but that it has needed to move on as society has been less willing to put up with its control, discrimination and outdated notions of the world and been more willing to think for themselves.
9

Gilbert McAdam,

Manila 17/05/2008 15:11:41
Infidel -
1. "Agreed. And witty, charming, good looking, modest ..." -- I'm glad to hear it: it seems we have more in common that I thought!

2. "You can't dismiss the OT so easily." -- I am very far from wishing to dismiss the OT. But that does not mean that everything in the OT applies to Christians today. For example, the NT makes it abundantly clear that the law contains a great deal of typology which has been fulfilled by Christ. No Christian today offers sacrificial lambs or goats according to the OT. Why not? Not because we don't believe in the OT, but because the purpose of the OT sacrifices was to symbolise Christ as the Lamb of God who takes away sin. The law which required these symbolic sin offerings has been fulfilled by the one true sacrifice of Christ. You cannot reasonably dispute that that is the teaching of the NT and has been the teaching of every major branch of the Christian church.

3. You may think that this conflicts with Matthew 6.19 and Luke 16.17, but it is clear that the apostles did not think so. Peter and James were prominent in the Council of Jerusalem (Acts 15) which decreed that these laws were not to be imposed on Gentile converts. If I were asked to choose between Peter and James' understanding of their Master's teaching and your understanding, I know which I would consider the more reliable!

4. "there are even passages supporting slavery. 'Slaves obey your earthly masters with fear and trembling' (Eph. 6:5)." -- That does not support slavery. It tells slaves how to respond to their unhappy lot in life, in a way that would commend the Christian gospel. But Paul also tells slaves that if they get the opportunity to be free they should take it (1 Cor 7.21).

5. "Sorry Gilbert, but you are stuck with the Old Testament." -- I'm not in the least embarrassed to be 'stuck with the OT.' But that does not mean that I obey laws whose purpose is already completed.
10

Rulesbutnotrulers,

Federation, not separation 17/05/2008 15:17:19
#4 Infidel is a twit (again).

Many people who have no conception of the Christian god or bible live moral lives. Are you/him/her saying there was no morality before the god of israel was transformed into the christian god?
11

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 17/05/2008 15:54:45
I think #9 shows just how easily it is to take whatever meaning suits your purpose out of the words of either testament.

There was a time when whatever the bible said was taken literally and was not questioned. Over the past few centuries, it's amazing how it has had to be 're-interpreted' in the light of progress and knowledge. Heaven's above! I've even seen some now quote verses that support tolerance towards homosexuality!
12

Gilbert McAdam,

Manila 17/05/2008 16:13:22
Zeno (# 11) -
"I think #9 shows just how easily it is to take whatever meaning suits your purpose out of the words of either testament." -- With respect that is not so. The NT has a perfectly clear perspective on how the OT is to be interpreted. That perspective was agreed by the apostles and has been held by every major branch of the Christian church ever since. I am NOT talking about re-interpreting anything in the light of progress and knowledge.
13

Infidel,

Dar ul harb 17/05/2008 17:55:48
Gilbert 12:
I'm with Zeno on this one. The NT does refer repeatedly to the OT as authoritative and its characters, Jesus included, did defend OT law (see my quotes above). That you can also argue that the NT in some way supercedes the OT just shows how muddled and self-contradictory it is. At least it does not follow the Qu'ran's bad example by simply cancelling early peaceful statements and replacing them with violent jihad ones. In that respect the Bible is much, much better. Your dismissal of NT support for slavery is appalling. Like it or not telling slaves to accept their lot and be fearful is hardly morally edifying. It is quite simply supporting the slave owners. Why no express condemnations of the practice?
Not only are you stuck with the OT, you are also stuck with its ferocious Yahweh. Only the God of the NT now adds the sadistic doctrine of hell.
14

Infidel,

Dar ul harb 17/05/2008 17:58:06
Rules #10

Rules is the twit. How on earth does he misread my post 4 so grotesquely? Morality is independent of religion. My post 4 was intended as irony.
15

Unimpressed one,

17/05/2008 19:23:56
I think you'll find it's the bible that's at the root of the problem.
16

Hugh V McLachlan,

Elderslie 17/05/2008 23:10:10
#11 Zeno,

'There was a time when whatever the bible said was taken literally and was not questioned.'

I suspect this is a myth. Selection and interpretation is inevitable as well as being desirable. Not all selections and interpretations are equally commendable, however.

If the Bible is read at all seriously, it demands to be interpreted. For instance, it is not possible to read the parables of the gospels seriously and to accept them literally without questioning them. Apart from anything else, the point of the parables is the questions they raise rather than any answers that they give.
17

Hugh V McLachlan,

Elderslie 17/05/2008 23:15:44
#16

I recall from my Sunday-school days that Moses went into the backside of the desert. How would this be taken literally without question?

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.