Friday, 31 October 2008

Should You Believe in the Trinity? - 2

Most Christians who talk to Jehovah’s Witnesses will eventually come across the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society’s [WBTS] booklet “Should You Believe In The Trinity” [abbreviated to “Trinity” from now on.]

As with most WBTS publications, the booklet gives the impression of being a well-produced, scholarly work. It is only as you check it out carefully that the errors begin to come to light. It may not be easy to get a Witness to investigate this publication but we want to give the opportunity to lovingly show some of the faults in it and hope you will be able to do the same with the next one that calls at the door. It is not wise to try to tackle all the arguments at once, concentrate on one at a time.

When you show that a particular quote is not the full one the reply that many Jehovah’s Witnesses have been given is, “Well the writer does say these words and therefore we are not misquoting them.” The answer I give to this is to quote John 3:16 & 17 from the New World Translation, as follows:

For God loved the world so much that he gave his only begotten Son, in order
that everyone... might... be destroyed.

Is that correct Mr Witness? No? Nevertheless, it is what is written in your Bible. I hope that through this the Witness will begin to see how dishonest it is, by judicial editing, to make any author say the opposite to what he or she actually said.

The “Trinity” booklet weaves a number of themes together but we have tried to break it down to a few main subjects each of which we will look at under the following headings.

A. MAIN WATCHTOWER ARGUMENTS - A summary of their main arguments.

B. PUBLICATIONS QUOTED - A look at the quotations they use, replacing, in bold italic print, anything of interest they have left out.

C. COMMENTS ON THE WATCHTOWER ARGUMENT - Highlighting anything that is wrong or suspect with their argument.

D. ADDED MATERIAL - A concise look at any extra material that will present another point of view.

SECTION 2 - THE TRINITY IS NOT TAUGHT IN THE BIBLE

A. MAIN WATCHTOWER ARGUMENTS

The word trinity does not appear within the Bible. The quotes show that the idea of the trinity is not even in the New Testament let alone the Old.

B. PUBLICATIONS QUOTED

Page 5. - The Illustrated Bible Dictionary, I. V.P., Part 3, p.1597

The word Trinity is not found in the Bible, and though used by Tertullian in the last decade of the 2nd century, it did not find a place formally in the theology of the church till the 4th century. It is, however, the distinctive and all-comprehensive doctrine of the Christian faith... Although Scripture does not give us a formulated doctrine of the Trinity, it contains all the elements out of which theology has constructed the doctrine. The teaching of Christ bears testimony to the true personality of each of the distinctions within the Godhead... The necessity to formulate the doctrine was thrust upon the church by forces from without, and it was, in particular, its faith in the deity of Christ and the necessity to defend it, that first compelled the church to face the duty of formulating a full doctrine of the Trinity... - pp.1597/8.

Page 5. - New Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol.14, p.304

The 4th century articulation of the triadic mystery is at least implicitly the word of God, hence part of the Christian credo. On the other hand, it is not, as already seen directly and immediately word of God. And today, it is becoming more and more recognized that the direct and immediate word of God, the Biblical message speaks for itself, should be the heart and substance of the communication both in preaching and in catechises.

Page 5. - The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol.15, p.47

In scripture there is as yet no single term by which the Three Divine Persons are denoted together. The word trias (tri’as) (of which the Latin trinitas is a translation) is first found in Theophilus of Antioch about A.D. 180... Shortly afterwards it appears in its Latin form of trinitas in Tertullian.

COMMENT

This quotation is correct but gives no problem to believing the doctrine of the trinity.

Page 6. - The Encyclopaedia of Religion, Vol.15, p.54

Theologians today are in agreement that the Hebrew Bible does not contain a doctrine of the Trinity. While it is incontestable that the doctrine cannot be established on Scriptural evidence alone, its origins may legitimately be sought in the Bible, not in the sense of ‘proof-texting’ or of finding metaphysical principles, but because the Bible is the authoritative record of God’s redemptive relationship with humanity. What the scriptures narrate as the activity of God among us, which is confessed in creeds and celebrated in liturgy, is the wellspring of later trinitarian doctrine.

Page 6. - The New Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol.14, p.306

The doctrine of the Holy Trinity is not taught in the O(ld) T(estament). In many places of the O.T., however, expressions are used in which some of the Fathers of the Church saw references or foreshadowings of the Trinity... The revelation of the truth of the triune life of God was first made in the NT...

Page 6. -The Triune God, Edmond Fortman

COMMENT

The quote begins on p.xv of the Introduction and then misses out some 18 pages before concluding on p.9 of chapter 1.

The Old Testament... tells us nothing explicitly or by necessary implication of a Triune God who is Father, Son and Holy Spirit... There is no evidence that any sacred writer even suspected the existence of a (Trinity) within the Godhead... Even to see in (the “Old Testament”) suggestions or foreshadowings or ‘veiled signs’ of the trinity of persons, is to go beyond the words and intent of the sacred writers. Perhaps it can be said that some of these writings... did provide a climate in which the plurality within the Godhead was conceivable to Jesus. However, these writers definitely do give us words that the New Testament uses to express the trinity of persons... - pp. xv-9.

Page 6. - The Triune God, Edmond Fortman

COMMENT

This quote starts in the middle of the last Forman quote above but does not finish until 24 pages later! Much of course has been left out.

If we take the New Testament writers together they tell us there is only one God, the creator and lord of the universe, who is the Father of Jesus. They call Jesus the Son of God, Messiah, Lord, Saviour, Word, Wisdom. They assign Him the divine functions of creation, salvation, judgement. Sometimes they call Him God explicitly. They do not speak as fully and clearly of the Holy Spirit as they do the Son, but at times they co-ordinate Him with the Father and the Son and put Him on a level with them as far as divinity and personality are concerned. They give us in their writings a triadic ground plan and triadic formulas... They give us not formal or formulated doctrine of the Trinity, no explicit teaching that in one God there are three co-equal divine persons. But they do give us an elemental trinitarianism, the data from which such a formal doctrine of the Triune God may be formulated... The Holy Spirit is usually presented in the Synoptics and in the Acts as a divine force or power. But in a few passages the sacred writers leave a vivid impression that for them He was someone distinct from both Father and Son with a distinct personal existence. In both Synoptics and the Acts there are traces of the triadic pattern of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. The clearest expression of this pattern is found in the baptismal formula where Matthew presents the three together as at once a triad and a unity. But nowhere do we find any trinitarian doctrine of three distinct subjects of divine life and activity in the same Godhead. pp.xv-15.

Page 6 - The New Encyclopaedia Britannica, Vol.X, p.126

Neither the word Trinity not the explicit doctrine appears in the New Testament... The earliest Christians, however, had to cope with the implications... Thus, the New Testament established the basis for the doctrine of the Trinity.

Page 6. - A Short History of Christian Doctrine, Bernhard Lohse, p.39

As far as the New Testament is concerned, one does not find in it an actual doctrine of the Trinity... In other passages of the New Testament the predicate ‘God’ is without a doubt applied to Christ. With these affirmations, which for Jewish monotheism were utterly offensive, Christians expressed their faith that it was not merely some heavenly being which encountered them in Jesus Christ but God himself...

Page 6. - New International Dictionary of New Testament Theology, Vol.2, p.84

The New Testament does not contain the developed doctrine of the Trinity. ‘ The Bible lacks the express declaration that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are of equal essence’ (said Protestant theologian Karl Barth)... All this underlines the point that primitive Christianity did not have an explicit doctrine of the Trinity such as was subsequently elaborated in the creeds of the early church.

One may perhaps say that there is indeed no developed doctrine of the Trinity in the NT, but that the writers, particularly in the later strata, thought in trinitarian forms.
- Vol.2, p.516.

Page 6. - Origin and Evolution of Religion, E. Washburn Hopkins, p.336

The beginning of the doctrine of the trinity appears already in John (c.100). To Jesus and Paul the doctrine of the trinity was apparently unknown, at any rate, they say nothing about it... But the first Christian theology was given in the words ‘I and my father are one’ and the plain faith of the early church members who were not doctrinaires was just this and nothing more. Jesus is God. - pp.336 & 338.

C. COMMENTS ON THE WATCHTOWER ARGUMENT.

About the only comment we can make is that their case is far from proven. Whereas many of the quotes say something about the explicit doctrine of the Trinity not being seen in the New Testament most when completed also show that the doctrine is there in one form or another.

D. ADDED MATERIAL

It is not important to find the word trinity in the Bible. What is important is that the meaning of the word trinity is found in the New Testament. The word trinity describes a relationship in which the Father is God, Jesus is God and the Holy Spirit is God. That teaching is found in the Scriptures as the following selection of verses indicate. Further teaching on this important subject can be found in other publications of REACHOUT TRUST.

Zechariah 12:1 in the NWT shows us three things,

1. Jehovah is ‘THE ONE’.

2. Jehovah THE ONE stretches out the heavens etc.

3. Jehovah THE ONE formed the spirit of man.

However Zechariah 12:10 with John 19:34-37 shows us that THE ONE Zechariah is talking about is JESUS.

Again Hebrews 1:10 and John 1:3 show us that JESUS is THE ONE who created heaven and earth.

Moreover, Colossians 1:16 & 17 show us that JESUS is THE ONE who created the spirit of man.

We discover that the “family name” reserved for God, Jehovah, is also given in Scripture to Jesus. Scripture therefore shows at least two persons in the Godhead.

However, when we compare Exodus 17:7, Psalm 95:8 and Hebrews 3:7-11 we find that this same “family name” is also given to the HOLY SPIRIT. Genesis 1:1-3 & Psalm 104:30 show the HOLY SPIRIT as the CREATOR. In addition, Job 33:4 shows the HOLY SPIRIT making man and breathing into him.

Summarizing this teaching in the simplest form we can say:

The FATHER is neither the SON nor the HOLY SPIRIT but He is God.

The SON is neither the FATHER nor the HOLY SPIRIT but He is God.

The HOLY SPIRIT is neither the FATHER nor the SON but He is God.

Friday, 24 October 2008

BYU yanks diploma for ex-Mormon calendar-maker - USATODAY.com

SALT LAKE CITY (AP) — Brigham Young University has yanked the diploma of a man who created a calendar featuring shirtless Mormon missionaries and was later excommunicated from the church.

Chad Hardy of Las Vegas attended graduation ceremonies Aug. 15 after finishing up his last four units of study online in June. But on July 13, in between completing his studies and the graduation ceremony, he was excommunicated by The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.

There is a lesson here for all those who want to understand what Mormonism is all about. Some have argued that BYU is a Mormon Church-owned school and, therefore, since Hardy knew and signed up to the rules of conduct, he only has himself to blame. Problem is he hasn't been "active" as a Mormon for six years, according to some reports. His lack of any meaningful involvement in the Mormon Church seemed to be no bar to his gaining entry on a BYU course so we have to conclude that faithfulness to the code, or lack of it, is not the real issue. The issue is publicity. It always seems to be with these things. Its not that he broke the code, he had already done that, but that he broke the code so publicly and the Mormon Church values its squeaky clean image more than anything.

Being that he paid for his course, worked for and gained a commendable pass it seems outrageously small-minded and spiteful to deny him what he paid and worked for. But image is more important than your diploma, more important than your future career, indeed more important than the truth judging by the increasingly strange and disingenuous nature of Mormon apologetics these days. You can't fight such paranoia it seems, although he seems determined to do just that and I, for one, wish him well of it. Someone has to knock sense into these blind zealots.

BYU yanks diploma for ex-Mormon calendar-maker - USATODAY.com

Friday, 17 October 2008

Should You Believe in the Trinity?

Many Christians, while talking to Jehovah’s Witnesses, are asked to look at the Watchtower Bible & Tract Society’s [WBTS] booklet “Should You Believe In The Trinity” [abbreviated to “Trinity” from now on.]

As with most WBTS publications, the booklet gives the impression of being a well-produced, scholarly work. It is only as you check it out carefully that the errors begin to come to light. It may not be easy to get a Witness to investigate this publication but we want to give the opportunity to lovingly show some of the faults in it and hope you will be able to do the same with the next one that asks you to read it. It is not wise to try to tackle all the arguments at once, concentrate on one at a time.

I have tried to personally see every book that the WBTS refer to. This was not easy at first because the WBTS left out references to page numbers, where and when published etc. Initially, thanks to the British Library I managed to see most of them. Since completing my research, the WBTS have issued their list of all the original publicationss.

When you show that a particular quote is not the full one the reply that many Jehovah’s Witnesses will give is, “Well the writer does say these words and therefore we are not misquoting them.” The answer I give to this is to quote John 3:16 & 17 from the New World Translation, as follows:
"For God loved the world so much that he gave his only begotten Son, in order
that everyone... might... be destroyed."

Is that correct Mr Witness? No? Nevertheless, it is what is written in your Bible. I hope that through this the Witness will begin to see how dishonest it is, by judicial editing, to make any author say the opposite to what he or she actually said.

The “Trinity” booklet weaves a number of themes together but we have tried to break it down to a few main sections, each of which we will look at under the following headings.

A. MAIN WATCHTOWER ARGUMENTS - A summary of their main arguments.

B. PUBLICATIONS QUOTED - A look at many of the quotations they use.

C. COMMENTS ON THE WATCHTOWER ARGUMENT - Highlighting anything that is wrong or suspect with their argument.

D. ADDED MATERIAL - A concise look at any extra material that will present another point of view.

Setting it out like this, we hope, that at a glance, you will be able to grasp the WBTS argument and be able to give a clear and concise answer as to what you believe the truth to be.

Remember you are not out to win an argument but to share the truth and give the Holy Spirit opportunity to work in the life of the Jehovah’s Witness. Be cool, calm and collected and allow the Lord to use you!

Today we are posting the first section and will add the others in future posts.

SECTION 1- THE TRINITY IS BEYOND REASON

A. MAIN WATCHTOWER ARGUMENTS

The definition of the Trinity is hard to follow, confusing and contrary to normal reason. They
conclude therefore that because it is beyond human reason and because God is not a God of confusion, the Trinity cannot exist.

B. PUBLICATIONS QUOTED

The original words from “Trinity” are in normal print and words or qualifying sentences omitted from the quote are in bold/italic print. We have added the full reference of the edition of the cited book so that a careful check can be made to see that we are not misquoting. Any comments made are in a separate paragraph clearly marked COMMENT. The page number refers to the page in “Trinity” where you can find the quote.

Page 4. -The Encyclopaedia Americana, Vol.27, p.16

It is held that although the doctrine is beyond the grasp of human reason, it is, like many of the formulations of physical science, not contrary to reason, and may be apprehended (though it may not be comprehended) by the human mind.

Page 4. - A Dictionary of Religious Knowledge, Rev.L.Abbott, 1875, p.944

It is certain, however, that from the apostolic times they paid worship to Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, addressed them their prayers, and included them in their doxologies. It was not till the beginning of the fourth century that the question began to be elaborately discussed how this practice, and the experience out of which it sprung, should be formed into a doctrine, and reconciled with the belief of the Church in one God... Precisely what that doctrine is, or rather precisely how it is to be explained, Trinitarians are not agreed among themselves... It is not possible for human intellect to comprehend fully the divine nature. The Bible represents God to us as Father, Son and Holy Ghost. It represents them equally entitled to our highest reverence, affection, and allegiance. It attributes to all the same divine qualities. It even uses these titles at times interchangeably.

Page 4. - What Are They Saying About The Trinity? - Joseph Bracken

Priests who with considerable effort learned... the Trinity during their seminary years naturally hesitated to present it to their people from the pulpit, even on Trinity Sunday Why should one bore people with something that in the end they wouldn’t properly understand anyway?... The Trinity is a matter of formal belief, but it has little or no [effect] in day-to-day Christian life and worship.

COMMENT

It is very clear that if you seek to approach the Trinity purely from a humanistic viewpoint it is beyond our understanding. This type of quote only proves that some people find the Trinity confusing not that the doctrine itself is.

Page 4. - Christianity and the World Religions - Hans Kung, p.113

Even well informed Muslims simply cannot follow, as the Jews thus far have likewise failed to grasp, the idea of the Trinity. The distinctions made by the doctrine of the Trinity between one God and three hypostases do not satisfy Muslims, who are confused, rather than enlightened, by theological terms derived from Syriac, Greek, and Latin. Muslims find it all a word game... why should anyone want to add anything to the notion of God’s oneness and uniqueness that can only dilute or nullify that oneness and uniqueness?”

COMMENT

This quote is correct but Kung explains just seven pages later,

"How should we understand the doctrine of the Trinity for the purposes of dialogue with Judaism and Islam (a test case for every Christian theologian)? Here, in summary fashion, is my answer... Jesus Christ... the ambassador, Messiah, word of the eternal God in human form... From the biblical standpoint, the Holy Spirit is God Himself..." pp.120/1

Page 4. - The Catholic Encyclopaedia, Vol.15, p.47

A dogma so mysterious presupposes a Divine revelation. When the fact of revelation, understood in its full sense as the Speech of God to man, is no longer admitted, the rejection of the doctrine follows as a necessary consequence.

COMMENT

What is interesting about continuing this quote is that it concludes that the only way to reject the Trinity is to reject God’s revelation of it to man. The WBTS are shutting off its members from the revelation of the very God they claim to serve.

Page 4. - Theological Dictionary - Rahner & Vorgimler, p.470

The Trinity looms in outline in the OT as a mystery ready for the disclosure... The NT witnesses to the divinity of Jesus Christ... is aware of the divinity of the Holy Ghost... The Trinity is a mystery... in the strict sense ... which could not be known without revelation, and even after revelation cannot become wholly intelligible. pp.469/70.

C. COMMENTS ON THE WATCHTOWER ARGUMENT

The WBTS try to lay the foundation that the Trinity is confusing and therefore not of God. However, whereas a number of the quotes they make do talk about confusion they also show that the Trinity exists and that with true revelation from Jehovah God we can see and accept its reality.

The other strand of their argument is that the Trinity is beyond human reason and therefore cannot be true. Is not God Himself beyond human reason? We cannot understand the eternal Almighty God with our finite minds. However, because we cannot understand the eternal God does that mean He does not exist? For God to be truly God He must be beyond our human reason - there is nothing wrong with that.

D. ADDED MATERIAL

The Bible is the revelation of this God who is beyond reason. His ways are not our ways, He is much higher than us - Isaiah 55:8-9. Jesus revealed God to us, John 1:14, and the Holy Spirit is sent to reveal both the Father and Son to us, John 16:13-15. Indeed as we read earlier the revelation of God transcends human reasoning and goes into the heart - 1 Corinthians 2:9, 10, 14; 2 Corinthians 3:5-18.The Trinity is indeed beyond human reason [in the mind] but it is not beyond God revelation [in the spirit].

Friday, 10 October 2008

Moroni's Empty Promise

An early Mormon leader stated:

“The Bible has been robbed of its plainness; many sacred books having been lost, others rejected by the Romish (sic) Church, and what few we have left, were copied and re-copied so many times, that it is admitted that almost every verse has been corrupted and mutilated to that degree that scarcely any two of them read alike” (Orson Pratt, The Seer, P.2 Jan.1854)

Based on such pronouncements, it is commonly, though mistakenly, believed among Mormons that our modern Bible is 'a translation of a translation of a translation...etc.' that in the process of transmission it has “passed through profane hands” and been interfered with by “corrupt priests” with no recourse to early documents. If this were the case it becomes immediately obvious why the Mormon is not encouraged to put a great deal of trust in the Bible.

If I were to suggest that, notwithstanding such perceived problems, I had prayed about the Bible and 'believed' it to be 100% reliable a Mormon might reasonably question my judgement and demand more objective evidence. Why should the way I 'feel' about the Bible satisfy anyone’s honest questions? Why shouldn't people be suspicious if I refused to address the issues and concerns that may be raised by Mormons about translation and transmission and offered my impressions instead of honest and thoughtful answers?

Such answers are amply provided today by comprehensive Bible scholarship of course and a Christian is not short of evidence to justify our trust in the Bible and need not fall back on feelings. And yet Mormons expect people to do exactly that. Questions are asked, concerns raised, clear and objective evidence counter to Mormon claims presented and yet the Mormon answer is Moroni's promise:

“Behold, I would exhort you that when ye shall read these things, if it be wisdom in God that ye should read them, that ye would remember how merciful the Lord hath been unto the children of men, from the creation of Adam even down until the time that ye shall receive these things, and ponder it in your hearts.

And when ye shall receive these things, I would exhort you that ye would ask God, the Eternal Father, in the name of Christ, if these things are not true; and if ye shall ask with a sincere heart, with real intent, having faith in Christ, he will manifest the truth of it unto you, by the power of the Holy Ghost.

And by the power of the Holy Ghost ye may know the truth of all things.”
(Moroni 10:3-5)


As though prayer can make clear discrepancies in Mormon teaching go away, as though it makes wrong right, falsehood true or truth false.

One of the most wrongheaded ideas about the Christian faith is that it is purely subjective, i.e. that spiritual truth is nothing like objective truth. Nothing could be further from the truth! The Christian story is the story of God acting in history, and the evidence of God's acting in history can be observed just as can any other events of history. The Bible positively encourages us to look at historical evidence as part of our 'investigation' of the Christian faith.

Mormonism, on the other hand, discourages such investigation, asking us to ignore historical, archaeological evidence that militates against Mormon claims, and instead simply rely on feelings. It begins by claiming to be a record of God's dealings with the ancient peoples of America, naming cities, coins, animals, people, wars etc. then offers absolutely no evidence, such as we find for the Bible, for any of its claims.

Far from proving anything, Moroni's promise becomes a form of emotional blackmail, putting the burden of proof on the person investigating Mormon claims instead of where it should be, on the church that makes these claims. If the Mormon says that the Book of Mormon is a reliable witness the onus is squarely on the Mormon to answer honest questions, offer reasonable arguments, and otherwise encourage further investigations.

The Bible story is not entirely dependent on historical evidence and God “speaks” in many ways to people’s hearts and minds. However, God has spoken and acted in history and it is reasonable to expect that historical activity to be apparent even if some would offer different explanations for the attendant historical events.

There is a Jerusalem, even if some don’t believe God’s Son died there for our sins; there is a Jewish nation, even if some deny their role as God’s people; the temple in Jerusalem was destroyed in 70 AD, even if some people question the biblical explanation for its destruction; a widow’s mite may be seen today; the type of coin Jesus took to illustrate his lesson that people should “render to Caesar what is Caesar’s and to God what is God’s” is a reality and ample evidence exists for the many character’s populating the Bible story..

Christianity presents compelling historical evidence for the Christian faith and challenges people to consider seriously what the facts point to (Ro.5:20) Mormonism, on the other hand, claims to be based in historical events but asks people to believe historical accounts when there is not an item of historical data to believe in. Faith, in biblical terms, is trust but, while Christianity has presents people with something in which to trust, Mormonism asks people to trust in how they feel about something for which there is no evidence.

Moroni’s promise is an empty promise because it is a challenge from someone who never existed to pray about something that never happened in places never built to people who never lived as recorded in a book that is completely fictional.

Saturday, 4 October 2008

Features | SignOnSanDiego.com | The San Diego Union-Tribune -- Apocalypse soon

I don't know how many 'ends' there have been but this small list, interesting though it is, could be added to many time over by regular readers of this blog. No one seems to mind that Scripture makes it clear that "concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only" (Mat.24:36) These are interesting examples and this story a worthy addition to the long list of those who insist they know what neither the angels of heaven nor even the Lord of Glory knows:

"The end is near?

Looking back at some 20th-century predictions:

1914: Jehovah's Witnesses say this is the doomsday year, followed by a series of later dates. In the 1990s, Jehovah's Witnesses quietly abandon a prediction that people alive in 1914 would live to see the Second Coming of Christ.

1919: Meteorologist Albert Porta predicts six planets will come together on Dec. 19, creating a cataclysmic event that would explode the Earth.

1936: Famed psychic Edgar Cayce picks this year for a disaster that will end the world as we know it.

1988: Hal Lindsey, in his best-selling book, “The Late Great Planet Earth,” predicts the Rapture will happen during this year. Former NASA engineer Edgar C. Whisenant pins it down to between Sept. 11 and Sept. 13. Unbowed, Lindsey still predicts these are the end times. Whisenant died in 2001.

1994: Radio evangelist Harold Camping tells listeners the end will come that September."

Features | SignOnSanDiego.com | The San Diego Union-Tribune -- Apocalypse soon

Thursday, 2 October 2008

Blaugmenting Your Christian Worldview: Almost Done

How about this for a group study. I cam across this blog whose stated aim is to buck the trend for Jesus:

"I hate the statistic that informs us that 75% of high school students will walk away from their faith shortly after leaving high school. I plan our studies with the intent of lowering that statistic with each student that comes in. My goals include:

  • removing intellectual excuses people give for claiming Christianity is false
  • removing students in these studies from the pond that pseudo-Christian movements fish from (Groups like the Watchtower & Mormonism normally convert Christians into their movements. Not these students!)
  • helping students develop spiritual disciplines (prayer, reading and studying the Bible, memorization, sharing our faith)."

Maybe this will inspire others to start such a group. His book choice for the group, Ron Rhode's "Reasoning from the Scriptures with Jehovah's Witnesses" is an excellent choice and no small challenge - but it goes to show it can be done. I like his plans for the future too.

Blaugmenting Your Christian Worldview: Almost Done