Bridge of Reason

The Chambers Dictionary defines legalism as “strict adherence to law...the tendency to observe letter or form rather than spirit, or to regard things from the point of view of law.” It also helpfully illustrates the definition with a reference to the opposing doctrines of salvation by works and salvation by grace. But what is wrong with keeping the law? Surely as Christians we believe in being law-abiding? There is certainly enough in the New Testament about obedience to authorities. We are instructed, “obey your parents in the Lord” (Eph.6:1); obey your earthly masters with respect” (Eph.6:5); obey your leaders and submit to their authority” (Heb.13:17) and we are reminded “to be subject to rulers and authorities, to be obedient, to be ready to do whatever is good” (Titus 3:3) The Challenge of Legalism When we witness to those with a legalistic bent we are often challenged with these and similar texts and accused of practicing antinomianism, “being emancipated by the gospel fro...

If ever you wondered what a Catch-22 actually is, Mormonism offers a great example. A Catch-22 is a paradox you can’t escape because of conflicting claims. You are supposed to believe one claim in order to believe the second but the second prevents you from believing the first. When I was a Mormon back in the 1970s, the official teaching on plural marriage was clear enough; it was the order of heaven. When it was abandoned by the Mormons in 1890 it was simply a temporary suspension because, ‘ We believe in being subject to kings, presidents, rulers, and magistrates, in obeying, honoring, and sustaining the law.’ LDS 12 th Article of Faith. In other words, we obeyed the law – for now. Nevertheless, there would come a day when the practice would be re-established and the order of heaven restored. That was because the standing order of marriage was polygamy. Without polygamy a man or woman simply couldn’t reach the celestial kingdom of God. Brigham Young pre...

  With what authority does the Watch Tower Society speak? Does the Watch Tower bring light, as it claims? Olin R Moyle began his association with Charles Russell’s Bible Students group in 1910. He worked as legal counsel for the Society from 1935 to 1939. A disenchanted Moyle resigned in July 1939, after witnessing the ill-treatment of Bethel staff, and Joseph Rutherford’s heavy drinking and luxurious lifestyle. The Watch Tower responded with a strongly worded article in the Watchtower magazine in which they accused Moyle of lying, comparing him to Judas Iscariot. His local congregation disfellowshipped him, and in 1940 Moyle sued the Society for libel. Moyle won, and won again on appeal, initially being awarded $30,000, later reduced to $15,000. That’s more than $707,000 and almost $354,000 in 2026. It is always a mistake for a cult to find itself in open court. So much is brought to light that they would rather not talk about as they are asked questions they would rather not an...

Mormonism's Open Canon? Mormonism is founded on the idea that the early church went into apostasy because of the absence of apostles and prophets. Mormonism is presented as a ‘restoration’ of ancient authority and prophecy. The Bible should never have been a closed canon, so Mormonism operates from an open canon. The problem arises when we quote Brigham Young, Mormonism’s second prophet, the ‘American Moses’ who led the saints to the Salt Lake Valley. You might think such an important leader would have something to add to the Mormon canon. He certainly had plenty to say during his thirty years presidency of the church. Nevertheless, he has but one entry in the Doctrine and Covenants, section 136: ‘The word and the will of the Lord, given through President Brigham Young, at the Winter Quarters of the Camp of Israel...January 1, 1847’ He said plenty, of course, much of it recorded in the 26 volume Journal of Discourses. But what was once recognised as a ‘Standard Work’ of the churc...

  It is commonly understood among Mormons that the Fall was a good thing. A 27 April post on X has sent the Christian world in a spin because it plainly said as much: 'In the LDS Church, we do not see Eve eating the forbidden fruit as a mistake or even a sin. on the contrary, we celebrate her courage and wisdom to partake of the fruit, transgress the bounds of Eden and become all that her Heavenly Father wanted her to be.' Of course, nobody outside the Mormon Church would teach such a thing. It goes against everything the Bible tells us, everything Christianity teaches about the nature of man, the purposes of God in creation , and the meaning of the atonement. People get uncomfortable when we use the word 'cult,' but it must be understood that error on this level cannot be winked at. It must be called out for what it is, plain heresy. People must be warned, and the fact someone 'sincerely believes it’ is no excuse. If it upsets our Mormon neighbours then pe...

  This Contribution by Robin McEwen Common questions that Jehovah's Witnesses often employ on hearing criticism of their religion/organisation are ‘Where else would I go?’ and ‘which other religion is as close to early Christians as ours?’ I get the impression that JWs think in terms of groups, denominations, and organisations. I believe this stems from the fact that they are taught that their own group is ‘the truth’, and all other groups or churches as false. O n finding out you are a Christian, a Jehovah’s Witness will want to know which church or denomination you belong to, as they seem to have a set opinion on each church group. What they are unaware of, is that within the rich tapestry of Christian cultures/denominations there is a unity which arises out of the fellowship that all born again believers share. We may worship in varied ways organise our churches slightly differently etc., but generally speaking, we have unity. He who unites us, Jesus Christ, is infinitely g...

  Is God Omnipresent? The psalmist writes: ‘ Where shall I go from your Spirit? Or where shall I flee from your presence? If I ascend to heaven, you are there! If I make my bed in Sheol, you are there! If I take the wings of the morning and dwell in the uttermost parts of the sea, even there your hand shall lead me, and your right hand shall hold me.’ Ps.139:7-10 ‘ Thus says the  L ord : ‘Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool; what is the house that you would build for me, a nd what is the place of my rest?’’ Isaiah 66:1 “ Am I a God at hand, declares the  Lord , and not a God far away?   Can a man hide himself in secret places so that I cannot see him? declares the  Lord . Do I not fill heaven and earth? declares the  Lord . Jer.23:23,24 The psalmist, Isaiah, and Jeremiah are convinced of the Lord’s omnipresence. Yet Adam and Eve hid from the LORD. Gen.3:8; Cain went out from his presence. Gen.4:16; Jonah fled from the...

The cry of the Reformation is sola gratia, sola fida, solus Christus, sola scriptura, soli Deo Gloria . We are saved by grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone, according to Scripture alone, to the glory of God alone. That fourth sola, sola scriptura , is under attack as much as it has ever been. The doctrine of sola scriptura , Latin for 'Scripture alone,' is the theological principle that the Bible is the sole infallible rule of faith and practice for the Christian. It does not argue that Scripture is the only authority, but rather the ultimate and supreme authority, against which all other sources—such as tradition, reason, or prophetic claims—must be judged. This principle did not emerge in a vacuum, but arose in the sixteenth century as a direct challenge to the late medieval Roman Catholic Church, which held that authority rested in a combination of Scripture and ecclesiastical tradition, interpreted by the Magisterium. The Reformers, led by figures like Ma...