READERS' EXCHANGE

 

If homosexual tendencies are natural in some people and not learned, as you and others in your paper have implied, we still cannot conclude that God does not condemn homosexual practices, for due to man’s fall there are many things, such as lying and cheating, that are “natural.” We are not to be surprised that in one’s youth there are these “natural” tendencies, including an inordinate attraction toward those of one’s own sex. God has made it clear in his word that homosexual acts are sinful (Rom. 1:26, 27 to name one passage). This makes it clear that what seems “natural” to us is to be rejected. —James D. Flanagin, Brownwood, Tx.

Our congregation is small and informal, and an article in your paper is often the springboard for discussion on Sunday morning. There is so much to be studied that has nothing to do with church politics or denominational argument. I have neither the energy nor the interest for the latter. It seems that the church has existed for the sole purpose of arguing about something. In these parts we date everything from some minor skirmish or major battle. While we were right in the middle of these wars, we are now older and we are tired of them. Maybe we can’t stop the war, but we can certainly refuse to participate. We find churches outside our brotherhood to be much different, full of people. We are seeking a way to be a group without the warfare. —Lonnie Guinn, 244 EI Campo Dr.. S. San Francisco, Ca. 94080.

Since I did not have a copy of your history, I borrowed one from Joe Jones. I have read it and re-read a number of portions. I certainly want a copy for my own library. I could keep Joe’s but I remember a Biblical commandment against that type of action and attitude. It would be difficult for you to know how much you have helped me prepare for my class in Restoration History. —Henry McAdams, St. Louis Church of Christ, St. Louis, Michigan.

I enjoyed reading The Stone-Campbell Movement very much indeed. Most of the material was a revelation to me as I knew little of the history of the Movement in America. Shame on me! Chapter 2 on European influences is of course of special interest to me, being a Scotsman. It proved most useful in a study I made this year on the history of the British churches. —Ian S. Davidson, Glasgow, Scotland.

Re: your article on printing, I have used the expression “the miracle of the printing press” on many occasion. As with many other things, we take the availability of mass-printed materials, especially the Scriptures, for granted. Thank you for reminding us that the Scriptures have not always been as available. —Jerry Taylor, College Park, GA.

I do not understand what happened to the Dallas Cowboys this year. —Max Foster, Arkansas City, KS.

(Those of us in the Dallas area know what happened since we are near the action and have inside information. They got beat! It is too bad that all life’s mysteries are not so easily solved. —Ed.)

It is ironic that you are stuck with the title Restoration Review in light of your insistence that our movement is more reformation than restoration. I’m not fussing, just observing. —Gene Jarrett, Morrow, GA.

(While I am persuaded that the term restoration has little value in the vocabulary of the modern church, I go along with some of the recent efforts to re-define it, such as renewal or renewal through recovery, and in that sense I can use the term with good conscience. It is the doctrine of restorationism, which falsifies the true nature of the church, that I particularly object to. —Ed.)