Albert Mohler on Qur’an Burning

“Christians are not called to burn the books of other religions. We are not called to publicity stunts that put lives at risk and subvert the preaching of the Gospel of Christ. Such actions deserve only the most severe condemnation. But even the condemnation serves its purpose — to gain publicity.”

Read the rest here.

4 Responses to Albert Mohler on Qur’an Burning

  1. Donald Johnson April 8, 2011 at 3:10 pm #

    Moses burned the golden calf, a symbol of another religion.

    ESV Exo 32:20 He took the calf that they had made and burned it with fire and ground it to powder and scattered it on the water and made the people of Israel drink it.

    As mentioned in another thread, Acts has a book burning.

    ESV Act 19:19 And a number of those who had practiced magic arts brought their books together and burned them in the sight of all. And they counted the value of them and found it came to fifty thousand pieces of silver.

    I do think Jones was seeking publicity and was not wise.

    ESV Pro 29:22 A man of wrath stirs up strife, and one given to anger causes much transgression.

  2. Charlton Connett April 8, 2011 at 6:00 pm #

    Donald,

    Because a biblical event happened, does that mean we are called to attempt to re-enact that event as a regular matter of faith? What was the burning, smashing, and drinking of the Golden Calf about? Who was involved in it? What was the overall historical situation of when the event occurred, and does that same situation apply to the burning of the Qur’an in this particular situation? Similarly with the book burning event in Acts, all of these same questions apply.

    When you compare apples and oranges the best you can hope for is to end up with a fruit salad.

  3. Donald Johnson April 8, 2011 at 9:17 pm #

    Charlton,

    I agree that an action back then does not necessarily imply any similar action now. It takes thought on how to apply these texts today, if they apply at all.

    One thing is sure, if you omit ANY discussion of these texts, then it seems one is omitting some
    possibly relevant texts, and thereby omitting any discussion on why they do not apply.

  4. Charlton Connett April 9, 2011 at 7:44 am #

    If the texts don’t apply, which I would argue that they don’t, then you are not omitting anything by omitting the texts. The only reason they may be worth mentioning is because they are examples of idol destruction. But then there are also many other examples of that in Scripture. But, the historical situation, once taken into context, reveals that the most relevant texts on this issue are not the texts on destruction of idols. Therefore, to bring those texts up introduces rabbit trails that do not add to the discussion, but simply lead to confusion as people attempt to discern why we would even discuss them in the first place.

Comment here. Please use FIRST and LAST name.

Powered by WordPress. Designed by Woo Themes