Stephen Korsman, a catholic, has been attacking the SDA Church for years in his Theotokos Blog. This new blog will be analyzing his attacks on the SDA Church from a Biblical perspective. From a blog which he contributes with we read:
"Stephen Korsman is a cradle Catholic from South Africa, with a Catholic history from both his mother's Irish/English side and his father's Dutch side. He is a medical virologist in Mthatha, South Africa, with a family history of science - archaeology (mother) and molecular biology (sister). His interest in apologetics and different belief systems began when he was 13. The topics he came across caused him a lot of concern - the Trinity, the state of the dead, and which days Christians should observe (Sabbath, Sunday, Christmas, Easter, Passover, etc.). From there he developed an interest in Adventism, and began defending his faith from that perspective. He hopes to engage in a more positive dialogue with Adventism than a mere defensive one, and gain and encourage better understanding of both faiths on both sides."
The fact is that his blog Theotokos is of a vastly different nature from that of a person looking for dialogue with Adventists. He has it as a personal mission to review the "heresies" of the SDA message vis-à-vis the Catholic tradition, not the Bible. To confirm this, his blog has as a heading: "Pray for us, o most holy Theotokos (Mother of God, Mary)." Under that, as if to signify the hierarchy of intercession, he brings: "Jesus Christ, Son of God, Have Mercy on us Sinners." He is not shy in his belief in the heretical teachings of the intercession and adoration of Mary. Where is that in the Bible?
His efforts not would have been significant (his arguments are quite obviously unbiblical and firmly based on the catholic tradition) were it not for the fact that now he is part of a blog of progressive adventism. His first blog there was questioning the Sabbath so this seems to be just a subtle attempt to questions the Adventist faith and bring more controversy to the church.
To begin this discussion I'd like to challenge Stephen to respond objectively (point by point) and using the Bible solely the following questions:
1. Your site of catholic apologetics brings as its heading the belief in the intercession and adoration of Mary, mother of Jesus. If you're trying to be Scriptural on your site, where in Bible have you found evidence that we should pray to Mary? Please quote book and verse only. (Church fathers not allowed please).
2. In your many diatribes against Sabbath keeping, you say that there's no evidence of Sabbath keeping in the New Testament [Would anyone try to make it a law for the English people to speak English instead of Japanese? Such a law would be totally innocuous, just like a new emphasis on Sabbath-keeping would be for first century Jews and Christians]. Please provide one verse in the NT that says explicitly, beyond a shadow of a doubt that Sabbath no longer was the day of rest. Furthermore, please substantiate that claim by showing that Jesus told his disciples that Sunday was now to be observed as the day of rest. Please quote 1 book and verse only. (Church fathers not allowed please).
3. If Jesus was our utmost example, what day of the week did Jesus observe as holy? Please quote 1 book and verse only. (Church fathers not allowed please).
4. If God sanctified the Sabbath and Adam did not as you boldly exclaim in your support of the day of the Sun, then Adam was not required to sanctify something that God held as holy and was therefore, sinning against God. Please provide one verse that shows that Adam DID NOT sanctify the Sabbath. Also, substantiate the claim that Adam DID NOT observed any day as your blog intimates.
5. If God wrote with his own finger the Sabbath commandment, would He not have personally changed this commandment? It's also the longest commandment and a sign between God and his people, thus of utmost importance. Please quote 1 book and verse only where God changed his law. (Church fathers not allowed please).
6. If "Jesus is Lord of the Sabbath" (Matthew 12:8), which day is the Day of the Lord? Please provide one Bible verse where Sunday is mentioned as the Day of the Lord. Both words must appear together. Please quote 1 book and verse only. (Church fathers not allowed please).
7. If Jesus instituted the Sunday as the celebration of the day of his ressurrection, please quote 1 book and verse only where we have AN EXPLICIT commandment to do so. It must be something to the effect: "And Jesus said to his disciples: From now on, you shall no longer sanctify the Sabbath, you shall celebrate Sunday. Please quote 1 book and verse only. (Church fathers not allowed please).
One of the Catholics' most beloved word is MYSTERY. The late Pope John in his DIES DOMINI "Apostolic" Letter quotes many misteries: the mystery of his identity, the Paschal Mystery of Christ, mystery of the world's origin, mystery of the biblical "rest" of God, the Christian mystery, the mystery of the Church, mystery of the kenosis, Easter mystery, mystery of the beginning, the entire mystery of Christ, mystery of the Incarnation, mystery of the saints, mystery of the Lord. Obviously he meant to make the Catholic Church the only possessor of the meaning of these mysteries and thus, make people slaves of the belief that the Pope has the KEYS to these mysteries. How absurd! How blasphemous!
In keeping with tradition, apparently Stephen wants to make it also a mystery the fact that the Sunday was instituted by tradition and NOT by the BIBLE. It is consequently a mystery why the Catholic changed so much in the Bible and instituted the words and precepts of MEN in place of the words of God.
This is just the beginning of our defense of the SDA faith. We are eagerly waiting for a BIblical response to the questions above, book and verse.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
I always wondered how Roman Catholics highlight so much the figure of Mary, when the apostle Paul, the greatest apologist and systematizer of the Christian faith, who was so much detailing in how to practice the Christian faith, in his 14 epistles never ever refers to Mary.
On the contrary, when he had every chance to exalt Mary, as any Roman Catholic would do, as he addressed the Incarnation of Jesus, he just said that He was "born of a woman" (Gal. 4:4). Now, if Paul had the Catholic mindset that would be a golden opportunity for him to exalt Mary as "mother of God", "queen of heaven", "eternally virgen", etc., etc., but, for the great disappointment of the worshipers of Mary, he simply ignored any special role on her part in the gospel message.
So, what is the reaction of a Roman Catholic about that?
Andre,
Your blog has potential for great discussion across the SDA-Catholic theological divide. Friendly suggestion: Changing the title which gives the premise for a personal attack on an individual to a title with a premise for a global critical analysis of Catholicism's unbiblical claims. And for the record: I didn't invite him to bring "progression to the SDA faith" but to encourage positive dialog with open minded Adventists. I'm sure Stephen can glean something from Adventists without feeling threatened. This isn't a defense of Stephen's stance, as I know he is critical of the SDA church on his blog, rather a clarification of my intent to invite him as a writer with clearly stated boundaries.
Well said, A.G. The goal of this blog is to find reasons for our faith in Scriptures only. Once we acknowledge that we can't base our faith in Scriptures only, then we are in the words of Jesus in Matthew 15:8-9: "...But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men. "
Let's give Stephen some time to gather his evidence based on the rules stipulated. Endless debate will not convince anyone, limiting our discussion to sound Scriptural exegesis may get us somewhere...
Peace
Hey Marcel, thanks for stopping by. This is not a personal attack on Stephen, rather his views. The title and the content of the blog imply a discussion on opinions, not on his character. No one here is looking to yet another controversy on SDAs. I stipulated clear boundaries for our discussion, otherwise it's a waste of time.
Stephen has been "dialoguing" with the SDA church at least since 1999 when he started his Theotokos site and I can't see one little change or compromise on his views on his blog or his website. If anything, he has hardened through the years. He is vicerally critical of our beliefs and yet cannot clearly prove his own using the Bible solely. I challenged him to do so. Unless we have a common ground, dialogue is almost impossible. He has brought the same old arguments to your blog and I'm surprised that some SDAs even agreed with him! That shows how much we need to be honing our skills in the defense of the SDA theology...
I also hope that he will glean something from this discussion as well, that is, if he is in a serious pursuit of truth and willing to use the Bible only and some set of rules for that matter. [We can use the Bible to prove anything if we want...].
I hope a more focused dialogue will solidify his real motivation when entering into a dialogue with SDAs.
Well, Stephen has emailed me saying he is not able to provide clear unequivocal Biblical evidence for the questions I asked him on this blog. STARK ADMISSION!
He has also banned me from participation in his own blog www.theotokos.co.za/blog when I confronted him with OFFICIAL Catholic publications that show their belief in the Pope as God, the reality of modern indulgences and Mary as being a co-savior with Christ.
It just shows how blinded and brainwashed Catholic people can become. When confronted with the fact that their religion is based more on tradition and man-made rituals, they prefer to stick to their guns and not dialogue.
Way to go Stephen! You have really demonstrated what your real motivations are and your credibility is totally ruined.
Post a Comment