Dear Editor,
Please kindly permit me to respond to Rev. Dr. J. Emmett Weir's December 8 letter to the editor in The Nassau Guardian. As a doctor of either theology or philosophy, Weir is obviously a highly credentialed clergyman. While I appreciate him taking the time to read my write-up regarding the tragic loss of Dr. Myles Munroe and eight others on November 9, I believe he was sincerely misinformed.
The gist of the write-up is that Bahamians should not misconstrue the untimely passing of Munroe as divine judgment. Many godly Christians have died in traffic, boating and aviation accidents. For instance, noted Christian personalities Rich Mullins, Keith Green and David Wilkerson all died in accidents. American gospel singer Rev. Timothy Wright died in 2009 as a result of injuries he got in an automobile accident in 2008. His wife and grandson died in that car crash.
Christians are not immune to death and suffering. Weir stated bluntly that Munroe was not scared to death, in refutation of what I had written regarding Munroe's final sermon at Bahamas Faith Ministries International that was preached hours before his death.
In that sermon Munroe clearly stated that he followed Jesus because he was scared of death, which he said was the number one fear among humans -- a claim which appears to be in direct conflict with Weir's main thesis. This information regarding Munroe's sermon was gleaned from an article in the religious section of The Nassau Guardian, which was published on November 13 -- four days after the tragic aviation accident.
The title of the article is ''Dr. Munroe's last sermon.'' The Nassau Guardian is a reputable newspaper. I do not believe they misquoted or took out of context Munroe's statement; therefore, Weir's beef should not be with me; but with the newspaper instead.
Furthermore, I do not think Munroe would have been amused at Weir's claim that his thinking and teaching were in line with the late German-American existentialist theologian and philosopher Paul Tillich's teachings. With all due respect to Dr. Weir, I find it befuddling that he claims to have read many of Munroe's books and listened to his sermons, yet concludes that his teachings are similar to those of Tillich's -- a man who denied the personality of God, which led many to charge him of being an atheist.
He referred to God as the ''ultimate ground of existence.'' Tillich also rejected personal sin and rebellion against God. He denied the historicity of the Fall in Eden, as recorded in Genesis 3.
Tillich argued that salvation is not in the historical person of Jesus Christ, but in a symbol. Tillich's Jesus is not the historical person in the scriptures. According to evangelical theologian Paul Enns, Tillich taught that salvation is not through atonement for sin but through ultimate concern. If anything, Tillich's theology was more in line with the teachings of neo-orthodox theologians Karl Barth, John A.T. Robinson, Emil Brunner, Reinhold Niebuhr and Soren Kierkegaard. In fact, Paul Enns argued in his book ''The Moody Handbook of Theology,'' that Tillich was more of a philosopher than a theologian who dealt with ideas and concepts rather than the historical events of Scripture. His books Systematic Theology, The Courage to Be and Dynamics of Faith are difficult to read.
From an evangelical standpoint, this man was a rank heretic. Yet Weir calls him one of the world's great theologians. He is way too generous.
Munroe was an evangelical Pentecostal minister who adhered to the tenets of scripture -- the very tenets Tillich repeatedly denied in his writings. While I believe that Weir meant well, I do not believe that it is a compliment to suggest that Munroe's teaching and thinking were in line with the teachings of an heretical Protestant philosopher and theologian who routinely trampled of biblical doctrines.
- Kevin Evans

Click here to read more at The Nassau Guardian