Friday, May 29, 2009

GotQuestions Gets Angry

I mentioned yesterday that in March, I e-mailed GotQuestions.org about a post which I thought badly misinformed readers on the Biblical arguments surrounding divorce in cases of adultery. The article imputed bad faith to Catholics - NAB allegedly changed the Bible: "There does not seem to be any textual basis for the NAB's choice of words, except to support the Catholic Church's own doctrine." In reality, the textual basis for NAB's choice of words is overwhelmingly superior to the traditional Protestant interpretation, as I explained yesterday. When I sent the e-mail that became yesterday's post to GotQuestions, the response was really pleasant:

Joe,

Thank you for your input. I will forward your message to the author of the article and we will prayerfully consider revising our article.

GOD bless!

Shea
GotQuestions.org

This response was really encouraging. But that was March 22nd. Almost a month later (April 21st), I sent another e-mail:

Hi Shea, I just wanted to follow up with you. I notice from your website that the article remains as it was, compete with the inaccuracies I addressed below. Am I to assume that you've concluded not to take any action, or are you still awaiting a conclusion?- Joe.

Shea replied the next day:

Joe,

I forwarded your comments to the author of the article, but I have not heard back from him yet. I will remind him.

We are not ignoring your comments.

Sincerely in Christ,

Shea
GotQuestions.org

Once again, an encouraging response, but this time, I was starting to get a little skeptical that I was being strung along. I responded simply, "Great. Thanks again for your feedback!" and figured I'd let them make the next move.

They didn't.

Flash forward to Wednesday. I e-mailed them again regarding Wednesday's post, which responded to their argument for sola Scriptura (wherein they once again made some unfounded anti-Catholic claims: this time, that we make doctrines up without Biblical support). The e-mail I sent them can be seen in Wednesday's comments section. In it, I also addressed the still-unaddressed issue of the factually incorrect post on annulments, by saying:

I e-mailed you previously regarding your post on annulments. I note with sadness that it remains up, even despite unanswered Scriptural arguments against it. I think it badly and unfairly prejudices people against the Catholic Church, and I think it misleads them on an important Scriptural question, drawing them away from the Truth, which is the opposite of what your site is intended to do.

Yesterday, I got a response, much less pleasant than the first two:

Joe,

We are trying to be respectful and responsive to your complaints, but please understand, we receive MANY complaints regarding various articles on our site. Mormons tell us we are wrong on this point. Jehovah's Witnesses tell us we are wrong on some other point. Seventh Day Adventists argue against another issue. Lutherans disagree with us on certain issues. Etc., etc., etc. If we took down every article someone complains about, there would be very few articles left on our website.

Second, in regards to your claim that it "unfairly prejudices people against the Catholic Church," other than the "unfairly" comment, that is precisely our goal. We want to prejudice people against the Catholic Church. We strongly believe that the Roman Catholic Church is terribly wrong on many very important issues. If you look through our "Catholic Questions" section -
http://www.gotquestions.org/Catholic-questions.html - you will see that we disagree with Catholic doctrine and practice in MANY areas.

Even if we spent the time to read the articles you requested we read, and then edited our "annulment" article, it would still not be satisfactory to you because it will still argue against the Catholic views of both marriage and annulment.

Sincerely in Christ,

Shea
GotQuestions.org

My enthusiasm for their site has, shall we say, waned. Apparently, my original understanding of the goal of the site (to draw people to the Truth) was wrong; Instead, it is: "to prejudice people against the Catholic Church." And in fact, that all-too-honest explanation from Shea certainly explains the zingers they have on the link provided in the e-mail, with questions like, "I am a Catholic, why should I consider becoming a Christian?," and "Is worship of saints / Mary Biblical?"

1 comment: