He is one very insightful writer, quite engaging. And that's admirable. For once, this great admirer of Ochieng's writings is having to cross the line to occupy the critic's seat.

Dismissing the article altogether would be tantamount to throwing the baby out with the bathwater.

If one were to contend that Christianity (and for that matter Judaism) did indeed borrow from its surrounding milieu (and I believe this was so to some extent), should one have to conclude per force that Christianity wound up as paganistic? I don't think so.

What about the question of Christianity being cultic? I guess it depends on which side of the fence one is speaking from. Thus whereas Bob Larson, a Christian apologist, would be pointing his finger elsewhere in his definition of a cult as characterised by the perpetration of the idea that "those outside are viewed as spiritually inferior, creating, therefore, an exclusive and self-righteous 'we' versus 'they' attitude," an outsider could snatch his words and apply them to his own religion, Christianity.

This, however, would not be the first time that Christianity would have been labelled sectarian (cf. Acts 24:14).

Lastly, is it legitimate to link Christianity with such terms as "darkness" and "damnation?" Not if we take the words of the Bible seriously. For, of Christ himself, it was said that "in him was life, and the life was the light of all people; the light shines in the darkness and the darkness did not overcome it."

Christ, in turn, informed his disciples that they were the light of the world. Concerning those who belong to Christ, the book states that "there is no condemnation" (Rom. 8:1). So how should we, then, conclude, that Christianity is a cult of darkness and damnation? God forbid!

Nicholas Odhiambo,

Dalas Theological Seminary,

Dallas, Texas.