Should You Protect & Defend the Word?
I recently had a discussion with a rather popular Christian blogger. In this discussion we disagreed on something. His stance was that we as Christians should not defend the Gospel that instead the Gospel would always prevail simply because it was well the Gospel. I disagreed and said that I thought that Paul would also disagree. With his letters to the churches in Galatia in which he did nothing but protect the Gospel and how it set us free. He didn’t really respond to me after that.
I say that because I think this whole Rob Bell “Love Wins” thing is bringing that up and I feel like there are a lot of Christians who whether they agree with what Rob is saying or not don’t want others to speak against him. They think it’s the most horrible thing on the earth to call someone a heretic and mock those push back. While I don’t agree with Rob’s hinting at the idea of there being no hell is right, I find it more scary/annoying that people are more concerned with politeness/niceness then they are with truth and protecting it. What are your thoughts on this? (Please don’t comment on Rob Bells ideas if you would like to do that here are some links to do so The Gospel Coalition, But Not Yet, Rachel Held Evans)
If the blogger you were arguing with was popular, I’m pretty sure it wasn’t me. That said, I agree with you on this. I’m not to keen on people using the “H” word to describe Rob and others; once you call someone a heretic, that pretty much puts an end to the discussion (which may be the point for some folks). But, shouting them down is fighting what you consider intolerance with more intolerance of your own. Which makes absolutely no sense. As to the first question, I think it depends on what you consider “defense”. If you’re referring to the classic 1980′s brand of apologetics, I don’t think so. In my opinion, the best defense of the Gospel is to live the best way you can. With particular emphasis on turning the other cheek and not repaying the evil doer.
@JoelR I think when I say defense of the Gospel, I mean if someone is saying they are a Christian and they are teaching that Jesus wasn’t the son of God, I should refute them. And if possible provide scripture (although to some degree that’s a weak spot for me although it is getting better).
About the word Heretic, I don’t think it’s a word to be used lightly and I don’t think I would use it with a friend in conversation. However if a person is the preacher at a mega-church, so by their mis-teaching they would be leading a lot of people astray. I think it is the job of the Church to call them out. So that those who follow them will know that something is up. And depending on the level of truth perversion, the word Heretic could be called for.
I’m not saying I am going to go around calling Baptist heretics although some of them are a lot wonky LOL JK!!
I absolutely believe that we need to defend the Gospel. We are supposed to be on guard for false teachers. But when there are points of disagreement within the body of Christ, I think we can respectfully argue with another person. Just because someone is wrong doesn’t make them evil. If that was the case, we would all be in trouble.
A respectful defense of the Gospel is always in order. I believe that just because we defend the Gospel does not make us intolerant nor does it make us impolite.
I am also against the idea of lifestyle evangelism as the primary means of spreading the Gospel. Please note, I am not against lifestyle evangelism, but when it replaces a confrontational Gospel, wherein trying to be polite/nice/politically correct means not sharing my faith or not defending the Gospel, then I draw a line.
Christians are supposed to be pro-active – thus the command to go into the world, instead of a command to wait for them to come to us because of something they see in the way we live. Again, not condemning living the Gospel, but that we should not be afraid to confront as the Gospel ultimately confronts us all as sinners in need of a Savior.