Norm's Honest Questions About Screwballs

[SpinyNorman]

It's talking about two different people: Those who ask why you have hope, and those who maliciously slander you.

No it's not.

It says everyone.

[Dee Dee Warren]

I hear what you are saying DD.

But we are living in the modern age. Isn't this a consoderation to have in mind in a public forum when anyone at any stage of a spiritual journey can poke their head in and read what is going on?

And why are they more important than those who would benefit, such as myself. Why do you love them more?

Someone who is looking for a different appraoch will find it. But I don't see here a promotion of different approaches but a contradictory approach to the Bible that would have left me in the lurch and leave countless sheep all polite prey for the wolf in the name of sentimental love. On some level, I deeply resent these kinds of arguments, because once again, I wonder why my experience and those like me is so discounted. And I see it as being on the altar of a standard that is not holistically Biblical.

And in conversations like this, I find debating it fruitless. I said what I wish to, and one can discount it for the sake of modern comfort or whatever. But I find that approach to the Bible contradictory to other passages and the Bible as a whole. I can reconcile it. The "we must be polite at all costs" approach does not, and ironically I don't think that approach is Biblically loving at all, but actually quite destructive. Which is ironic.

But again, going in circles about it is not productive to me. I see (my personal opinion) a lot of pride and idolatry in the modern sentimental approach. And when I do, I thank God (after YEARS of being around polite Christians) that a few finally loved me enough to get in my face.

It isn't about the wolves we don't love, but the sheep we do.

[Darth Executor]

What if YOU find out later that you were wrong, and when you stand before the throne of God he asks you why you allowed your pride and arrogance to push away people who needed to hear His message because you were worried about being to nice to them?

The sword does indeed cut both ways.

Did you actually pay attention to what I was responding? Xmm already made the argument you just made and I pointed out that it's fallacious to take her side by default just because you don't know which one is right.

By the way, before you jump on me, I am not calling you prideful OR arrogent, simply saying that is how your tone comes off.

Yes you are, and I don't care. You're far more likely to irritate me by trying to sugar coat it than by just saying it straight up.

[Mountain Man]

But what good does throwing in the YOU MORON do? Why not just leave it at "You're pretty ignorant of ANE culture, aren't you? Go study some history books and get back to us"?

Why do you have to toss in the insult?

Most people would consider being called ignorant an insult already. The "you moron" is just a little icing on the cake, so to speak.

[SpinyNorman]

Most people would consider being called ignorant an insult already. The "you moron" is just a little icing on the cake, so to speak.

No, ignorant means uneducated. But even so....why do you need icing on the cake?? Who profits???

[SpinyNorman]

Yes you are, and I don't care. You're far more likely to irritate me by trying to sugar coat it than by just saying it straight up.

No I am not.

Where do you get the right to tell me what I am thinking or feeling?

[Mountain Man]

No it's not.

It says everyone.

Oh, give me a break. It's a qualified "everyone". Take a look:

Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

The "everyone" is specifically referring to those "who [ask] you to give a reason for the hope that you have." Then it goes one to specify a different group from the first, namely "those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ". Notice that one group is asking and one group is speaking. Two different people.

[SpinyNorman]

And why are they more important than those who would benefit, such as myself. Why do you love them more?

Who said they are more important or that I love them more?


Someone who is looking for a different appraoch will find it. But I don't see here a promotion of different approaches but a contradictory approach to the Bible that would have left me in the lurch and leave countless sheep all polite prey for the wolf in the name of sentimental love. On some level, I deeply resent these kinds of arguments, because once again, I wonder why my experience and those like me is so discounted. And I see it as being on the altar of a standard that is not holistically Biblical.

And in conversations like this, I find debating it fruitless. I said what I wish to, and one can discount it for the sake of modern comfort or whatever. But I find that approach to the Bible contradictory to other passages and the Bible as a whole. I can reconcile it. The "we must be polite at all costs" approach does not, and ironically I don't think that approach is Biblically loving at all, but actually quite destructive. Which is ironic.

But again, going in circles about it is not productive to me. I see (my personal opinion) a lot of pride and idolatry in the modern sentimental approach. And when I do, I thank God (after YEARS of being around polite Christians) that a few finally loved me enough to get in my face.[/QUOTE]

I never said we need to be polite at all costs.

And if it is for the sake of "modern comfort" and "unbiblical" how do you reconcile Sparko's verse

1 Peter 3:14-16 (New International Version)
But in your hearts set apart Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

[Mountain Man]

No, ignorant means uneducated.

I know what it means, but I also know how the majority of people react when the word is used to describe them.

But even so....why do you need icing on the cake?? Who profits???

People like Darth Xena, for one.

[Darth Executor]

So you are saying the verse takes a SUDDEN 180 degree leap in mid sentence??

I find that very hard to swallow.

I gave precise reasons as to why. Do you have an answer?

[LilPunkishOfTerror]

But what good does throwing in the YOU MORON do? Why not just leave it at "You're pretty ignorant of ANE culture, aren't you? Go study some history books and get back to us"?

Why do you have to toss in the insult?

Wait a minute..I'm scratching my head here...is it ok to call someone ignorant or not?

[SpinyNorman]

Oh, give me a break. It's a qualified "everyone". Take a look:

Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.

The "everyone" is specifically referring to those "who [ask] you to give a reason for the hope that you have." Then it goes one to specify a different group from the first, namely "those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ". Notice that one group is asking and one group is speaking. Two different people.

No give ME a break. It is one complete thought.

If it wasn't a complete thought, why include the phrase BUT DO THIS!

But do what? Do give the answer to EVERYONE who asks.

How the heck are you going to make someone who speaks maliciously against you be ashamed if you are slamming the same crap back at them?

[Darth Executor]

No I am not.

Where do you get the right to tell me what I am thinking or feeling?

Because you said it yourself.

[Darth Executor]

And why are they more important than those who would benefit, such as myself. Why do you love them more?

This is precisely the reason why, if the son of Satan shows up sprouting crap I will drive the hammer of God through His skull. I think loving your enemy more than your neighbour is an abomination. I am not interested in being "civil" or being nice to evil people who drag others to hell with them.

[Xmansmommy]

Good for you, I wish you well in following your convictions, Xmom.

Thank you, Trout.

There are many differing schools of thought when it comes to evangelism, to of the most common are Friendship evangelism (FE) and Confrontational evangelism. (CE)

As is obvious by definition, FE is the method that puts friendship first in the relationship, if we can become friends with someone, then perhaps we'll have the opportunity at some point to preach the Gospel, or perhaps our friends will enquire about why we are the way we are, offering us a launching pad to present Christ.

I think FE is a wonderful thing.

CE is more of an in-your-face approach to evangelism. CE's can be found preaching on street corners and handing out tracts, their message is REPENT, Christ wants to forgive your sin and make you right with Him. They are often looked upon as weirdos and unsophisticated Christians.

I think CE is wonderful.

And this has what to do with the topic that started these discussions? We weren't talking about evangelism. As far as I could tell we were talking about apologetics, screwball awards in particular. Do you think there is a difference?

I came to Christ through the words of a Christian willing to tell me that I was a filthy dirty sinner in need of forgiveness, CE brought me to the cross.

That's wonderful and I'm glad that there was a Christian willing to confront you with that and eventually lead you to seek forgivenss.

Apologetics isn't the same as evangelism in every sense, there are people who are sincerely seeking answers to tough questions about the Christian faith, and there are people seeking to destroy the faith held by Christians.

Of course there are. But as for the sincere seeker, do you think most of them are drawn to rude, demeaning responses to the tough questions rather than the same answers without that kind of interaction?

The second group deserves our scorn, they are enemies of the cross and their arguments should be answered as such.

And you haven't heard me suggest otherwise.

Those sincerely seeking answers should be answered gently and respectfully.

I totally agree. Do you think they are always treated as such?

Perhaps some people need to get a good dose of shame from a JP Holding to knock them off their high-horse and perhaps there'll be an Xmom waiting to share the love of Christ with them?

Oh that kind of thing has happened (not from a JPH knock down but there are plenty others) and no doubt it will happen again.

I think most skeptics here at Tweb are my intellectual superiors, some of their criticisms of Christianity I can't comprehend, never mind ridicule.

So if you had the intellectual skills you would do it too, eh? Interesting.

I expect Christians not to take themselves too seriously, and be able to laugh at themselves and each other, it helps keep us humble.

I'm all for a good laugh myself, amen.