Darryl's Blog
Theology and controversy
I've been doing some thinking about theology, controversy, and confrontation the past couple of days. Here's why.
At last week's Band of Bloggers, Phil Johnson said (and this is a summary), "Seeking controversy for its own sake is bad; but engaging the issues sometimes demands dealing candidly with issues. Christ didn't shy away from controversy." Yet some see Phil's approach and blog as too confrontational. Is Phil right that candidly dealing with issues means that we sometimes wade into controversy? If so, how do we do it? (A good example of Phil's approach is his recent post on defending the truth.)
On the other hand, Steve Knight left a comment here yesterday, "After all, what is 'orthodox'? and who defines it? right?"
Here you have two very different approaches to truth and orthodoxy. How do we respond to false teaching? Or do we? I hope to post a few thoughts on this in the next few days.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Theology and controversy.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.dashhouse.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2374
My problem is that everyone seems to want to make a name for themselves as the defense council of the Lord. Too often it appears that those who would be His defense team treat every goober in his basement with a computer as a member of the digital Areopagus in need of flaming, so we can maintain the "purity of the faith".
Quible is a good word to describe much of this kind of stuff. "To argue, or raise objections about a trivial matter."