Does Christian Discussion Bring an Edgy Element?

- excerpt, Apologist Dr. Walter Martin 1985

Well the way I see it, for what it's worth, is that when we are discussing Christian matters, we are dealing with the ultimate truth of reality. I don't think I see it as "edgy", as much as I see it as sharp as a two edged sword that truth cuts strait to the bone and exposes our fallen nature, our true wickedness in the face of a Holy God, when dealing with God that’s all it can do. I am a man of unclean lips, unworthy, broken, foul, nothing in the presents of our Holy God. What Dr. Martin is saying here actually make sense if you think about it, sadly. The secular media has no ultimate standard they stand on. They judge everything by the flesh, by what they think, so are much more open to hearing these fantastic claims, if for no other reason than to mock them. The Christians on the other hand are far more invested in the beliefs they hold to, and in ways are far less likely to consider anything that may challenge certain beliefs. Please don’t misunderstand, all people are prone to letting their preconceptions steer how they view all evidence, and even tend to make it fit what they want it to, but I do think that that Christians (or the religious in general) can be more resistant to hearing anything that may challenge their deeply held beliefs. When you believe “whatever”, it’s much easier to see these things as entertaining.





To answer the question head on- Does Christian Discussion Bring an Edgy Element? Yes, it by the very nature of the subject has to.

I would hope so that Christian discussion brings an edgy element otherwise it would be a dry boring discussion.

Appropriately so for one level, yet that same discussion would fascinating for another and not at all for still another. But I'm new here so my perspective is going to hit the dust most of the time

New perspectives are welcome and keep the forums fresh rather than stale or stagnant. Things do get heated at times in the Bible Discussion Forum but that is par for the course.

a warzone is still war, the nature of a war-game is ... well, let's just say, it really test your sportsmanship

in chess, there's forking, pinning, losing pieces, and threatening other pieces, that's the nature of the game

unfortunately, people can come up with many variations of false gospels that might be as numerous as the number of possible chess games (ok, that's an exaggeration, but still)

and false accusation is unfortunately the most abused and arguably the most unethical weapon in the BDF, and is it any wonder that there's similarities with Satan who is "the accuser of the bretheren"?

Perhaps the secularist is still looking for truth, while Christians believe they found it. Even though we continue to grapple with superficial dogma every Christian feels that his understanding has been spiritually ascertained. It was no different with the Pharisees. They crucified the Messiah in their zeal. I’m fairly certain even if Christ returned today, most of those who call Him Lord would reject Him. It is my observation that most would rather worship a Christ of their invention then the One who saved them. I would be willing to wager life that at least half the Church doesn’t even understand salvation, or it’s implications.

What was he trying to talk about back in 1985 that they didn't want to let him talk about?

.
Glad you asked! Basically, an ever increasing cult-mania and the inability by the professing Church to truly distinguish sound teaching from the non-Christian Cult. Dr. Martin touches on the root,

"Now we have deviated in a massive way today. What is happing is a marked reticent on the part of the professing Church to call the proverbial spade a spade, , I’m asking, doesn’t anyone ever anymore get excited in the presence of evil? Doesn’t it rile you? No one wants to come out and say what’s wrong for fear that they’re going to be criticized, for fear that they will lose their constituency, , Let’s get the record straight, , cults have declared war on the Church. We are supposed to respond to that, but that is what you are not getting. Instead you’re getting – ‘Shhhhhhsh, don’t say that, that’s not loving’. Well by that standard neither was Jesus. Because when He met the Pharisees and the Sadducees and the Scribes and the Herodian’s, He barbecued them. I’m very mild compared to His view of false doctrine.”​

I’m starting to wonder if we had a NT-era Elder sign-on to the forum, would he tend to be stigmatized by like-classed elders. Has the Church entered a new common temptation, where worldly occasions that were once resisted have been re-branded as Christian liberality? Something has short-circuited the effectiveness.

Problem is Jesus didn't meet the Pharisees, Sadducees and Herodians. They met him. Jesus never sought them out to criticize them. They came to find fault with Jesus, and Jesus dealt with them succinctly.

To put it succinctly, Jesus didn't pick fights.

Never? Look, I understand what your saying and largely the better undertaking. But from that sometime occasional 'need', yes, we do have to overturn the moneychangers and the unfortunate "withstood him to the face", when the Spirit fills our understanding, we should have by then made our minds up.

Objection Your Honor (to a "court Judge"), the bible discussion forum is not a courtroom, and no one is prosecuted, and no one should be treated as such.

You’re right, sometimes it looks more like a lynch mob.

In case anyone hasn't noticed, Dr Martin would likely not be welcome in the secular venues these days either with the attack on free speech the way its going in the name of "civility".

"He who rejects Me and does not receive My sayings, has one who judges him; the word I spoke is what will judge him at the last day."

(John 12:48)

Well spoken brother.

three powerful word here

well = good
spoken = what I just did
brother = I'm saved!

but it will be like an "inside joke" that the world will never understand

Also speaking for non-Christian cultism, , the widely sought-after editing successor of the late Dr. Martin is Dr. Ravi Zacharias who brings us up-to-date on the current use of the word ‘cult’, people indeed have changed,

"To use it in a general sense and a general audience is not a wise way to do it. You use it in a setting of theological debate, dialog and discussion. When the word is tossed around in a public setting with all the issues we’ve had with people like Jim jones and others, it brings baggage with the term that makes it much more than what a mere theological discussion would be, , because it is saying much more than what one is intending for it to say, , So that is a term we leave for the classroom.

For the Christian, a cult is generally defined as that which claims to be rooted in historic Christianity,
but has deviated or abandoned the finished work of Christ or compromised upon His person.​

One should not be surprised these days at all the rejection and assorted deviations.

If you have something profitable to contribute please continue, otherwise butt-out.

so this is what conviction is like

now lead me to salvation