Z
zaoman32
Guest
So I was on the good ole FB last night and someone posted that they did an interview with Publishers Weekly concerning a book he had read. It's a pretty popular book, by a pretty well known author. (I will not state what due to its controversy, and in an attempt to keep this thread at least semi-on topic). There were a slew of comments following his post. There were basically two stances being voiced. One was asking if this person called out the book on its non-scriptural text and ideas (it is a "christian" book), The other chastised the former for smashing fellow believers, and voiced their frustration they had with bickering christians.
Hmmm...I can definitely see merits to both stances on this, so what's your opinion? Which do you think is more wrong, to advocate false teaching by ignoring it and/or not calling out the false teacher, or risk creating more strife and argument by calling it out for what it is?
I made my stance perfectly clear in a recent thread, but I would like to hear your opinions.
P.S. Jullianna deserves some credit to for her recent thread post on christian literature for making me think of this
Hmmm...I can definitely see merits to both stances on this, so what's your opinion? Which do you think is more wrong, to advocate false teaching by ignoring it and/or not calling out the false teacher, or risk creating more strife and argument by calling it out for what it is?
I made my stance perfectly clear in a recent thread, but I would like to hear your opinions.
P.S. Jullianna deserves some credit to for her recent thread post on christian literature for making me think of this