This morning, I read some of RC Sproul's 'Essential Truths of the Christian Faith'. In the introduction, Sproul summarises 10 key things that are the common cause for the ineffectiveness of today's evangelical Christian. I can't remember them all of the top of my head, but they included such things as neo monasticism, antinomianism, slothfulness etc and I may speak on some of these at a later date. However, one thing that I found particularly pertinent was the Christian's deliberate avoidance of all things controversial. But the funny thing was, the prophets of the Old Testament were nothing but contoversial, and Christ was perhaps the most controversial person of all time. Christians tend to see contoversy as creating arguments, and there are passages of scripture warning against argumentativeness and godless controversy. However, we should engage in controversy when it comes to Scripture and the things of God; we should equip ourselves and be prepared for controversy, for we cannot stand idle as 'truth lies slain in the streets' - peace at the expense of truth.
But its funny really. I only seem to get comments posted on my blog in response to controversial topics. If I write about something normal, no one cares.
Are these comments proof that the readers enjoy controversy, contrary to what Sproul says, and want to be involved? Or is it actually indicative of the above problem, as mentioned by Sproul, and readers are responding only in an attempt to quell any contorversy that might have been stirred up by my posts?
You're the reader - let me know.
[Blogger]
I was just going to have a whinge about the fact that I'd been confined to the use of the LoFi interface, when 'hey-presto', I go back into my blog and find the proper UI. Nice.
