You need to have crocodile skin when you get involved with controversial issues. When you place your bet and let the chips fall where they may, there are some consequences. For example, you need to accept that other party will call you names, you will be shunned, you will be misrepresented and most likely you will be alone when you bare yourself, when you let people know where you stand with regards to a controversial issue. Some cost accounting need to happen before you sign your name. That goes with the territory, so you must cultivate a thick hide and comfort yourself with the Scriptures.I think Hermann Sasse typifies this himself in The Lonely Way.
For some this is way too much to bear specially when family and perhaps income are involved. I do not know how that is solved, there is likely no solution to this dilemma. This we come to realize is not for everyone. For some this is too much pressure to hold, there are other lives involved and these lives have for example, social and economical needs.
However, one must also realize that a doctrine which we may oppose does not float out there in thin air, but the doctrine lives inside the hearts and minds of people. Such people may not fight clean but rather fight your position subtly. You may not know but I have 25+ years of experience in the computing industry and I have learned a very important lesson early in my career: Any technical problem can be solved politically.
By analogy, any theological problem can be solved politically too.
We can not be naive, if our opponent knows well he can not rebut the solid position we hold, he might try to go political on us and thereby undermine in reality the testimony we hold.
Either he tries to intimidate you politically and usually that does not work or he can try to sweeten you up politically too, like flatter you and thereby glory in you.
Psalm 62: 4They only consult to cast him down from his excellency: they delight in lies: they bless with their mouth, but they curse inwardly. Selah.
2 comments:
For some reason Brett's comments did not publish....
Here is what Brett Meyer said...
I like this post Lito. Very well said.
It is indicative of a false teaching when those defending it resort to personal, ad hominem, attacks.
It is the primary tactic of UOJ promoters and their "...this must mean.." false gospel.
I enjoy watching the Sr. editor of CPH and the Roman Catholic school professor trolling layman's blogs in order to post disparaging remarks against those who teach and defend Justification by Faith Alone.
Bro. Brett,
This blog has evidence that it was not us who started the name calling business. The UOJers are the ones quick to label what they do not understand with pejorative names. They seem to be quick at doing negative propaganda on JBFAers.
McCain we know offers no argument to explain why UOJ is true Scripturally or Confessionally.
Kilcrease does the same, he offers a psycho analysis of Team JBFA but never proving from the Bible nor the Confessions where UOJ is taught or found. Spurious quotes of Luther are offered but when read in overall context put the quotes as indecisive.
Oh he says, it is there, the concept is there. This is similar to how the Roman Magisterium promoted the Immaculate Concepcion of Mary. They say, oh it is there, the concept or teaching in its **kernel form** is in the church father's tradition etc etc.
Mild Colonial Boy, called this Jesuitry.
LPC
Post a Comment