Blog as Monologue and Conversation-Stopper
Pluralists would rather talk about HOW I am communicating instead of about what I AM communicating. Pluralists don’t like my tone. Don’t I know that the only way to influence people is for me to let them influence me first? And then we can agree to call this “mutuality”.
To which Christians say: the main debt we have to you is the debt we have to God to love you enough to tell you the gospel. When we tell pluralists the gospel, we listen to them to find out if they are understanding it. When we tell them the gospel, they may have valid points to make. Our duty is to agree with them when their point is right and to let them know when their point is wrong, especially when that point is evidence of their rebellion against the gospel.
It is not reasonable to disagree with the gospel. If one disagrees with the gospel, then one is not being rational. The God who made all of us is the God who has revealed the gospel. The God who demands PERFECT righteousness is the God who had sent God the Son to obtain that righteousness for the elect.
The desire to leave out some of the gospel is evidence of a mind and will still at enmity with God. If all we ever want is peace at any price, then we should never claim to have any news from the Sovereign Creator of this world. When people say that talk like my talk is “hateful”, that only means that they have now understood that I am an enemy of their false gospel.
When the enemies of the cross say that talk like this is a “conversation-stopper”, their assumption is that the only way to have a conversation is to agree first that we are all saved but that we interpret things differently. Believers have been born again in order to believe the gospel. Non-elect unbelievers were created in order to never believe the gospel and thus be destroyed. (II Peter 2:1-12).
Tags: bloggingYou can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.