I think I made my point. Nobody can force you to come to the truth. I'd rather be rude and disrespectful but give you the truth than be all tolerant and nice and make compromises on it. I hate falsehood and lies, not people. If you truly love your neighbor you direct them towards the truth even if it's not dressed in niceties and false unity.
I think people should grow a back bone and not be all feminine in their exchanges because Christianity is not about being nice but about the Truth - otherwise we get Nice-ianity). I'd go even further - If you're afraid you could hurt someone's feelings by telling the truth, you can't be a Christian. If I call you a fool and you're acting like one, that's not unchristian in the slightest. Scripture and the Church fathers used very harsh language when dealing with heresies and false teachings (and not just language but physical aggression too).
I'd go even further - If you're afraid you could hurt someone's feelings by telling the truth, you can't be a Christian. If I call you a fool and you're acting like one, that's not unchristian in the slightest. Scripture and the Church fathers used very harsh language when dealing with heresies and false teachings (and not just language but physical aggression too).
You’re conflating truthfulness with harshness, and Scripture doesn’t do that. Yes, the Bible uses strong language at times. Jesus calls Pharisees “blind guides” and “whitewashed tombs,” Paul says “let them be accursed,” prophets denounce kings.. but none of that gives a blanket license to speak however we want whenever we feel justified. In every one of those cases, the harsh words serve a redemptive or corrective purpose under divine authority, not personal venting or moral posturing. I had this reinforced on my heart earlier with the sermon snippet I shared.
Christ doesn’t say, “Speak the truth no matter how much you enjoy hurting people.” He says, “Speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Those two are not opposites. Truth without love is not Christlike; love without truth isn’t either. Paul explicitly says that without love, even correct doctrine makes you nothing but noise (1 Corinthians 13:1–3). That should immediately put a check on the idea that bluntness equals righteousness.
Jesus directly warns against contemptuous, demeaning speech that flows from the heart, not from correction:
“But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.” Matthew 5:22
The issue isn’t the syllables we use.. it’s the posture of the heart. Christ rebukes to restore; He doesn’t insult to dominate. When He confronts error, it’s measured, purposeful, and aimed at repentance, not humiliation.
As for the appeal to Church Fathers again and “physical aggression,” you’re sliding from description into justification. Scripture never authorizes Christians to use violence to defend doctrine. In fact, it explicitly forbids it. Jesus rebukes Peter for using the sword and says, “All who take the sword will perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52). Paul says the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh (2 Corinthians 10:3–5). If physical aggression were part of Christian orthodoxy, those verses make no sense.
You can denounce false teaching without becoming false in your own conduct. James warns that human anger does not produce the righteousness of God (James 1:20). And Proverbs reminds us that a harsh word stirs up anger, while a gentle answer turns away wrath.. not because gentleness is weakness, but because it’s effective and Godly.
So no, Christianity isn’t about being afraid of hurting feelings.. BUT.. it also isn’t about sanctifying cruelty and calling it courage. Christ didn’t tell us to win arguments; He told us to make disciples. And if the truth is really from God, it doesn’t need contempt, threats, or fists to carry its weight.
Being bold is biblical. Being truthful is biblical. Confusing aggression with holiness isn’t no matter how many appeals to wordly authority or how much tradition you try to wrap around it.
It would have been nice not to blow through my arguments though because it seems you just don't care for the truth of the matter. Just answer this one:
Who is your greatest enemy? Is it perhaps Satan? Do you love him?
Fair. When time permits I will give you the responses your comments deserve as you obviously put time in crafting them.
My greatest enemy is technically ... myself, fighting with my own fleshly lusts and desires. Satan influences but I choose and act. I am thankful having the Holy Spirit on my side of this battle.
This message brought to you by speech to text while driving.
I wonder how it makes you feel knowing that I stopped reading your heresies 2 comments ago. lol
I think I made my point. Nobody can force you to come to the truth. I'd rather be rude and disrespectful but give you the truth than be all tolerant and nice and make compromises on it. I hate falsehood and lies, not people. If you truly love your neighbor you direct them towards the truth even if it's not dressed in niceties and false unity.
I think people should grow a back bone and not be all feminine in their exchanges because Christianity is not about being nice but about the Truth - otherwise we get Nice-ianity). I'd go even further - If you're afraid you could hurt someone's feelings by telling the truth, you can't be a Christian. If I call you a fool and you're acting like one, that's not unchristian in the slightest. Scripture and the Church fathers used very harsh language when dealing with heresies and false teachings (and not just language but physical aggression too).
You’re conflating truthfulness with harshness, and Scripture doesn’t do that. Yes, the Bible uses strong language at times. Jesus calls Pharisees “blind guides” and “whitewashed tombs,” Paul says “let them be accursed,” prophets denounce kings.. but none of that gives a blanket license to speak however we want whenever we feel justified. In every one of those cases, the harsh words serve a redemptive or corrective purpose under divine authority, not personal venting or moral posturing. I had this reinforced on my heart earlier with the sermon snippet I shared.
Christ doesn’t say, “Speak the truth no matter how much you enjoy hurting people.” He says, “Speak the truth in love” (Ephesians 4:15). Those two are not opposites. Truth without love is not Christlike; love without truth isn’t either. Paul explicitly says that without love, even correct doctrine makes you nothing but noise (1 Corinthians 13:1–3). That should immediately put a check on the idea that bluntness equals righteousness.
Jesus directly warns against contemptuous, demeaning speech that flows from the heart, not from correction:
“But I say to you that everyone who is angry with his brother will be liable to judgment; whoever insults his brother will be liable to the council; and whoever says, ‘You fool!’ will be liable to the hell of fire.” Matthew 5:22
The issue isn’t the syllables we use.. it’s the posture of the heart. Christ rebukes to restore; He doesn’t insult to dominate. When He confronts error, it’s measured, purposeful, and aimed at repentance, not humiliation.
As for the appeal to Church Fathers again and “physical aggression,” you’re sliding from description into justification. Scripture never authorizes Christians to use violence to defend doctrine. In fact, it explicitly forbids it. Jesus rebukes Peter for using the sword and says, “All who take the sword will perish by the sword” (Matthew 26:52). Paul says the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh (2 Corinthians 10:3–5). If physical aggression were part of Christian orthodoxy, those verses make no sense.
You can denounce false teaching without becoming false in your own conduct. James warns that human anger does not produce the righteousness of God (James 1:20). And Proverbs reminds us that a harsh word stirs up anger, while a gentle answer turns away wrath.. not because gentleness is weakness, but because it’s effective and Godly. So no, Christianity isn’t about being afraid of hurting feelings.. BUT.. it also isn’t about sanctifying cruelty and calling it courage. Christ didn’t tell us to win arguments; He told us to make disciples. And if the truth is really from God, it doesn’t need contempt, threats, or fists to carry its weight.
Being bold is biblical. Being truthful is biblical. Confusing aggression with holiness isn’t no matter how many appeals to wordly authority or how much tradition you try to wrap around it.
Oh I still think your perspective is wrong. I still reject it. I'm just going to be more kind about it moving forward.
That's cool. Civility is good and I'm all for it.
It would have been nice not to blow through my arguments though because it seems you just don't care for the truth of the matter. Just answer this one:
Fair. When time permits I will give you the responses your comments deserve as you obviously put time in crafting them.
My greatest enemy is technically ... myself, fighting with my own fleshly lusts and desires. Satan influences but I choose and act. I am thankful having the Holy Spirit on my side of this battle.
This message brought to you by speech to text while driving.