It starts with the debauchery-pretending-to-be-art of the 2024 Olympic Summer Games opening celebration, and leads to a July 28, 2024 Instagram post made by actress Candace Cameron Bure, who is not at all shy about her faith in Jesus Christ.
The tactic I increasingly see from “Christian” writers and pundits everywhere is pitting one aspect of Christian faith/practice against another, forcing either/or choices that were never supposed to be at odds with each other. You end up with these bizarre love versus truth, grace versus holiness, orthopraxy versus orthodoxy dichotomies that are inherently false.
The classic false dichotomy is that you can either love someone or you can call them to repent. One that is growing in prevalence is the anti-traditionalist blast: when someone says she misses the greater sense of community, citizenship, sexual discretion, and lower crime of “bygone days,” then she’s also dogwhistling acceptance of the racism of that era as well. You can have _Leave It to Beaver_ or you can have greater equality between the races, but you can’t have both.
Who says? Why not BOTH? Why is a greater emphasis on right living AND loving the person who doesn’t look like you being made into an impossible paradox? Why not have love AND truth? Grace AND holiness? Orthopraxy AND Orthodoxy? Who is creating this dichotomy?
I find this either/or thing everywhere in recent writings by people who call themselves Christians. But it’s a great evil that warps weak minds. It’s the kind of tactic being used against Bure. And people need to be on guard against its flawed reasoning.
Wow. This might be my favorite blog post of yours so far. There is so much here - with depth of understanding of both culture and Scripture. You have articulated it all so well.
Ignoring sin is not loving the person who is headed to eternal destruction. Speaking truth as defined by God's word, motivated by love, will save lives for eternity and bring true peace to the individuals who respond to the message.
Thank you for taking the time to write and share this!!!
The tactic I increasingly see from “Christian” writers and pundits everywhere is pitting one aspect of Christian faith/practice against another, forcing either/or choices that were never supposed to be at odds with each other. You end up with these bizarre love versus truth, grace versus holiness, orthopraxy versus orthodoxy dichotomies that are inherently false.
The classic false dichotomy is that you can either love someone or you can call them to repent. One that is growing in prevalence is the anti-traditionalist blast: when someone says she misses the greater sense of community, citizenship, sexual discretion, and lower crime of “bygone days,” then she’s also dogwhistling acceptance of the racism of that era as well. You can have _Leave It to Beaver_ or you can have greater equality between the races, but you can’t have both.
Who says? Why not BOTH? Why is a greater emphasis on right living AND loving the person who doesn’t look like you being made into an impossible paradox? Why not have love AND truth? Grace AND holiness? Orthopraxy AND Orthodoxy? Who is creating this dichotomy?
I find this either/or thing everywhere in recent writings by people who call themselves Christians. But it’s a great evil that warps weak minds. It’s the kind of tactic being used against Bure. And people need to be on guard against its flawed reasoning.
Wow. This might be my favorite blog post of yours so far. There is so much here - with depth of understanding of both culture and Scripture. You have articulated it all so well.
Ignoring sin is not loving the person who is headed to eternal destruction. Speaking truth as defined by God's word, motivated by love, will save lives for eternity and bring true peace to the individuals who respond to the message.
Thank you for taking the time to write and share this!!!