A reminder of what is at stake when it comes to Christian apologetics and the lack thereof:
Not listed among Slick’s proof texts of the necessity of apologetics are these: 1 Timothy 6.1-2 and Titus 2.9-10. Semi-Pelagian apologists should especially love these two passages since they apparently are consonant with idea that slick advertising can bring about repentance and faith. In any case, the two texts apparently support the idea that Christians or Christian teaching should, at worst, be only minimally offensive to unbelievers.
As a side note, and interestingly enough, one may notice that according to those two texts it was particular rejection of slavery that would have been offensive to unbelievers of the time and place in which the apostle Paul lived--the opposite of what critics of Christianity now object to when they charge that Christianity supports chattel slavery. Of course, if one will make more than a superficial comparison and contrast between Roman-era slavery and modern slavery, then he should discover that motivations and circumstances behind the two institutions are quite different. That is what they should discover, yet we live in a world where people are lazy and have their own particular agendas, do we not?
No comments:
Post a Comment