thanks for your thoughts again. I didn’t post your one comment because I was so frustrated with all the blogs I had been reading that I just lapped yours in (at the time) with all the naysayers, but I appreciated your questions in this blog.
To the first one, I would answer that the point of Christ-likeness and my definition is indeed acting like Christ. Now the truth is, there were times, as you said, that Christ came out was harsh. But most of the time he was not. When he did speak out, typically it was against a system of beliefs where people were using religion as a means to their own ends.
Where I get frustrated, personally, is when people do this and then accuse other people of doing it.
This is what I believe that might set us apart (though it also may not) as far as disagreeing. I believe that people who take the Bible literally can use religion as a means to their own end, in their own interpretation of the Word, just as much, if not more as those who have a more loose interpretation.
I don’t think the point is the Bible at all.
Now having said that, I answer question 2.
I absolutely answer this question with a yes, there are things that need to be solid,and I would say that each of the points you’ve asked about are solid. For instance, I do think the trinity, the Bible, and the salvation by faith are sound dosctrines that need to be adhered to.
But more times than not, these are not the things Christians are fighting about, are they?
We fight about…
music.
Freewill/Calvinism (a debate which, by the way, I was addressing in this post, and a debate I will not ever get into in this blog)
eschatology (choose you this day whom ye will serve, Tim Lahaye or Hank Hennegraff)
The name or denomination of your church
The church government
Translation of the Bible
etc….
I believe the gospel is very easy. Easy, that is to understand, not easy to actually surrender to it.
And I believe that that true gospel is definitely smaller than we’ve made it out to be. The gospel is not connected (or at least closely connected in a way that can be answered) with any of these arguments I’ve mentioned earlier.

I believe with the questions you asked me, you “sharpened me” in a way that I don’t believe was being done when I looked at the blogs where people were bickering back and forth. So the answer is yes, I do believe there is a godly way to disagree. I just don’t think it’s typically happening.

Thanks Bob for your post, and I’d love to hear your response to my response.

Your point is a good one. Disagreements should not be raised to the level of fighting. Nor should we ever be un-Christlike when we do disagree. Living out the Word before an unbelieving world is also of utmost importance. However, let me just raise a few questions:

1. What is your definition of acting “unlike Christ”? Is it merely being negative or contrary to a viewpoint? Or are there other elements involved? Christ, in His zeal for God’s glory, often did and said thngs (“in the name of truth”) that we might find distasteful today, yet He did not sin in doing those things. In fact, in doing those things, He fully kept the law, i.e. He loved God with all His heart, soul, mind, and strength AND He loved His neighbor as Himself. This must be true for Christ to be our sinless sinbearer.

2. Are there issues worth contending for, even among professing believers? Issues like the nature of or belief in the Trinity? The infallibility and veracity of Scripture as God’s Word? Salvation by faith alone? Or should we just live and let live even if the true Church of Christ is being injured or defamed or the true gospel is being misrepresented? Can we disagree in a way that exhorts a brother in Christ or attempts to clarify a matter in someone’s mind?

I know you think that I’m merely being antagonistic, but I assure you, that is not the case. I just think that disagreements are sometimes necessary and that one can disagree in a Christlike manner. Thanks.

Bob

I appreciate your post!

Randy