How to Debate False Teachers

It is a rather atrocious sight, the amount of false teachers and the seditious lies they propagate from various pulpits. Worse still are the amounts of congregants who consume their untheological and illogical ramblings, disguised as profound spirituality and philosophy. Therein lies an essential aspect of the Biblical Christian’s mission: to correct those falsehoods and denounce the messengers which advance them for the sake of helping those who come in contact with the lies they advance.

It was with this attitude that I recently proceeded to write a pointed rebuttal to a series of Facebook posts published by an individual I personally knew, a man whom years ago abruptly left the church my father shepherds due to marital infidelity (so as to evade church discipline), only to resurface some time later as an “ordained minister” and head of a small congregation in the state where I reside.

Conveying sanctimony and false altruism, thinly veiled by using Christian platitudes, this fellow proceeded to post the following message on his social media account shortly after the Charlottesville protests (translated verbatim from Spanish to English):

“Neither political party represents Jesus Christ, He being the ‘KING OF KINGS AND LORD OF LORDS’, by his own merits…Eternal God, Prince of Peace…

At a moment in which our Nation finds itself divided due to hatred, racism, discrimination, prejudices, enmities, conflicts, ideals, agendas, rights, liberties and libertinism, the Church of Jesus Christ should understand that our posture is one of a conciliatory nature and not divisive…(it is not necessary to be present at events which are highly charged with divisive ideals, as I saw last night, the church of Jesus Christ ought to be influential in another manner) At this moment, it is not the time to seek out factions in order to entrench ourselves and defend an ideal…THE CHURCH OUGHT TO BEND ITS KNEES AND CRY OUT TO GOD IN HEAVEN SO THAT HE MAY FORGIVE OUR INIQUITY AND OUR SINS…we stand firm in our FAITH and Biblical conviction, nevertheless, this does not give us the right to discriminate against anyone…Never forget that Jesus’ mission, through his sacrifice, was to RECONCILE THE SINNER TO GOD…God help us”

Forget the fact that this individual has no respect for grammatical rules; in essence, his manipulative rant calls for the Christian to be politically correct, skirt his civic duty and refrain from defending what is correct and denouncing what is wrong, all under faulty logic which claims that speaking the truth causes dissention and that neutrality and self-censorship are supposed forms of pacification. (Also disturbing, is his portraying the fight for principled “ideals”, “rights” and “liberties” in a negative manner.)

Admittedly, I felt a scorching indignation after reading this ineloquent piece of demagogic sophistry and desired to write a proper rebuttal. I never got around to it originally due to the fact that I had to meet ministerial obligations. However, I’m glad I didn’t comment at first because a few days later, he decided to share a meme with a tagline that strongly implies that both President Donald Trump and former sheriff Joe Arpaio are racists and which rhetorically asks why Trump would pardon Arpaio.

Above the meme he wrote:

“(Amos 3:3-4)

3 Can two walk together, unless they are agreed?

4 Will a lion roar in the forest, when he has no prey? Will a young lion cry out of his den, if he has caught nothing?

‘Neither political party represents Jesus Christ’  Neither”

The same burning outrage I felt days before swiftly returned. This time I proceeded to write the following response which I publish for the benefit of the reader:

“[Addressed to the author of the posts], what ever happened to not seeking “out factions? It seems to me that you have done the exact opposite of what you counseled only a few days ago through a personal note on Facebook. In joining the sophist cry of condemnation against Trump for pardoning Arpaio, you’ve chosen a faction – that of the Hispanic demagogues whom classify Trump and Arpaio as racists only because they seek to follow federal immigration laws, the same laws which Obama unconstitutionally ignored, thus endangering the American citizen and rewarding those who violate the aforementioned laws. Trump was correct in pardoning the sheriff, being that his judicial case and subsequent sentence were politically motivated. I would have thought that being a Christian – and much more a pastor – that you would have more closely considered the pertinent details of the case and approved of Trump’s merited actions. Yet, the fact that you endorse the leftist messaging (which intentionally omits these important details in order to politically manipulate Hispanics within the US) demonstrates to me that two things have occurred: 1) you agree with leftist politics or 2) you commented without understanding all of the pertinent details relating to the case. Worse still, you employed a Biblical text in order to insinuate that Trump and Arpaio are racists, something that isn’t true and don’t have a shred evidence to prove it so.

I will now refer myself to the writing you published a few days ago. How is it possible that you advise your readers to refrain from choosing factions in order to defend an ideal if in choosing Christ you are choosing a side [and an ideal]? This act automatically denotes you as a follower of Christ and his teachings. Christ himself stated that he who is not with him is against him and scatters abroad. (Matthew 12:30) Your counsel, although appearing altruistic, is politically correct – which is to say, unbiblical and contrary to truth. The only way someone can be a conciliator is if he who is in error admits his error, disposes himself to repent and adheres to truth. If this does not occur, in the name of “conciliation” we cover for and subtly endorse error, calling others into a relationship even though a particular group persists on continuing in their erred ways. Furthermore, you well know that many prefer not to hear the truth. Therefore, the person that adheres to truth does not cause division – it is those that insist on wickedness that attempt to silence the truth.

Lastly, I write the following: when you advise your readers to, in essence, maintain neutrality in politics, you are joining a political faction, that of the left, which demands silence from Christians. This is ironic, considering that you employ freedom of speech (which is defended by the First Amendment of the US Constitution, is the most essential of all liberties and one in which thousands upon thousands have died for you to enjoy) in order to call for other people’s silence and to normalize indifference and apathy. This is shameful and does not honor Christ, our Savior, whom employed words to denounce evil and defend what is right.”

After reading my comments, it’s almost needless to say that his retorts weren’t close to a substantive response to my examination. Instead they were diversionary, sentimental and even disparaging. I’ll detail the rest of the exchange in the next article.