I was planning to address the issue of mean-spiritedness that I sometimes see in human discourse.  This article was one of the documents that came up with that particular search string.  I don’t know Kyle but, while he and I share a different soteriology, his understanding of “balance” seems biblically accurate and insightful.  Take a few minutes to read it, Pastor Scott

13 February 2025/Kyle Borg

The Reluctant Polemicist

One of the most embarrassing moments of my life happened when I was a new seminary student. I had scheduled lunch with one of my professors, excited to talk theology and ask about preaching. As I got into his car and was buckling up, he said in his strong Scottish accent, “Kyle, I’ve seen how you interact on social media. If there were a degree for being argumentative, you’d be at the top of the class.” I wanted to run, but the car was already moving, and I was stuck.

I grew up in a home that encouraged me to challenge what I was taught and to have informed convictions. My family enjoyed a good-spirited argument around the dinner table, and due to natural “abilities” I believe that if something is worth saying it’s worth saying loudly. In college I won an award for the best speaker in debate, and on one particular occasion I received applause when I reduced my rival to tears as she fled the room. I studied philosophy and was always asked to prove or disprove the world of ideas. When social media became popularized it gave me endless chances to tell people they were wrong.

In my formative years my love for arguing turned theological. I had big shifts in my thinking when I was introduced to Calvinism and Reformed theology. Far more ignorant than knowledgeable, I fiercely argued with anyone who disagreed with me, even if I had shared their view minutes earlier. I didn’t listen; I only responded. I didn’t try to understand; I just wanted to win. I thought I was being heroic, especially since John Calvin famously said: “A dog barks when his master is attacked. I would be a coward if I saw that God’s truth is attacked and yet would remain silent.”

Then came my professor’s confrontation. His words hit me hard, they were shattering. But it was an “Aha-Moment” — I wasn’t a defender of the faith, I was just being a jerk, hiding behind a think mask of piety. Unfortunately, my actions had consequences. I needlessly offended others, I hurt people not with the truth but with my words, and I dishonored Jesus. Since that day I’ve tried to blunt my polemical edge — or, to put it more accurately, I’ve tried to have that edge sanctified.

I say “sanctified” because there’s a place for Christians to stand firm and refute. After all, we believe in the authority and clarity of the Bible and this should lead us to have strong convictions on theological matters. The Prophets, Apostles, and even Jesus didn’t shy away from contending vigorously for the truth — speaking boldly and convincingly. But to do this in a godly way requires grace and wisdom — qualities that are, in my view, rare. There’s a fine line between contending and stirring up trouble (Prov. 29:22), speaking a soft word or being harsh (Prov. 15:1), being prepared or disrespectful (1 Pt. 3:15), being responsible or a busybody (2 Thess. 3:11); correcting or fault-finding (Matt. 7:3-5), being discerning or divisive (Titus 3:10). There’s a fine line between seeking peace and exhibiting pride. A godly polemicist needs to know that line, and I fear very few do.

When the Dutch theologian Herman Witsius was invited to give a response to a big theological controversy in Britain, he began his response by writing:

And I reckon it not the smallest part of our calamity, or at least the most painful of our office, that we who preside in matters of Christianity, are often constrained to bestow tedious labour in resolving the difficulties of thorny controversies. So is the age; all places resound with debates: that very temple not excepted which the Lord hath consecrated to peace and concord […] Be ye willing or unwilling, in battle you must engage; O that it were always that good fight of faith, which Paul recommended to Timothy! However, if we are not permitted to shun the conflict, the prudence of the just demands, that they, who in the defense of orthodoxy show themselves the right guardians of truth, should remember studiously to avoid [those] things which are not lawful for ministers of peace.

Witsius wasn’t unwilling to engage. Anyone familiar with his writings knows how thoughtfully, thoroughly, and strongly he did so. There’s a time and a place and a way to do so — and passivity lacks the courage that should distinguish believers. But he was also reluctant. He was reluctant because controversy can come from the spirit of the age, the fight of faith can be counterfeited, the peace of the church easily disturbed, and argumentation can become lawless warfare. Such polemics are beneath the dignity of Christianity.

What does the church need most today? The answer can vary depending on your perspective. After observing many debates on social media, you might think the church needs less arguing and more caution. I can relate to that view. Most social media interactions don’t seem to be helpful, kind, or honoring to Christ. A lot of it is just rude, uncharitable, and straining gnats. It’s just a shameless craving for controversy. On the other hand, when we look at the culture, we see many Christians who are indifferent—those who aren’t deeply convicted or committed, and they avoid necessary conflicts at almost all costs. I understand that too, and wish the church had more of a fighting spirit.

In my opinion, the church needs the reluctant polemicist. We don’t need reluctant people without polemics, nor do we need polemics without reluctance. We need those with an uncompromising backbone who are willing and able to zealously contend for biblical doctrine, worship, and godliness. Men who fight for the honor bestowed by God alone. But they also need to have enough reluctance to avoid, in the fight, everything unbecoming of one enlisted under the banner of Jesus Christ, and whose contending is for peace. Again, in the words of Witsius: “Those men [are] the most happy, who knowing nothing but Jesus Christ, and him crucified, and living soberly, righteously, and godly according to the prescription of the gospel” remain far from contentions and striving.

Kyle Borg

Husband of one. Father of six. Pastor of more. Rural enthusiast.

On Sunday (2/9) I preached on Mark 9 which deals with the place where “the worm does not die and the fire never goes out” – the place called Hell.

I got a question on the text line that results from the line in the Apostles Creed, posted below (appearing between the burial and resurrection) or from 1 Peter 3.  Where did Jesus go during his “death?”  The passage from which the Apostle’s Creed draws its conclusion is 1 Peter 3:18-20 which reads: 

 “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water”

Did Jesus go to Hades and preach to the spirits of the dead?  

Did He go to Hades and triumphantly proclaim His victory over sin and death?  

Or, is this a reference to Jesus’ spirit being with Noah when he preached to the lost of His day?  

I prefer the third interpretation, but it is textually the weakest of the three; the words of Jesus to the thief on the cross, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43).  These words seem less subject to conjecture or misinterpretation.  I do NOT think Jesus was in Hell (or Hades) for those 3 days.  And on those rare occasions I’m called on to recite or sing the Creed, I stay silent during those moments.  

I understand why it’s there and I’m not going to go on a crusade to get it changed, I just think there is a better interpretation.

Pastor Scott (with thanks to William for reminding me of Luke 23:43)On Sunday (2/9) I preached on Mark 9 which deals with the place where “the worm does not die and the fire never goes out” – the place called Hell.

I got a question on the text line that results from the line in the Apostles Creed, poster below (appearing between the burial and resurrection) or from 1 Peter 3.  Where did Jesus go during his “death?”  The passage from which the Apostle’s Creed draws its conclusion is 1 Peter 3:18-20 which reads: 

 “For Christ also died for sins once for all, the just for the unjust, so that He might bring us to God, having been put to death in the flesh, but made alive in the spirit; in which also He went and made proclamation to the spirits now in prison, who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water”

Did Jesus go to Hades and preach to the spirits of the dead?  

Did He go to Hades and triumphantly proclaim His victory over sin and death?  

Or, is this a reference to Jesus’ spirit being with Noah when he preached to the lost of His day?  

I prefer the third interpretation, but it is textually the weakest of the three; the words of Jesus to the thief on the cross, “Truly, I say to you, today you will be with me in paradise” (Luke 23:43).  These words seem less subject to conjecture or misinterpretation.  I do NOT think Jesus was in Hell (or Hades) for those 3 days.  And on those rare occasions I’m called on to recite or sing the Creed, I stay silent during those moments.  

I understand why it’s there and I’m not going to go on a crusade to get it changed, I just think there is a better interpretation.

Pastor Scott (with thanks to William for reminding me of Luke 23:43)

After Jesus ascended to heaven (Acts 1). The 11 remaining disciples appointed a brother named Matthias to replace Judas, who had committed suicide after betraying our Lord. This is a debated point because the Scripture gives us no indication whether or not God wanted them to do this, and many see the apostle Paul as God’s obvious replacement for Judas. While I personally tend to hold this point of view, I find it pointless to argue or debate. God has called all of us to the work he has for us and no one is more important or more holy or more loved in God’s kingdom than any other person.

What happened to these men after Jesus is based in part on historical record and in part on church tradition. Unfortunately politics enters into the traditions of men and so we have traditions claiming that James, the brother of John, went to Spain, when the Bible makes it clear that he was the first of the 12 to be martyred (killed) for his faith in Jesus, when he was put to the sword in the early days of the church in Jerusalem.

PETER

Peter was crucified around 66AD in Rome under the persecution of Emperor Nero. There are all kinds of unverified traditions about his death, most notably that he was crucified upside down because he didn’t consider himself worthy to die the same way Jesus did. 

JAMES

James was the first of the 12 to be put to death. King Herod had him killed by the sword in Jerusalem (Acts 12). There are some non-biblical traditions about James that I will address later. 

JOHN

The writer of the the Gospel of John, the book of the Revelation and three epistles bearing his name, John is the only one of the 12 that history says was not put to death for his faith, although he suffered greatly because of Jesus throughout his long life. Tradition says he ended his life ministering in the region around Ephesus in modern day Turkey and is buried there. 

ANDREW

The brother of Peter, Andrew traveled north, bringing the good news to what is now Russia and the western regions of the former Soviet Union. He later traveled through modern day Turkey and Greece where he was martyred.

PHILIP

Philip ministered in North Africa and then Asia Minor. Traditions says that a Roman Proconsul was so enraged that his wife had converted to Christianity because of Philip’s preaching that he had Philip brutally put to death. There is disagreement about the manor in which he died but no matter the method, it was because he fully believed that Jesus had died and risen from the grave. It is possible that Philip’s tomb was recently discovered (read about HERE).

BARTHOLOMEW/NATHANIEL

Bartholomew was apparently someone who loved to travel. Some accounts have him going to India with Thomas, then Armenia before heading along the trade routes between Ethiopia and the southern Arabian regions. While we are not sure how he met his end, tradition agrees that he was martyred for his faith. In some places he is listed as “Nathaniel” which could have been a family name or a name he was known by in the church. 

MATTHEW/LEVI

The gospel writer who had previously been a tax collector, Matthew traveled to modern day Iran and then down to Ethiopia, probably following established trade routes and preaching the gospel along the way. While some account do not include how he died, others say he was stabbed to death in Africa. 

Like Bartholomew, Matthew was known by more than one name: Levi. This other name is easier to pin down and is probably a family or tribal identification. 

THOMAS

Thomas get’s a bad rap. Although he doubted the resurrection at first, Thomas’ faith in the risen Jesus was strong enough to send him traveling east to Syria and Iraq to preach the gospel, eventually ending up in India were the Marthoma Christian tradition considers him to be their founder. The Marthoma tradition says that Thomas died by stabbing at the hands of four soldiers. 

JAMES THE SON OF ALPHAUES

Very possibly the brother of Matthew/Levi, James is believed to have preached in the regions north of Israel. A non-christian historical account says that he was stoned and then clubbed to death. He is sometimes known as James the Younger (younger brother of Levi?) or James the Lesser (which would have had different connotations then it does for us today). 

SIMON THE ZELOT

Simon’s ultimate end is somewhat unclear. I wrote earlier that politics gets involved in the traditions about the apostles. When Christianity became the official religion of the Roman Empire it became politically advantageous to be connected with the apostles or notable christian events or leaders. This means that places like Turkey, Greece, Rome and Jerusalem naturally had more power/influence than churches in places like Britain, France, Africa and Spain. 

As I said earlier, there are non-biblical traditions regarding the apostles. In the 12th century, a Spanish bishop began to promote the idea that James had come to Spain, despite the account of James’ martyrdom in Acts 12. The same is true with Simon the Zelot with different groups and agendas making claim to Simon’s legacy. The majority view seems to be that Simon was sawn in half in Persia.  

PHILIP

Little is known about Philip’s life after Acts 2. Some have tried to link him with the Philip found later in the book of Acts but the circumstantial evidence doesn’t seem to fit other than sharing the same name. Tradition says that he preached in the Phrygia region of Asia Minor (modern day Turkey) and was martyred for his faith in Jesus in the town of Hierapolis. 

JUDAS THADEUS 

The early church father Jerome called Jude “Trinomius” which means three names. Mark and Matthew list him by his family name “Thaddeus”, while Luke refers to him as Judas the Brother of James. Some have tried to link him with Jude, the half-brother of Jesus who wrote the book of the same name but we reject this view. 

Tradition holds that he preached the gospel in the area we could think of as Northern Syria, Iraq and Turkey. He was said to have been killed with arrows in Turkey’s mountainous northern region. 

MATTHIAS

Tradition says that Matthias traveled north, possibly as far as the Caspian Sea. He was martyred for his faith although the method of his death is unclear.

PAUL

Paul suffered for the Lord throughout his life. In addition to imprisonment and multiple threats to his life, Paul wrote in 2 Corinthians 11:25 that “Three times I was beaten with rods. Once I was stoned. Three times I was shipwrecked. Once I spent a whole night and a day adrift at sea.” 

Paul was beheaded in Rome in 66 AD, possibly at the same time as Peter.

JUDAS

Judas committed suicide after betraying Jesus. I mention this because every one of Jesus’ followers died. 10 of them as martyrs. John died of old age. But Judas chose a cursed path. He was not the only one who betrayed Jesus; all of the other disciples abandoned Jesus, Peter directly denied knowing him. Paul persecuted Jesus’ followers. Yet all of them embraced the grace and forgiveness of God and that same grace was available to Judas. 

Last Sunday we were talking about Faith in the light of catastrophe: “Though the fig trees should not blossom…”  But time got away and we didn’t talk as much about just everyday living by faith as I had intended.  This “got questions” article is a good thought provoker in that direction! – Pastor Scott

What does it mean to walk by faith and not by sight?              (2 Corinthians 5:7)

Second Corinthians 5:6–7 says, “So we are always of good courage. We know that while we are at home in the body we are away from the Lord, for we walk by faith, not by sight” (ESV, emphasis added). Other versions use the word live, rather than walk. The “walk” here is a metaphorical reference to the way a person conducts his or her life. We still use the phrase “all walks of life” to mean a variety of lifestyles or cultures.

The apostle Paul reminds his readers that followers of Christ must not build their lives around things that have no eternal significance. Rather than pursuing the same things the world pursues, a Christian should focus on the unseen realities such as Jesus and heaven. Paul goes on to say, “So whether we are at home or away, we make it our aim to please him. For we must all appear before the judgment seat of Christ, so that each one may receive what is due for what he has done in the body, whether good or evil” (2 Corinthians 5:9–10). Jesus instructed us to store up treasure in heaven (Matthew 6:19–20; Luke 12:33). He promised rewards to everyone who does His will (Matthew 16:27; 1 Peter 1:17; Revelation 22:12) and punishment for those who reject Him (Matthew 25:24–46; John 3:16–18).

Walking by faith means living life in light of eternal consequences. To walk by faith is to fear God more than man; to obey the Bible even when it conflicts with man’s commands; to choose righteousness over sin, no matter what the cost; to trust God in every circumstance; and to believe God rewards those who seek Him, regardless of who says otherwise (Hebrews 11:6).

Rather than loving the things of this world (1 John 2:15–16), Christians should spend their lives glorifying God in everything they do (1 Corinthians 10:31). It requires faith to live this way because we cannot see, hear, or touch anything spiritual. When we base our lives on the truth of God’s Word, rather than on the popular philosophy of our day, we are going against our natural inclinations. Our natural instinct may be to hoard money, but walking by faith says we should give to those in need (Luke 11:41; Ephesians 4:28). Society may say that sexual immorality is acceptable, but those who walk by faith base their standards on God’s unchanging Word, which says any sex outside of marriage is sin (1 Corinthians 6:18; Ephesians 5:3; Galatians 5:19). To walk by faith requires that we tune our hearts to the voice of the Holy Spirit and the truth of His Word (John 10:27; 16:13). We choose to live according to what God reveals to us, rather than trust our own understanding (Proverbs 3:5–6).