“My concern (is) to avoid selling out our evangelical birthright to every wind of cultural criticism or trendy new idea that comes our way–I am convinced that Christianity, as an historical religion, needs to listen very carefully to its history in order to build on past strengths and avoid repetition of past mistakes–or by my desire always to provoke readers not only into thinking for themselves but, above all, into having an opinion about things that matter. Too many today sit on the moral and theological fence; too few have any strong opinions about anything. That is why so often theological and ecclesiastical discussion in evangelical circles goes by default, with nobody having clear enough convictions about anything to engage in real discussion. This is not helped, of course, by the increasing tendency in evangelical circles to ape American linguini-spine culture and to regard disagreement with anyone on anything in our allegedly postmodern world as always inherently oppressive. Some evangelicals, indeed, seem to think that the whole point of having a debate is–well, just to have a debate, a conversation, and then to agree to differ as we all sit around having a mutually affirming, self-congratulatory love-fest. I say that such a view is total rubbish. As the late Frankie Howerd would have said, ‘Nay, nay, thrice nay!’ The point of a debate, as Paul so clearly demonstrates time and again in the Book of Acts, is to establish which position is best”.
– Carl Trueman, “The Wages of Spin”