Somebody asked me once "Why do you do it? Why do you maintain those lengthy discussions with people who disagree with you and you know will never agree?" Reasonable question.
There are a few reasons I do these dialogs. The top reason is because I believe I am so commanded (Jude 1:3; 1 Peter 3:15). You'll find that I rarely have extended discussions with people over matters as trivial as, say, politics, socialism, or that kind of thing. No, it's matters of faith and practice for which I will contend. Commanded to do so, then, I think I need to do so.
The second reason (in order of importance to me) is for my readers. More often than you might realize I've had people talk to me (either in real time or electronically) about "These people seem to have good arguments. How do I respond?" They know there's something wrong with the argument they're seeing and they know it's not right ... but how exactly is it not right? So, as a form of encouragement ("There are answers to the errors you find. Biblical Christianity is logically defensible. You do not need to check your brain at the door of the church.") and a method of teaching, I do it for my readers. This does tend to shape the tone of my response as well. I'm not discussing things in a vacuum with those who disagree. There are others watching. Since I believe we are commanded to defend the truth "with gentleness and respect" (1 Peter 3:15), I have to keep in mind that I'm teaching others how to respond, so I need to maintain (to the best of my ability) a tone of gentleness and respect. (I have to tell you it's not always easy to be gentle and respectful. Sarcasm comes naturally to me. It's not an effective communication, generally speaking, but it sure can feel good at the time.)
The third reason is for my own sake. I need to know why I believe what I believe. Knowing what I believe (I fear that far too few Christians actually do) isn't enough. I need to know why. When I engage in a debate, there are essentially two possible outcomes. I could find out that I am wrong. Believe it or not, that has happened ... more times than you might realize. In this case, I have corrected my erroneous thinking. That's good. The other possible outcome is that I'm right. If I simply stood on this as the only possible outcome, however, I'd be missing out on the benefit of asking and answering the questions. You see, when I engage in the debate and determine that I am right, I not only solidify my beliefs (which decreases the future chance that I'll be wrong on that topic), but I also know why I'm right. In either case, then, I've gained. I either corrected my error or confirmed the truth and know why. It's a win-win for me.
There are other reasons people may argue. They need to be right. They are too arrogant to admit they may be wrong. There is a power struggle -- "You can't tell me I'm wrong!" There are some that think that all points need to be argued at all times and as offensively as possible (it seems) because, you know, we need to be angry and rude to the glory of God! And there are more reasons. I don't have all those fancy notions at work. I'm supposed to stand for the faith, so I do. I believe it is important to teach and encourage others, so I try. And I need to verify my own position and practice modeling what I think we are to do. Not that complicated.
6 comments:
For God. For your brethren. For your soul. All good reasons, and as a reader, I agree that these discussions are helpful since I quite often (too often) don't know how to best respond to arguments against what I believe to be true...so, thanks.
For me, though, I think sometimes, I have been guilty of needing to be right...pride is a weakness I have to battle.
Hey, nice summary. Have you considered blogging? Oh ... wait ... never mind.
Wouldn't it be nice if the only reason I did what was right was for godly reasons. I would be less than honest if I didn't admit that, pushed far enough by certain people with certain attitudes, it's just about being right. I am quite certain that pride is something every last one of us has to battle.
Yeah, that would be nice... Thanks for the honest encouragement!
22Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart. 23Don't have anything to do with foolish and stupid arguments, because you know they produce quarrels. 24And the Lord's servant must not quarrel; instead, he must be kind to everyone, able to teach, not resentful. 25Those who oppose him he must gently instruct, in the hope that God will grant them repentance leading them to a knowledge of the truth, 26and that they will come to their senses and escape from the trap of the devil, who has taken them captive to do his will. (I can't remember the ref for this, except that it is in Timothy.)
I think about these arguments off and on through the day. Sometimes I make myself read them for the very reasons you mentioned. This scripture is one that has occured to me often as I read and later as I contemplate.
That said:
This is a good post. I have a saying: the best way to not be deceived is to assume you are. It seems that you ascribe to that thinking also. I suppose the other side of that coin is to deceive yourself into thinking you are not deceived by deceiving others into thinking you once were but now are not.
I suppose the trick is in determining both what qualifies as "foolish and stupid arguments" (some are; some aren't) and in how to avoid quarreling while doing what it says: "gently instruct". That's what I have in mind. I'm just not so sure how good I am at it ... yet. Practice, practice, practice. ;)
But I gotta tell ya, that last line -- "deceive yourself into thinking you are not deceived by deceiving others into thinking you once were but now are not" -- was a brain bender. :)
Yea I kind of chuckled as I wrote it.
Post a Comment