How do Christians debate? Is it fundamentally different from the way that those who profess no faith in Christ conduct their conversations. Anyone whose only knowledge of Christianity comes through the pages of the New Testament might assume that there would be significant differences, but come with me to a controversial church meeting or read a popular blog where disagreement has broken out. Is there any distinction you can make between Christian and non-christian exchange? My experience is that Christians are just as capable of belittling their opponents as any non-Christian you might meet, often being aggressive, dismissive, patronizing or just plain rude.
How can we avoid this? Christians should conduct all their conversation with what has been called “interpretive charity”. It may well be a familiar turn of phrase to you, but it’s a new one on me and I’m grateful for being introduced to it. It means beginning with the assumption in any disagreement that your opponent is not only sincere but is also rational and holds those opinions for sensible reasons. She is not being wilfully stupid. Secondly — and this is by no means easy — it means restating those views to yourself in the most persuasive way that you can, which for Christians always means seeking their Biblical basis. In other words, the task is to take your opponents strongest argument and really listen to it so that you can restate it even more persuasively. It means looking at others in the best possible light.
I’m going to try. You?
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
bward 02.02.05 at 10:36 pm
So what do you think about quoting the Bible to non-Christian people? I always find that hard, and I’m not sure that it is desperately productive.
Joel Thomas 02.02.05 at 11:53 pm
I’ll try! I admit it won’t be easy, though.
dh 02.03.05 at 8:23 pm
I’m reading a book called “humble apologetics” which address
all of these things you have spoken about. Very good book.
If you in the past thought I was any of the things you mentioned I apologize. That is not the case or heart of what I was saying. I try to find areas of agreement
and state those. Sometimes there isn’t and we need to discuss, when we are in those times, with love like you spoke of.
Eugene 02.04.05 at 4:43 am
The culture in which the New Testament was written in was
noted for being a culture of combative discourse. Honour/shame,
challenge/riposte, patron-broker-client relationships (from which
we get our theological understanding of Jesus as God’s broker
and we are the client. Bruce Malina (I think that’s his name) wrote
an excellent Social Science Commentary on the Synoptic
Gospels (Matthew, Mark, Luke) in which he explains how
people communicate.
I personally do not have a problem with debate and argument.
I think it is healthy as long as it is does not devolve into
name calling. The lawsuit situation in I Corinthians was
about people tying up the court systems with petty disputes and
name calling.
However I will admit that although Paul called people names,
like foolish Galatians and the Judaisers “mutilators of the
flesh.” He was trying to be as loving as possible. Then again
Paul was only human.
Joel Thomas 02.06.05 at 11:51 pm
My reaction to Donald Sensing’s post on enjoying killing in war may have push the limits of interpretive charity. But, I’ll keep trying!
Richard 02.07.05 at 12:27 am
That’s the spirit Joel!