The theology that a person holds often greatly impacts that person's view and actions in life, and this leads some people to feel a justification to always correct a person for any minor theological differences. They'll confront perfect strangers to, as they would say, stand for the truth. They view this as loving, because they think that if the person only holds that view then that person's life would be so much better.
But the great flaw in that is it rejects the fundamentals of how relationships work, or how to get to know and help people works--of how to be loving. If you tell a stranger, or someone you haven't truly tried to get to know or know their viewpoint well, that you think they are terribly wrong on something, what would you expect? All that is communicated there is that one person has wanted to skip the part of getting to know someone and has jumped into telling that person what to do.
Relationships shouldn't be about trying to correct another person or force them to be a certain way. It's about getting to know and appreciate them, and possibly at certain moments--very rare moments, most likely when they ask for advice--that's mostly when a relationship can include this aim to help another see and possibly adopt your viewpoint.
I wonder if some people think the whole world is an academic classroom. There truly should be a difference here and there. In debate class, you debate. In real life, you talk and get to know each other.
Another flaw is that it may be pride, and not love that motivates people. If you see that people don't often like to be corrected on every little detail that you may view as wrong, you'll know that the end result is often they will want to move farther away from you. So what was the whole point? In the end, it may be that the person wanting to correct the other just wants to be and feel right. That's pride and not love. Or at least pride was the main motivating factor, whether the person realizes it or not.
The Bible talks about matters of indifference. We really shouldn't let matters of indifference get in the way of enjoying being brothers and sisters in Christ. People are learning theology over time, and as long as they understand the very foundation of the Bible, the gospel and all it offers to us, then they will be fine. Don't rush, and wait for them to ask the questions.
As Christians, we should be known for our love. Not for a constant fighting spirit over theological differences.
Theology does affect people greatly. But we have to realize our limitations and how human relationships work, and that pride is all too present and common.
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Showing posts with label debate. Show all posts
Thursday, October 1, 2015
Saturday, January 3, 2015
Christian Debate
Debate is only useful when both parties in the debate seek truth. Too often in debate the involved parties are not in dialogue but rather just jabbing at each other.
True debate requires understanding the position of the person you are debating with. I often have found myself among like minded people telling them they are not fair in their criticisms of other positions.
It is often that we will not agree with a position, but most frequently most of the criticisms of positions we hear are unfair and frankly untrue. In the current day we cut corners in debate. It is easier to throw mud than to do the hard work of explaining why an opposing position is wrong. Why this is important is that we are called to be people of love.
If we wish to live out our faith we need to enter debates in a spirit of love. Sometimes it may mean respectfully leaving a debate where people are more interested in mudslinging than truth.
Always as Christians we should be mindful that how we debate is as important as what we say when we debate. I believe a respectful tone of debate is not only Christian but also enhances our message.
True debate requires understanding the position of the person you are debating with. I often have found myself among like minded people telling them they are not fair in their criticisms of other positions.
It is often that we will not agree with a position, but most frequently most of the criticisms of positions we hear are unfair and frankly untrue. In the current day we cut corners in debate. It is easier to throw mud than to do the hard work of explaining why an opposing position is wrong. Why this is important is that we are called to be people of love.
If we wish to live out our faith we need to enter debates in a spirit of love. Sometimes it may mean respectfully leaving a debate where people are more interested in mudslinging than truth.
Always as Christians we should be mindful that how we debate is as important as what we say when we debate. I believe a respectful tone of debate is not only Christian but also enhances our message.
Friday, June 27, 2014
Love as the Apologetic
One of the few truly interesting apologetics Christian's have is love. Love in the Christian sense is interesting because it is so counter cultural to the world.
Christian love differs from love in the world in that it is beyond reason. We love not because of what is, but what could be or because of what Jesus has done.
You see Christian love is not without reason but its base is in an event in the past or in future possibility. Christian love often ignores what is.
That is why the early church spread so quickly. There was something very distinctive about their love.
Argumentation or debate are apologetics with little use. Most debates are ended emotionally long before the intellect is engaged. You see that man does not like the Christian message about himself because he must first accept his nature.
It is good for man to accept his nature. But he does not like the message.
Ultimately the solution of free grace through faith is dependent on the realization of need. The good news of salvation is only good when we realize the actual state we are in.
Christian love differs from love in the world in that it is beyond reason. We love not because of what is, but what could be or because of what Jesus has done.
You see Christian love is not without reason but its base is in an event in the past or in future possibility. Christian love often ignores what is.
That is why the early church spread so quickly. There was something very distinctive about their love.
Argumentation or debate are apologetics with little use. Most debates are ended emotionally long before the intellect is engaged. You see that man does not like the Christian message about himself because he must first accept his nature.
It is good for man to accept his nature. But he does not like the message.
Ultimately the solution of free grace through faith is dependent on the realization of need. The good news of salvation is only good when we realize the actual state we are in.
Thursday, March 20, 2014
Because God
I recently was flipping through a fairly interesting book on human psychology in a book store which made many interesting points. Of course one section was interesting and I thought I'd object to the book without naming it.
It basically contained a few sample dialogues of hypothetical situations in which people were asked to give their opinion on a topic and then explain why their rational.
A few of the people said "because it is wrong" as an answer and they were pressed for a rational. The specific issues are irrelevant to my point. Often Christians today are being pressed by non believers to give reasons why things are wrong past "God says it is."
It is certainly good if the Christian can give an apologetic for his beliefs, but ultimately we see many Christians discouraged because they don't have an answer past "God said." Ultimately if God says it is then we can feel confident in our position.
You see if it is God who said it the argument is over if we truly understand the situation. An apologetic is useful to have of course, but the apologetic or the rational is far less important than the point that it is God's will not ours that matters.
Often as Christians we get pressed for reasons we don't have at the moment. It is often very unfair the way debates go. You might press an atheist for a reason for something and they simply say you should go read such and such a scientist and that scientist has the answer.
Of course if I tell them you should go read this or that theologian and I know they can answer your question, then the atheist will become quite upset. You see we are often unfairly held to the standard of master theologian/apologist in debate by the atheist who refuses to be held to the level of professional physicist/astronomer.
Needless to say the point is often in debate or discussion we can feel discouraged. And we need not feel so. The world often holds the church to standards of evidence it does not hold itself to.
It basically contained a few sample dialogues of hypothetical situations in which people were asked to give their opinion on a topic and then explain why their rational.
A few of the people said "because it is wrong" as an answer and they were pressed for a rational. The specific issues are irrelevant to my point. Often Christians today are being pressed by non believers to give reasons why things are wrong past "God says it is."
It is certainly good if the Christian can give an apologetic for his beliefs, but ultimately we see many Christians discouraged because they don't have an answer past "God said." Ultimately if God says it is then we can feel confident in our position.
You see if it is God who said it the argument is over if we truly understand the situation. An apologetic is useful to have of course, but the apologetic or the rational is far less important than the point that it is God's will not ours that matters.
Often as Christians we get pressed for reasons we don't have at the moment. It is often very unfair the way debates go. You might press an atheist for a reason for something and they simply say you should go read such and such a scientist and that scientist has the answer.
Of course if I tell them you should go read this or that theologian and I know they can answer your question, then the atheist will become quite upset. You see we are often unfairly held to the standard of master theologian/apologist in debate by the atheist who refuses to be held to the level of professional physicist/astronomer.
Needless to say the point is often in debate or discussion we can feel discouraged. And we need not feel so. The world often holds the church to standards of evidence it does not hold itself to.
Thursday, February 6, 2014
Creation Debate
I normally don't like to comment upon public debates, but I think I would like comment on the Bill Nye and Ken Ham debate. Mainly I would like to say that there are a number of Christian viewpoints on Creation.
A good book for the topic is James Montgomery Boice's Genesis volume 1 commentary. It lays out well the various and diverse Christian viewpoints on creation at the start of the commentary.
A good book for the topic is James Montgomery Boice's Genesis volume 1 commentary. It lays out well the various and diverse Christian viewpoints on creation at the start of the commentary.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)