When it comes to engaging in debate or focused discussion with another person over the internet over controversial teaching, or anything of the like, here are a few suggestions:
- Be as gentle as possible. It should be an encouragement to us that the most scandalous church in the first century still were called Christians by the Apostle Paul. He was both gentle and firm with them, and so should we be with those we love yet desire correction for. Gentleness should characterize us with other people’s faults – because at the end of the day, you’re left accounting for your own sins before God, and pleading the cross for yourself primarily.
- Listen to where they are coming from. Often we can get so caught up into what we believe others think, that we never give ear to what they are actually saying. Then, when we address them, we’re not even addressing them, but the caricature of what we believe they are asserting. In logic, this is called the Straw man Fallacy, and it always shows the arguer to be a fool. I don’t suggest it!
- If the discussion is about a particular teacher, listen and study those who enjoy and support that teacher. In some ways, it’s being kind to those you disagree with to listen to those who support their teacher. It also helps you get the “real” view of the person – for good or bad – that person has folks who love them just as you do, so it’s good to see what sort of community they’re coming from. Paul did this in Acts 17, and so should we with every teacher we engage.
- Seek to pull up every good and commendable thing about that person that you can.
- At the end of the day, the Scriptures rule, and so we should wield them gently and confidently, so as to let the Bible do the work, not us. This may be anything from spending some time expositing the Scriptures carefully in the Greek, to pointing out Scriptures and asking pointed questions. (For example: How can you read 2 Kings 25-28 and still be an Arminian? Your belief about the will and God’s sovereignty do not jive with this text’s clear teaching that God predestined for Sennacherib’s actions and fall.) This could be softened by presenting a Scripture and saying that one doesn’t understand how their view lines up with it – followed by a request for clarification on their part.
Anyhow, these are my thoughts on how to create constructive, helpful, edifying, and hopefully sanctifying conversation between those who may be coming from a completely different world than yourself. Much like Tarzan, the lines of communication can simply come from an open acknowledgment, accompanied by a desire for understanding: Me Tarzan, You Jane.
The Strasbourg Inn 