12/7/2024 Word Count – 1,732 Reading Time – 7.7 minutes

I have a friend who is a very smart and articulate fellow. His spiritual and religious inclinations are often in stark opposition to mine. He regularly reads my posts, understands my spiritual convictions, and frequently voices his opposition to my ideas. I believe our discussions have brought us into a fuller friendship and a better understanding of each other’s point of view. And even though we both remain unconvinced of the ultimate validity of the other’s opinions, we are able to continue our discussions as well as our friendship. And while I value learning about other perspectives on the world I also benefit greatly from the introspection the debates engender in me. I am forced to bolster my opposing thoughts and dig deeper to defend my position than if I did not have this devil’s advocate scrutinizing my writing. Although I do care about my friend’s salvation I am convinced that attempting to shove Christianity down his throat would result in his increased resistance and mistrust in people speaking about their faith as well as the demise of our relationship. And while I would be saddened by the loss of a friend and an adept sparring partner, I would also lose the opportunity to answer any questions that he might have if he were to becomes inclined to examine Christianity more closely.

I think the key to our ongoing dialog is our ability to maintain a high level of civility in our discussions. We can disagree without insulting each other and don’t feel the need to engage in personal attacks in place of arguing personal understanding. I believe an important element in the civility of our discussions is respect. I don’t think you have to respect a person’s opinion in order to respect their right to have that opinion. I feel that the right to be wrong is an important aspect of our right to exercise our God given free will.

We as Christians benefit from an understanding that there are mysteries to life that require faith to embrace. This gives us an advantage that not everyone has when it comes to formulating our world view. None of the true, core existential questions are empirically proven, meaning that no matter what your worldview is, it still relies on belief in something unproved, which I believe is the meaning of faith. For example, if you believe there is no God, since that is unproveable, you are still relying on faith in that belief.

Christians are called upon to love, even our enemies. I hope to drill down into the deeply faceted and somewhat confusing topic of love in a future blog. For now, suffice it to say, respect may be integral to our ability to love, especially when the object of that love is in opposition to (and perhaps even hostile toward) our personal beliefs.

In addition to loving, Christians are called to “spread the good news of salvation through Jesus”. For someone outside the faith that statement has a lot of ideas that may be completely foreign to their understanding of how the world works. We Christians have developed our own vernacular over the centuries. I think this phrase falls into that category. When we engage other Christians with that sentiment they understand what we mean by “good news” and “salvation”. They know who Jesus is historically and spiritually and they understand the theistic relevance of all this. But for those who lack understanding of the phrase it almost sounds like a foreign language. And the idea that we Christians are unable or unwilling to engage non-believers in terms that are understandable to both sides of the conversation seems a bit disrespectful to me.

We should bear in mind that when we are speaking with unbelievers, particularly those with no religious inclination, we really are speaking a different language. Our faith in God, Christ and the Holy Spirit are dependent upon an understanding of metaphysics that is probably not part of the non-believer’s worldview. Christians take the supernatural for granted. When we discuss the concepts of people rising from the dead, miracles, demons and God Himself, we are introducing elements into the conversation that are beyond the scope of people who are unaware of their spiritual being. If our partner in conversation is a materialist or naturalist they are confused, skeptical, and possibly frightened by the idea that there is more to existence than atoms and molecules. It may be that we have to bring them into an acceptance of the possibility of the broader concept of the spirit realm and our connection to it before they can open up to the idea of God.

Additionally, there are reasons a person has a certain perspective on life and the world. I fear that we Christians harbor an attitude that another person’s challenge in accepting what we see as the only true faith is purely from ignorance or evil. When we disregard the impact of culture, experience, and personal consequences on a person’s beliefs and worldview that disregard can be taken as a sign of disrespect. I have been in conversation with people whose beliefs were in opposition to mine because they had had a bad experience with a Christian church or group in the past. That experience shaped the identity and definition of Christianity to them. Until we get past their negative experience it will be hard for us to show them the amazing nature of Christianity.

In my opinion, another way Christians are off-putting to non-believers is by attempting to enter into a conversation about our faith with accusations and condemnations. Sin is an important topic. But if a person isn’t aware of, or convinced about the dynamic of sin, it may be difficult for them to accept that avoidance of sin is of any relevance to them, especially if you, yourself, are an obvious sinner. And who doesn’t sin? God is about a lot more than sin. And, until someone is convinced of God’s authority, it could be very hard to believe that God’s moral code is any more valid than their own. It’s possible that condemnation of sin, when introduced before a person has accepted God’s authority, could keep that person from being open to learning more about God’s relevance in so many other aspects of their life that could benefit from His influence.

 I’m not trying to diminish the importance of identifying and avoiding sin for Christians. Sin is a big deal. But there is more to a relationship with God than just our sin. Jesus made it clear when He said in Matthew 5:28 “But I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lustful intent has already committed adultery with her in his heart”. And in Mark 7:20-23 Jesus stated “What comes out of a person is what defiles him. For from within, out of the heart of man, come evil thoughts, sexual immorality, theft, murder, adultery, coveting, wickedness, pride, foolishness. All these evil things come from within, and they defile a person”.

If we don’t understand a little about what is in our hearts that is compelling us to sin it is hard for us to see God as a helper rather than an enforcer. It’s hard for us to accept that with God’s help and guidance we can stop sinning (not entirely, but in particular instances) and thereby avoid the consequences of sin, which we may see as punishment. If we are too black and white about sin it becomes more difficult to accept our participation in sin. We only see many of God’s edicts as nonsensical impositions on our lifestyle, which puts us in a position of feeling like we need to defend our actions rather than examine our reasons for preferring the offending part of our lifestyle. When we come to understand God as our helper it may be easier to accept that His laws may be of benefit to our spiritual being and therefore should be considered in our decision making. If we aren’t able to see God as a helper in addition to His role in our lives as an enforcer, and if we can’t see God as an entity who has an interest in our eternal wellbeing and as someone who has sacrificed greatly and endured our repeated failures with infinite patience, it will be difficult to experience the fullness of a relationship with Him. As we strive to introduce our unbelieving friends and acquaintances to God we may gain more traction if we introduce Him as our loving protector instead of our feared enforcer. Even though he can be both it could be important what order we put those concepts in.

Another thing that can get in the way of civil dialog between 2 antagonists is fear. If we lack faith in the truth of our convictions it causes us to react forcefully to ideas that might challenge our standpoint. When this happens on both sides of the conversation the result can be a chaotic exchange of shouts and insults that go nowhere to prove a point and only serve to encourage the opposition to increase their volume.  I admit, there may be times when rancorous behavior is called for. But for the most part I think that style of communication creates more barriers to your ideas than  provoke thoughtful consideration of them.

One final thing about communication. There is a difference between conversation and preaching. A conversation is a dialog. Preaching is a monolog. Both are important to introducing the concept of Christianity. Each has its place in spreading the good news and the word of God. If you are preaching you don’t really care about what the listeners think. Your goal is to express a point of view. While preaching can lead to relationships, it does not necessarily engender relationships. Conversation, on the other hand, is relational. It involves the expression of more than one individual’s ideas. As a result, listening is important. Listening means being quiet while other people express their thoughts. It also means respecting their right to have those thoughts, even if you don’t agree. It may happen that conversation gets heated, and it may be difficult to keep from interrupting and interjecting opposing ideas. But in the end, if you are trying to develop a relationship rather than crushing an opponent, listening and being courteous is important.