
We spend an awful lot of talk and ink discussing the proper and biblical way to disagree with one another. Often we debate whether sarcasm is ever a legitimate tool in the believer’s arsenal. We dispute about what situations call for the Matthew 18 protocol and which ones do not.
We have the nice police regularly tooting their whistles and waving their batons about over a hard word or two, following by sundry citations of our Lord zinging His enemies with the wit of Shakespeare and the venom of Don Rickles. For all the talk, however, we’re making little progress in reaching consensus. Come now and let us reason together.
Our disputes are by and large through impersonal cyber means, which exacerbates an already existing problem. We don’t speak on the interwebs with the same gentleness with which we talk with one another in real life. Mere written words are denuded of all the subtleties and nuances of face-to-face conversation. There we have tone of voice, posture, and facial expression to give us clues. In real life, even when we are steaming mad, we still sense their humanity and typically temper our tantrums.
We are prone to denying our opponents’ simple humanity. I receive regular reckless accusations against me on the flimsiest of evidence. As the conversation moves forward, each participant feels absolute freedom to ascribe to me perspectives I’ve not only never taken but have expressly denied. And then to add insult to injury, they assign sundry selfish motives to all that I do.
Some time ago I had a conversation go something like this, “I heard on a podcast that you said on a podcast that Lutherans are heretics who go to hell.” I replied, “I didn’t say that as I have never believed that. Could you please cite where you believe I said that?” “I don’t have time to hunt down the citation. Why don’t you tell me what you did say on that podcast?”
So I’m now accused of saying something I never would have said. I ask for the source. And in turn I am asked for a source where I didn’t say it. “Uh, here’s your source- everything I’ve ever written or said that has ever been published. Those are all the places where I didn’t say what you say I said.”
Others came to my accuser’s defense, noting that one thing they know about me is that I like to confuse my congregation, and that I’m just interested in selling books and getting butts in seats at my seminars. I was told that I have ulterior motives.
Sadly, I have no citations from my writings or podcasts where I publicly deny having ulterior motives, desiring to confuse my congregation and having a mercenary perspective. All this because I’m a Calvinist and not a Lutheran. I’m confident, by the way, that many a Lutheran has been treated as badly by Calvinists.
I’m guilty of the same I must confess. A star in Hollywood, a well known podcaster, a political pundit are, too often in my own mind, not real people deserving of Christian charity. Perhaps being on the receiving end will help me to more fully repent. Lord help us to never forget that the people we disagree with are people before they are people we disagree with.








