Comments on: listening in

By: Duke

Duke — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 21:23:59 +0000

Yessss! When pastors are at their best, they are bringing us into God’s own presence.

By: Joao

Joao — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 14:35:44 +0000

I really appreciated how the tone of this exchange changed since Ken’s last mercy-filled response.
I think that’s the key right there.

I often listen to pundits like Bob Dutko, Rachel Maddow, Jim Press, Michael Medved, Dennis Miller, Bill O’Riley and Keith Olbermann rail at the opposing point of view and come away convinced of how they are right or wrong about their issues and how the opposition is evil, godless or ignorant. It seems so simple.
And like them,I have argued with others and chosen to unleash all my cynicism, biting humor and negative opinions upon them.

Nothing accomplished except greater alienation and animosity towards them if I ‘lose’ the argument or puffed up pride in my rhetoric if I ‘win’.

That is until I face someone I care about.
Then, I will develop my point carefully, blunting any barbs of aggression in order to exchange ideas but also keep the relationship.
Maybe that’s the way to ‘argue’.

I have gained nothing from the former way, but have gained understanding and grown friendships from the latter (‘former’ and ‘latter’ terms always confuse me).

I currently enjoy a good friendship with a person who disagrees with me on 95% of all ‘issues’, beginning with the fact he is an agnostic and I am a christian, going downhill from there.

But our close friendship stems from our mutual willingness to see past issues and appreciate each other’s character (well, at least I assume he appreciates mine )

So much so, I can say I would trust him with my life and even stood as his best man @ his wedding.

So back to my observation on Ken’s merciful response, that verse in the Bible about the power of a kind word really seems to be accurate.

By: Duke

Duke — Sat, 11 Oct 2008 00:15:59 +0000

Some of the Christians I have admired, learned from, and loved the most are also people with whom I have had theological disagreements. My son and I disagree with one another on many things, but I do love him more than my life. My wife isn’t even a Christian–talk about a divide!–but I love her deeply. So one of the things I’ve had to learn (or explode!) is that much of what we like to think about and talk about and disagree about is not central. It cannot be, or as I say, I would have to explode.

By: Cassady

Cassady — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:20:20 +0000

I think it is important to have different opinions and to discuss them. It often strengthens our walk with other believers when we push back on one another. However, we have to be careful not to judge one anothers perceptions as we all have different backgrounds which have led us to particular conclusions.

By: Jim

Jim — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:24:03 +0000

I thought the dialogue between Jesus and Peter was the example of how it should go. I mean before Jesus died and when Jesus served Peter that fish dinner.

Jesus told Peter to get lost, then prophesied that he was a traitor, then told him to love everyone and be a leader. Talk about your end round of dialogue.

By: Tom Cole

Tom Cole — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 13:37:27 +0000

I was part of a project that had a lot of life on it in the late 90’s called Bridge Across the Divide. There were people on both sides of the issue of homosexuality. We had ex-gays and conservative Christian viewpoints, we had gay activists and gay Christians. We also had ground rules. We would say things like IMHO (in my humble opinion) and not blast each other and demand that they listen to us.

I think I learned more from my four years in dialogue, with people who fiercely disagreed with one another, than I have in any other format. The challenge is to temper our words even when we have passion. I believe that this kind of dialogue IS possible. I don’t think it’s outside the realm of possibility. So long as civility and love are the touchstones of that dialogue.

I would welcome dialogue like that once again!

By: mark

mark — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 02:42:07 +0000

I, for one, am willing to be “actually committed to remaining in conversation with each other,” but I ain’t gonna marry any of youse guys! :-p

By: MJJ

MJJ — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:37:36 +0000

Ken–your post reminds of the first presidential debate when Jim Lehrer was trying to get John and Barack to address each other instead of looking out to the audience/camera. I think we humans are like that. It’s much easier to address your deepest convictions facing forward to an anonymous audience (pastors excluded, of course) than to look directly into someone’s eyes and engage in a real, honest-to-goodness dialogue. That indeed is the scary part.

By: Billabong

Billabong — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 18:02:34 +0000

But also let me say that I can get caught up in my own emotions, such as frustration, anger, irritation, impetuousness, contempt, hostility, arrogance, and fear. And I do lose sight of Jesus then. And I don’t like it.

By: Billabong

Billabong — Thu, 09 Oct 2008 17:19:50 +0000

Well, I don’t know. I do enjoy hearing other people’s points of view. People who are sincere followers of Jesus. People who are trying to follow him faithfully. I do enjoy the humility I experience in them. Sincere and humble followers do receive one another differently. I enjoy being around people like that, even though we differ on some questions. I have trouble though when people try to call my faith or my intelligence into question when we have these disagreements, particularly when the disagreements are about things that Jesus did not emphasize as central to his ministry. I have trouble when people use bullying or contempt or derision to reinforce their arguments. And I have trouble with people who are more interested in winning arguments and being right than they are in seeking the presence of God.