Limits of Conversation
When I first became a Christian, I loved to debate atheists and people of other faiths. Any topic was open and I looked forward to the challenge. Looking back, it helped me to grow in my own faith but I have moved to a different spot. Obviously I am still interested in the conversation as that is the purpose of this blog. But you may notice something about the way I respond to things people post on this blog. Sometimes people will post a dozen things that they disagree with me on. I usually will pick two or three points to discuss, not because I dismiss their opinions, but because there is better conversation if the number of topics are limited. I may return to the other topics at a later time. There are also times that something is brought up that I would rather take the time to really look into and to write a separate post about it.
There are other things that go on as well. As expected with any discussion of religion, there are passionate feelings. I respect that. But sometimes the conversation devolves into name-calling and accusations that produce more heat than light. I am not interested in that. I try to base this blog on: “Always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.” (1 Peter 3:15–16 ESV) If the conversation has gone bad or if the person is only interested in expressing their anger at my lack of agreement, I will end the conversation. I will do my best to sort through the emotion and find something productive to post on at a later date, by will not enter into pointless arguments and debates. I write this to say that I do this not out of a lack of interest in the truth but in my conviction of how religious conversation should take place.
