10 Reasons Why I Never Argue Theology

By Jeremy Myers

This is a guest post by Sam Riviera. He spends most of his time and energy caring for others in his community so that through his life and actions they might see Jesus. He also makes some of the best cookies you have ever tasted.

If you would like to write a guest post for this blog, check out the guidelines here.

Argument about Theology

Does Our Theology Define Us?

Have we ever said “What those people believe is wrong! We believe what the Bible says.”

“Those” people might say the same thing about us.

We organize our beliefs about God, religion and what we think the Bible says into a system we suppose is consistent and call it our theology.

Does Our Theology Unite Us or Divide Us?

If we base our theology on the Bible, then your theology and my theology should agree. Correct?

But we all know that probably none of us agree on everything. With that in mind, here are ten reasons why I never argue theology with anyone:

I think I’m right. You think you’re right.
I know I’m right. I attended seminary.
I know lots about theology and can devastate almost any opponent in a theological “discussion.”
Maybe I’m not always right. I heard N.T. Wright say in an interview that he is probably wrong a third of the time. I concede that he probably knows more about theology than I do. If he thinks he is probably wrong a third of the time, then maybe I’m occasionally wrong.
I hate arguing with people. When I look back on it later, even though I may have won the argument, I never feel good about it.
I’ve noticed that my superior theological knowledge never really changes anyone’s mind. They only pretend to agree.
Arguing theology consumes too much of my time, time spent researching my position – wasted time. It leaves me little time to help or serve others.
Arguing theology prevents me from really getting to know other people. It prevents me from hearing their stories and from knowing their joys and their sorrows.
Arguing theology just doesn’t look like Jesus to me. Somehow I can’t imagine Jesus arguing theology. I can imagine him partying with sinners, forgiving prostitutes, healing people and dying for me. I can imagine him talking about the Father’s love. I can imagine him engaged in lively discussions with the Pharisees. But I cannot imagine him arguing theology.
Arguing theology prevents me from loving my neighbors. When I’m trying to prove the correctness of my beliefs, I end up thinking I’m right and they’re wrong. That mindset does not help me love my neighbors as I love myself.

Why do you avoid arguing theology?

Do you love discussing theology? Why?

In Guest Posts, Theology

http://www.mhmcintyre.us/ Mark McIntyre

Arguing theology prevents me from understanding why someone holds the position they do. What is behind the hard stance? Why is this such a strong issue for the other person? Why is this such a hot button for me? These are questions that should be explored before the discussion rises to the level of argument. If we begin to understand each other, perhaps we both might grow from the discussion.
- Sam
  
  You got my point! Let us discuss, not argue. It’s easy to be so convinced we’re the expert, that our position is correct, that we don’t really listen to other people and hear what is behind what they’re saying.
BilliusZetay

Theo-logy – study of God. How is that even possible? Is he an artifact, a museum piece? He won’t sit still long enough for a snapshop. I think it takes a lot of hubris for the ant to study the giant. My lot is in with the uneducated fishermen.
- Sam
  
  Yes, that what the word means. Most people use it to refer to our study of what we think we know about God, religion and the Bible.
BilliusZetay

Oh, yes, and my wife knows very little about the bible and has no theology yet when she talks to the Jehovah’s Witnesses about God and Jesus, they walk away and come back with bigger more experienced guns. She just seems to have the spiritual insight to stump them. It’s pretty amazing. Me I get caught up in the bible ping-pong so now I leave the JW’s to my wife.
- Sam
  
  I grew up next door the a Kingdom Hall. Some of our neighbors were JWs. One of their little secrets is that lots of people cycle through their religion. I know several who came to my door as JWs, but later left the JWs.
  
  Having been a JW, most of them strongly dislike Christians because of the way the Christians treated them when they went to the Christians’ doors. I treat them kindly. They tell me I am the exception to the rule, often the only exception.
  
  I will not discuss theology with them because that goes nowhere. The only theology they get from me is “lived-out” theology in the way I treat them.
  - BilliusZetay
    
    I heard that they refer to Christians as “goats”. I have always tried to be polite and kind with them. Actually on one level I admire some of the dedicated individuals because they have done things that most Christians have not had the courage to do. They have abolished most pagan festivities. During WWII they were persecuted in Germany when many Christians were not. Plus it takes a lot of courage to go knocking on the doors of total strangers to talk about your beliefs. I also note that some JW sites are exposing some of the secret societies (like Skull and Bones, Masons) while Christians remain silent. I think the irony is that a Mason may have founded the JW’s. So while I don’t entertain discussions I also will not be unkind to that kind of courage. The discussion has to be at a deeper more revelatory level in the same way as Jesus was with the woman at the well. I read a JW blog once in which some members were openly discussing how the were beginning to believe they were being manipulated by the leaders of the organization. I think that there are more than likely some JW’s who are actually Christians but confused about what to believe (not many but some). The day of liberation will come to them as well as to those in all the denominations when God speaks the command to “come out of her.” We may be very surprised.
    - http://www.google.com/profiles/GaryFPatton GaryFPatton
      
      In re-reading your comment above,
      BilliusZetay, I was reminded of the “liberation” that Holy Spirit brought to large numbers, I believe, of the members of the original “Worldwide Church of God”. I fellowshipped with several in a church we both attended for some time. Once released from demonic deception, they were still beautiful people (cult members are often the nicest folks one could want to meet) and “on fire” for the R-E-A-L Jesus (Relational-Engaging-Authentic-Loving/Life-giving).
      
      I was also reminded about the power of deception and the truth of 2 Cor, 4:4 because the same cult is back and active on the Web under a new leader and sounding so good …except for the 1% that would separate one for eternity from God..
- http://www.google.com/profiles/GaryFPatton GaryFPatton
  
  BilliusZetay, did Jesus try “to stump” anyone or did He share His “good news” by loving them?
  - BilliusZetay
    
    Hi, I’m not sure about the intent of your question. Is
    it about the choice of the word stump? Stump doesn’t carry a negative
    pejorative sense to me. If I’m stumped over
    something it means I need to think about it more or reconsider something.
    To me it means to put an end to arguing,
    particularly of a religious nature, because the person is unable to respond
    with further argument. It’s a word I chose without much forethought to be
    honest. I quickly plugged it in there.
    However, upon reflection on that particular word, I think there
    were a few situations where Jesus did indeed set out to stump the religious
    people – particularly religious people:
    
    1) John 8:1-11.
    I think Jesus was acting in the spirit of Hosea 4:14 – those passages are among my favourite –
    he shut down argument and condemnation with a few simple but weighty words .
    
    2) Matthew 22: 15-22
    was the situation where the religious people wanted to entrap Jesus in an “either
    or” dead end “damned if you do damned if
    you don’t” answer in the hopes of having him dead by civil or religious authorities.
    
    3) This was followed by Matthew 22:24-34 where he “silenced
    the Sadducees” over the question of marital status of seven dead brothers. Jesus was fairly direct in telling them they
    didn’t know the scriptures. Love allows
    for correction. Love is allowed to employ words like “no” and “don’t”. Love is allowed to challenge which is why Jesus took a whip and overturned the money changers tables. People lost money that day because the coins scattered on the floor. I think his love and his zeal were in perfect alignment and focus on that occasion and he offered no monetary compensation.
    
    4) Matthew 22:43-46 was a question he posed to the Pharisees
    which they could not answer. They had
    been grilling him. Now it was his
    turn. They were stumped and walked away
    frustrated, I expect, at not having fared any better than the Sadducees in the
    entrapment game. The two groups were fierce
    competitors.
    
    I have for a few years now advocated against argument for
    the sake of argument which is usually rooted in pride. To “win” a person to Christ through argument
    I think makes for the worst kind of disciples – usually argumentative ones
    (i.e. If your mother was an addict you
    will be born an addict – sort of an analogy but perhaps a bad one.) However, I think it would be wrong to
    conclude that one can never be lead by the Holy Spirit to pose a strategic
    question that shuts down an argument or that causes a person to give some
    serious thought to a matter. I think my
    wife was acting very much in that being lead by the Holy Spirit.
    
    God bless you with his grace.
    - http://www.google.com/profiles/GaryFPatton GaryFPatton
      
      Hi again BilliusZetay! Thank you for your collegial, complete and competent reply using Scripture.
      
      We’ll agree to disagree and not just about “stump” not being considered pejorative in the context of witnessing..
      
      The thrust of my comment, my Friend, was that one doesn’t share Jesus’ love, in my opinion, by debating with anyone and “stumping” them. I know, I did it for years with Jehovah Witnesses in Toronto.
      
      Various JW trainer pros kept coming back as long as I stayed intellectual and debated Scriptures that were designed by my mentors to “stump”. When I switched and started sharing love from the heart, the visits stopped (1 Cor. 2:14 & 2 Cor. 4:4).
      
      And also I don’t feel, my Brother, that it is valid to compare religious Pharisees, bent on stumping Jesus and keeping control of the crowds, with lost, religious people who come to our doors today to convert us.
      
      But, that’s just my opinion and we agree that both of us feel little is accomplished by debating theology!
      
      God bless you and all those you love!
Mandelaonline

I want to encourage you with my testimony. God is ever faithful. http://youtu.be/bCyWxBeoiT4
Cliveclifton01

BilliusZetay and Sam, once again I find myself agreeing with you. Arguing is not of God or Jesus or the Holy Spirit.

Arguing is verbal fighting, “I’m wiser than you”, “I know all the answers”. The bully thinks to himself, “I’m stronger and bigger than him” “I can beat him in a fight”.

Isaiah 1 v 18 “come, let us reason together.” Acts 18 v 4 Paul reasoned in the synagogue each sabbath.

Jesus did it differently, He listened to others reasoning, asked them questions and sometimes gave them an answer.

Normally just a question from Him was sufficient answer.

What great compassion He has for us, Luke 5 v 18 to 26. Matthew 16 v 5 to 12. Ch 21 v 14 to 16. Mark 11 v 27 to 33.

I have found those that challenge what we believe are not desiring an argument but a revelation. They ask, we tell, God reveals by His Spirit, we rejoice with the Angels.

Clive
- Sam
  
  Thank you, Clive. Most of us need to learn to listen, especially to what is behind the things people say. It is very easy to listen only so we can decide if the are “right” or “wrong”, then take it upon ourselves to set them straight.
John Fisher

Sam,

I seem to disagree with you and most the commenters here to a degree that I in many cases I would say that not only do I think the statements are untrue, but that the exact opposite is true. For example, when Mark McIntyre says “Arguing theology prevents me from understanding why someone holds the position they do,” My reaction is “What? That is exactly what a proper argument is best for when the ‘why?’ might otherwise be unclear.”

A point of clarification: I’ve heard people make the distinction that they like ‘debating but not arguing’, where they are making a distinction in connotation, in both cases you are trying to persuade toward a point while someone else is trying to persaude toward a contrary one, but they are saying that when they debate they are polite, reasonable and respectful to the other person but when they say that they don’t like to argue by ‘argue’ they mean doing so in hateful, hostile manner. This isn’t really what an argument is by definition though it often is used that way in everyday discussion. So I would ask, when you say that you don’t like to ‘argue’, are you trying to say that you don’t like to persuade people loudly/angrily/hatefully?

If that is what you mean I would say that many of your points are valid and that approaching people with hostility and attempting to ‘bully’ them to your point of view is fairly useless. However, you seem to not only mean that you don’t like arguing hatefully with people, but that you don’t at all like a discussion with someone wherein you are discussing two contrary views that you each hold at all and providing rational reasons that logically lead to your viewpoint, that we should never talk with anyone where this a possibility that one and only one view can actually be correct. If that is the case, I would say that much of your reasoning does not make sense, and I again, I would say that not only do I not agree but the opposite is true. For example, your first point “I think I’m right. You think you’re right” isn’t a reason not to debate, but rather is exactly why debate is important; if one viewpoint and another are mutually exclusive (either one may be true, but they can not both be true) and if which one is true matters in some way then each person holding each viewpoint should make every attempt to share and examine whether there is reason to believe that their own view is false while at the same time providing the other individual with your reasons and allowing them to provide you with insight into possible flaws in your own reasoning. In this sense, a reasonable argument (without the common connotation of hatefulness) is not only OK but is a critical method of communication and learning.
- http://www.google.com/profiles/GaryFPatton GaryFPatton
  
  Right on, John!
  
  If your points re the cruciality of argument, when Spirit-led, were not valid, why have several of us taken the time to disagree here, e.g., BilliusZetay and me.
  
  You and I also agree that the article, in some places, projected to me a borderline arrogance, as you suggest immediately below. But then, for me, not you, I’m reminded of my Mom’s ‘Sayin’: “It takes one to know one, Gary!”
  
  Blessings!
  - Sam
    
    Gary, I’m glad you picked up on one of the points I was making. Actually, points #1 through #3 and #6 were intended to portray a bit more than a borderline arrogance. This was my tongue-in-cheek way of saying I won’t argue theology lest I might become like that.
    
    I have known some of those folks. They are so sure they’re correct (they learned it in seminary, they’re the pastor or elder, their understanding is more perfect, and so on). My observation – They almost never see this in themselves. They’re just so certain they’re right, and don’t see themselves through the eyes of others.
    
    In one sense they may be “right”, but in another they’re “dead wrong”. (I think of the tombstone I once saw that was inscribed “I had the right-of-way” and below that line was inscribed “A lot of good it did him”.)
John Fisher

Sam,

Sorry for the double post, but my other comment was already getting long and I wanted to discuss another angle on this article (hopefully more briefly).

When I said I didn’t agree with what is being said here to the point that I don’t understand how one could mean some of these points, part of what I meant is that this article honestly comes across as very arrogant in a way that I would think of as uncharacteristic of you. Are some of your points meant to be illustrative, where you are trying to illustrate that you don’t like to argue because “this is how I become when I argue” or do you honestly believe points like #2, that you are correct because of your education therefore further discussion with someone who doesn’t have a proper education (evidenced by the fact that they don’t already agree with you) is useless.

I would like to presume that you don’t actually believe that your education makes you infallibly correct (to the point of ‘devastating’ anyone who doesn’t accept the ‘truths’ you know) and that you are attempting to illustrate that you unfortunately become “bull-headed” when arguing. If that is the case, then I would say as before that that isn’t just not a good reason to avoid debating, but is in fact a very good reason to debate more, to try and engage others in debates with viewpoints very contrary to your own but with the practice of examining the validity other ideas than the ones you’ve already been conditioned to accept and questioning whether the reasons for yours are really reasonable.
- Sam
  
  John, I missed this comment! I was traveling and had no computer access for almost seven days. Since it’s Jeremy’s blog, I can’t access the comments through the Dashboard, which shows all comments on my posts.
  
  Actually my points are a combination of my reasons for not liking to argue
  (#4, #5, and #7 thru #10) , and my observations of several very repulsive “Christians” I know who love to argue, think they are always right, never listen to what others say and run away most people who are checking out Jesus (#1 thru #3 & #6). I do not want to argue because I do not want to become that kind of person.
  
  I am using the word argue in the sense of something that goes beyond discussion. I’m using it in the sense of “I’m right and you’re wrong”. It may not be hateful and hostile, but one or both parties is pretty much a “know-it-all” who loves to hear themselves talk. So this is probably closer to the common usage of the word.
  
  In my experience, we persuade others most often by our lives, and how we treat them. Yes, I’m familiar with the definition of argument to which your refer, but I engage in that only rarely, and then only with people I know very well, where we both know where the other is coming from, where we both listen and where neither of us is determined to change the other.
  
  Again, in my experience, I’ve run across many religious folks who can make a very convincing argument and perhaps they’re even factually correct, but their attitude is not. They don’t love or even care about the other person and the other person knows it. But they do have a deep need to be right.
  
  I vividly remember the guy who commented “I don’t give a $#@* what he says. He may be right, but I doubt it. He cares about no one except himself and his need to be right.”
  
  Rarely do I need to “argue”, however we define the word. I try to love others. When I do they talk to me. They ask questions. We talk, discuss and I respond to what’s really on their hearts, which they tell me. It’s almost never what I might think. That works so much better than trying to correct their incorrect views, theology or whatever.
  
  Actually, I notice that people who try to get me to argue with them are using that as a mask for their pain. They’ve discovered that getting people to argue almost always keeps people at arms length (or runs them away), which confirms to the argumentative person that “no one loves me” and also confirms the person’s self-disgust/lack of love for themselves.
  
  The way I try to live is this – If I don’t love others, I have no right to speak into their lives. I try to listen to hear what’s really behind what they’re saying and learn to love them. Then, sometimes, we talk and listen.
  - http://www.google.com/profiles/GaryFPatton GaryFPatton
    
    Thank you for your response, Sam. I appreciate it.
    
    When I first read your comments, I took them as tongue in cheek and wondered if some might not.
    
    When David, who knows you, said what he did, I wondered if I had been wrong …and chimed in.
    
    Isn’t communication a wonderful and problematic thing …even when we CAN read one another’s “Body Language”.
    
    In Jesus’ love!