Jaycee Ann ✞’s Reviews > Tactics: A Game Plan for Discussing Your Christian Convictions > Status Update

mmmm well I mildly disagree with that but oh well lol

Noelle,
wdym?

mildly disagree with the idea that argument in a church is good. and that if disagreements aren't debated then we would be in forced and fake unity, because that's certainly not true. debating to an extent I suppose can be good but without it, our unity certainly wouldn't be fake even if we had different viewpoints

Our pastor actually just preached a sermon on this recently *realizes that it was like several months ago* well semi-recently so I can tell you the gist of that if you want

Noelle,
I didn’t explain the point in the book fully because of character limits for updates. Basically the point the author was making was that heated, unnecessary, and/or emotion fueled arguments aren’t good, but logical, rational, and tame arguments are. The Bible states many times to reprove those who have false beliefs (2 Timothy 4:1-2, Titus 1:9-11 etc). The author of this book states “Instead, true maturity means learning how to disagree in an aggressive fashion yet still maintain a peaceful harmony in the church.” The point of argument in the church shouldn’t be to simply quarrel or fight for foolish reasons, but to get to the root of the issue or disagreement, and to find the truth. If the church discourages friendly debate, then the result will likely be a false sense of unity, because everyone will be living under the guise of assumptions and false beliefs.

Many seem to consider simple disagreements as arguments that should not have happened, simply because they let their emotions take a hold of them. In a virtuous argument, such as we are engaging in right now, the goal would not be to diminish or discredit the other person, but to discover exactly what they mean and believe, and find the truth hidden beneath the words. Arguments of this fashion are healthy and necessary not only for clear communication in relationships but also for clear standards in the church.

Okay I think I see what you mean now, it was worded a little strangely in your update, I still don't believe it is forced or fake unity if disagreements aren't discussed. The church can have differences of opinions in the community as long as they all believe that Jesus is Lord and can put aside said disagreements and worship the Lord. Yes, in the Bible it says God's word can be used for reproof and correction (2 timothy 3:16) so I see what you mean now, the use of the Bible for reproof is good, as long as worship of the Lord is the most important, not working out smaller disagreements, iykwim. And as long as none of the arguments/debates are on things that the Bible doesn't expressly forbid or command. And we can't let our disagreements make us look over what brings us together in the first place. And as long as everyone has the right idea of who God is, and follows Him, we will live in harmony, it won't be fake or forced even if people go astray in certain points (Romans 15:5-7)

anyways yeah I probably sound like a hypocrite, debating against debating, but I wasn't trying to completely disagree or even change your opinion lol just telling you what I thought lolll

Maybe "argument" is the word that was tripping me up. Argument and debate is different from correction obviously, so that's probably what I disagreed with along with the thing about fake and forced unity

Noelle,
Yes I wasn’t exactly referencing small disagreements in the church as the root of debate, but the fundamental differences and disagreements in doctrine. Such as the wrongness of lgbtq. If it were to never be discussed or debated then everyone would be living under a unity that was strained, because they disagreed and didn’t do anything about it.

Noelle,
well the definition of argument is “an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one” and so I was also referring to argument not just correction, and also note the definition states that it is typically heated or angry, but an argument need not be.

Jaycee Ann ✞ wrote: "Noelle,
Yes I wasn’t exactly referencing small disagreements in the church as the root of debate, but the fundamental differences and disagreements in doctrine. Such as the wrongness of lgbtq. If i..."

Yeah I know what you meant, but even then, the discussing of different beliefs is wrong if it can't be put aside to worship the Lord. If someone genuinely believes in Christ and follows Him, but thinks that LGBTQ is right still, they are still my brother/sister and we can still live in unity even though they are in sin. And no sin is greater than another, lying isn't less wrong than murder, being part of the LGBTQ community isn't worse than gossip, adultery isn't worse than stealing or vice versa. Right now I'm just pushing back on your label of the wrongness of LGBTQ being a "fundamental difference and disagreement in doctrine." Pointing out sin is a good thing, but when we let it hold us back from worshipping the Lord together as a church family is when it crosses a line. That's what the devil wants, for us to get caught up in the specifics so that we aren't following Christ in unity

Jaycee Ann ✞ wrote: "Noelle,
well the definition of argument is “an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one” and so I was also referring to argument not just correction, and also note t..."

Yes, but it is typically regarded as heated or angry, and I wasn't saying that was incorrect persay, just not the word choice I would have chosen, because it carries the wrong connotation

Also again, we can agree to disagree lol I'm not trying to change your opinion, just trying to explain why I think this

Noelle,
I’m not trying to say it should stop us from worshipping God and such but it also shouldn’t go unaddressed. Beliefs about lgbtq IS a fundamental part of sound doctrine, just as the other things you listed are, I just used it as an example because of its profound impact on the modern day church and its role in the world. Just as if someone thought that gossip or adulatory is okay, I’m saying it should be addressed and not ignored. I’d also like to point out that Matthew 18:15-17 instructs us on how to go about addressing said issues. It goes as far as to say that if a sinner refuses to listen to a friend, a gathering of several witnesses, and the church as a whole, then he should be treated as if a gentile. We are called to point out of the sins of our brothers and sisters in Christ, and if they realize what they’ve done wrong then the church can go back to its unity. If they refuse to listen and go on with their sin of false belief then there’s nothing more you can do, and while you don’t have to cut ties with them completely or anything, it’s still very very crucial to “debate” or “argue” with this person so they see where they have gone wrong. As you said, all sin is equal, and so it would not do to have someone who believes murder to be acceptable, among those in the church, now would it? In this situation you must direct them to the scripture and point out how what they believe is wrong. 1 Corinthians 1:10 states “I appeal to you, brothers,
by the name of our Lord Jesus
Christ, that all of you agree,
and that there be no divisions
among you, but that you be
united in the same mind and
the same judgment.” this is very clearly stating that the church must have the same fundamental judgements and morals to be united. Luke 11:17 says that a divided kingdom or house will fall. When it comes to more secondary beliefs (for example, infant baptism) then yes, we should of course not let those disagreements get in the way of our unity as a church family, but when fundamental differences arise, they must be addressed, eradicated, or separated from the church because they are not what Christ represents.

Jaycee Ann ✞ wrote: "Noelle,
I’m not trying to say it should stop us from worshipping God and such but it also shouldn’t go unaddressed. Beliefs about lgbtq IS a fundamental part of sound doctrine, just as the other th..."

Okay I worded that weird, LGBTQ being wrong is an important part of sound doctrine, but not more important than other sins.

And I also think there isn't a very clear line between what a fundamental difference is and secondary beliefs, and who's to be the judge of that? certainly not us. The Bible says (as you well know) that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead that you will be saved. And so while we obviously don't want someone in the church who believes murder is acceptable, how is that any different from someone who thinks lying is acceptable? (I know you weren't saying they were, just an example) because both would spread incorrect truths and false teaching. But we also aren't perfect either. We may be sinning as well without knowing, in which case, yes, we want someone to point out our sins, but I still think you are incorrect in using the terms "debate" or "argue" because we aren't trying to debate, just correct something someone was doing, maybe discuss would be a better term. anyways I'm going on a tangent, it' just the minor word choice that bothered me.

and I think we believe basically the same thing (apart for some minor discrepancies) I'm simply trying to point out that it shouldn't take priority over what brings us together in the first place, our following of God, which no I don't think that's what you were saying, now that I do understand what you're saying, I just feel you could've worded it better because it sounded like you meant something other than what I see you mean now