For those who have ever debated with protestants, and wasted
hours running around putting out all the little fires set, and then came to the
final closing of the debate (most likely very heatedly), the next topic will be very familiar. Whether it comes on specific points during a
discussion or as the closing statement, there is sure to be a point where the
whole, “Let's just agree to disagree” mentality will come out. Many times it will be explicitly stated, but
not always. Sometimes the whole attitude
of that thinking is just left floating about.
Essentially, what this says is that were both human and it's
not important that we don't have agreements on doctrine as long as we both love
God. In fact, even though we might
disagree on the Trinity, on grace, and salvation, on faith, on baptism, and any
other topic you want to pick, it's not important because “We both love
God.”
This retreat
to try to avoid argument tends to come from being afraid because maybe a topic
has become too heated or maybe a glaring error has been exposed. A Christian might somehow assume that arguing
is ungodly (but there truly is a time and place for it) and therefore we can
all just agree to disagree as long as we love God. There is a thread of truth to the idea, but
it depends on if the person truly does love the one True God – which is hard to
know given that they disagree on aspects of His nature, His work, and His role. The Bible often mentions the idea of
“worshiping . . . in truth.” However, if
there isn't agreement on any of the fundamentals, it seems it is a dangerous
thing to really leave a person with, “As long as they love God.” If they don’t believe in the Trinity, is it
still the same God? If they don't
believe that once saved, always saved, is it still the same God as you
believe? If they believe Jesus was a
good prophet, philosopher, and teacher but that his death did nothing for us,
is it still the same God? If they
believe that faith saves with works of righteousness, is it the same God? (Now, I'm not saying I accept all
those views above, because in fact I reject some of the views from that list,
but I want to show how agreeing to disagree is just plain stupid.)
Agreeing to disagree makes a person back off from
truth as if it is solely relative and not objective. If anybody is free to disagree with your view because it is only relative then your view is irrelevant. So by accepting the terms of agreeing to
disagree, the person is actually putting their own view as irrelevant. Relative views are only relevant to the
individual and therefore do not apply to everybody else. Therefore, if my view of God is relative,
then it isn't important if we disagree because my view only is applicable to me
as an individual.
Now somebody might say, “That's not what I mean by agree to
disagree. I simply mean we can still be
friends and live in harmony without agreeing on this topic.” Unfortunately, when dealing with theological
positions the opposition is to something with eternal ramifications. This
raises another question to the believer, “Shouldn't the person out of love for
others at least debate vigorously to defend their view rather than surrendering?” Two views that are opposed on critical issues
cannot simply live in harmony.
The point not being that opposing
views cannot allow people to live in harmony, but that CERTAIN views naturally prevent it.
Look at same-sex marriage, it is something where those opposed and those
in support cannot simply agree to disagree because the
views are mutually exclusive. In cases
like this, there cannot be peace while the opposing views exist. Therefore, one must fight for their cause
until it is lost.
Another aspect of this agreeing to disagree is that often
times it is even within the same church body.
So it is alright for a church to be divided on every aspect of
Christianity, as long as they love God even if that God is viewed in two
completely different and even contradictory ways?
The biggest problem with this view however, is that it forces
people into an acceptance position.
Rather than take a hard stance against certain views, it seems to
retreat. Christians are scared of taking
an absolute position on any matter. Even
more so, they're worried about imposing their views on others as if that is
some sort of sin. Now I myself am
against stupid picket signs and people on the side of the road shouting at
others, but I'm not against a Christian taking a stand. It isn't if same-sex marriage is a political
issue and not a religious issue. The
very nature of it makes it more religious than not, but Christians have backed
off from the attack, taking positions about just letting them be because we
aren't in a position to judge.
This whole mentality of cowardice comes from a continual embracing
of the great humility impersonator, “Let's just agree to disagree.” Christians out of fear of coming across as judgmental
have retreated to the full acceptance of all.
Years of continually retreating from strong opinions have left Christianity
in a state of impotence on the verge of irrelevance. Atheists and liberals celebrate this retreat
from hard positions because it strengthens their hard views which they will not
back down from while Christianity runs and hides.
It's time for Christianity to stand up for objective
truth. Reject the relativist
mentality. Quit trying to leave politics
alone. Christianity isn't meant for just
an individual, but for a whole world. We
cannot simply agree to disagree.
