Online Debating
Today Tom of Disputations debates the value or lack thereof, of online debating:
If, however, one party's primary interest is not to uncover the truth -- showing off, scoring points, annoying others, and feeling like a proud witness of Christ are some other interests that might take precedence -- the debate will be a failure, both for the people directly involved who were seeking the truth and for all those observing the debate.
Very true, although, as is often the case, the parties who most need this advice are the least likely to take it, or to even think it applies to them.
Theoretically, folks who annoy could serve as agents of Christian charity, in that we have to love them anyway and how much merit is there in loving a Mother Teresa compared to an abusive commenter? Of course, the annoying person could just as easily become an obstacle by fostering anger and negativity.
Regardless, when I read a commenter like the one I recently saw on Disputations, one whose mean-spiritedness comes through loud & clear, I tend to have an equal and opposite reaction in the opposite direction to his thesis regardless of what truth he might possess. This isn't good, given that truth should not be judged on the worthiness of the messenger, but I see more clearly how powerful the witness of the messenger is.
No comments:
Post a Comment