A few weeks ago, I made a comment that we should read one book every year which we know we would disagree with. I was quoting one my professors from the evangelical seminary I was attending. He was a prominent New Testament scholar, a devout believer and a good teacher. He was also an Arminian, meaning that he did not agree with the Calvinist teachings embodied in Reformed theology. At one point in the class, he spent a few moments telling us why he held to the teachings of Arminius, explaining Calvin’s theology at the same time. It was at that moment that I became an avowed Calvinist. I am sure that he would be a little appalled if he knew that it was he who pushed me solidly into the Reformed tradition.

It was because of this experience that I came to believe firmly that we should read one book every year with which we know we will differ. To put it more broadly, we should be willing to listen to someone who differs from us and listen to them with respect and care. One of three things will happen: first, we might find ourselves disagreeing with them and become more crystalized in the view we already hold. Second, we might find ourselves agreeing with them and we might even be willing to change our position. Or third, we might find ourselves asking more questions that will require further reading and study. This third possibility is really what we are hoping for, for when we ask questions and seek answers, we will grow in our knowledge.

Unfortunately, in today’s environment, it is inconceivable to many that we take a moment to listen to someone with whom we differ. Instead, it is a common practice to vilify those with whom we disagree, counting them among our enemies. This is very evident in the contemporary political sphere where we tend to view those who are not of our political leanings as being inept at best and evil at worst. Perhaps it has always been this way, and it may be that I am more aware of it now than before, but I find it disturbing. It might be far better to view those with whom we differ politically, for example, as having the same goals (the wellbeing of our nation), but different ways of getting there. I may disagree with the methods of someone who is not aligned with me politically, but I should very slow to question their motivation, unless, of course, they have stated quite clearly that they are doing what they are doing for their own benefit of the benefit of their friends. If I trust that we have similar goals, there is room for listening and discussing.

This was certainly true of my Arminian professor. He wrote a seminal book on hermeneutics (how to interpret and apply the Bible), and his one desire as a scholar and professor that the church be better equipped to follow Jesus as given to us in Scripture. He loved the Lord, and he loved the Lord’s church. As a result, I felt privileged to have him as professor. I could well have said, “He’s an Arminian and I don’t hold to his view, so I’m not going to take a class from him,” but then I would not have been blessed by what he could teach me about the Greek language. (I took a course in Greek from him.) I have to say, as well, that while my appreciation of Reformed theology was strengthened because I disagreed with him, I also found myself to be willing to think more deeply about how we are saved and what my role is in that salvation process.

It is true that over the centuries various parts of the Christian church have not been very gracious toward others who differ from them. In fact, even today, I hear, quite regularly, parts of the Christian church being treated as if they are the enemy. But we must be careful, for we might well be making those who God has also called into his enemies as well. That is not appropriate.

Let me illustrate with an example of how we must look beyond where we differ to the underlying motivation that we have in common. I was reading an article about the icons of Jesus (pictures and statues). I completely disagree with having them placed in the church for veneration, and I do not think they have any place in our worship. Nevertheless, this article helped me understand the motivation that is behind the creation and display of such images. These images, the author wrote, teach us to be respectful. We do not approach an image causally but, rather, we approach them with a sense of awe, not because the image is worthy of our veneration but because the one that the image represents is.” The article went on to say that these images (icons) provide us with an opportunity to practice our respect and awe for God. Again, I disagree that the church should display such images, but, at the same time, I understand some of the motivation for their display. We should be completely respectful of Jesus, approaching him with a deep sense of awe and wonder. I agree with that sentiment, and, as the author lamented, this sentiment is being lost to the Christian church, for we often do not show the awe that we should when we come before the Lord. We are quite casual, in fact, in our attitudes, and that shows disrespect to Jesus. I don’t think images of Jesus will solve the problem, and I don’t think that the Bible even allows for them as part of our worship. That being said, we also much be careful to act like Jesus is just one of us and even treat him as we would a casual friend. He remains our Lord and our God, and we must respond appropriately.

The point is this: while we may disagree with the methods of others who differ from us, we should be careful to understand their motivation. Why do people do what they do? We must never, ever assign an evil motivation to someone who is seeking the very same thing we want. In fact, we should listen carefully to them so that we can understand what motivates them to do what they are doing. Once we understand their motivation, we have a foundation for future discussions in the area of method. For example, if I understand that someone uses a statue of Jesus because they want to teach themselves to be in awe of him, I would say that the far better option would be to study the gospels and see Jesus in them. The gospels give us a much more awe-inspiring view of Jesus than does a statue.

We should listen to those with whom we disagree. Yes, we might find that they are right, and although change is hard, it can make us better people. Or we might find that we become more certain of what we already believe. Or, most likely, we will find ourselves engaging in deeper study and reflection. But whatever the case, we must not assign evil motives to those with whom we disagree, or we will lose our opportunity to become better and more informed people.