In an interesting serendipity, PyroMarketing author Greg Stielstra stopped by to comment on my concerns about the methods he advocates. While I didn’t expect to find us in agreement, the resulting email conversation could only be described as disappointing. Without express permission to quote from private correspondence, I don’t feel comfortable paraphrasing the dialogue; it would only be my perspective on it, leaving you readers with no chance to evaluate the conversation, and particularly Greg’s side of it, on its own merits.
In a past life, ideas were more important to me than people. Ideas could be used as weapons when I felt people failed me, or even just when they became annoying. The focus of my life has changed in the years since trusting Christ. Surrounded by primarily non-Christian loved ones, increasingly becoming aware that life is finite–short, even–people have become more important than ideas. This doesn’t make ideas unimportant; it’s simply a re-ordering of my personal priorities.
Part of that human value is the right to think what one chooses to think. People are fascinating creatures, and their ideas are formed in fascinating ways. People are precious and beautiful and worthwhile. They are the only thing you can take with you to heaven, and that’s what takes top priority for me.
People’s prior assumptions are built through life experience, exposure to the thoughts of others, and exposure to the thoughts of God. Whether consciously or subconsciously, people place differing weights of importance on each of these factors. Those inward priorities colour the fabric of our information filtering system. They create a pre-existing context for handling the random information that constantly flies at us in daily life.
God offers us His word as a pre-existing information filter, designed to give us holy and heavenly perspective.
“All Scripture is inspired by God and profitable for teaching, for reproof, for correction, for training in righteousness; that the man of God may be adequate, equipped for every good work.” (2 Tim. 3:16-17)
“For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh, for the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. We are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God, and we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ...” (2 Cor. 10:3-5)
“For the word of God is living and active and sharper than any two-edged sword, and piercing as far as the division of soul and spirit, of both joints and marrow, and able to judge the thoughts and intentions of the heart.” (Hebrews 4:12)
“And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what the will of God is, that which is good and acceptable and perfect.” (Romans 12:2)
However, on a daily basis, I communicate with people who don’t necessarily share that view of Scripture’s pre-eminence as an organic framework of logic and life-interpretation–nor its authority to make those interpretations. They bring their own assumptions to the reading of those passages. As a result, their sense of logic is going to be different than mine; their beliefs are going to be different, their sources of authority will differ, and so will their attitudes and actions. In essence, their pragmatic faith and their ideology are going to be different than mine.
But in discussion, it’s not a “better or worse” battle at that pre-values, filter-formation level. It’s a learning opportunity, a chance to refine and correct my own preconceptions. Or it should be.
Differences shouldn’t be grounds for interpersonal combat. “For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the powers, against the world forces of this darkness, against the spiritual forces of wickedness in the heavenly places.” (Eph. 6:12)
Differences should be grounds for real communication–not just batting ideas back and forth like weapons, but taking interest in how other people’s ideas have come into existence. That’s always valid. The fastest way to be an ineffective communicator is to try to force someone to use another person’s preconceptions and wording to explain themselves. It’s a way of saying, “I’m going to enforce my interpretations on your words, regardless of your intended context.”
Unfortunately, I found myself feeling that I was being forced upon, very quickly. Disappointing.
But that’s just one side of a situation.
