(8:40 AM) | Adam Kotsko:

Adam Kotsko: Enemy of Truth

During a heated theological discussion on Olivet's dialog listserv, my conversation partner grew frustrated and said:

I despair especially of having any discourse with you. As far as I understand your views, I cannot refer to them as Christian.

Today, during a heated discussion of the interpretation of Genesis, my conversation partner said:

Seems like your are trying to make a point ignoring the whole Bible.... Why would you restrict what was given to help us understand truth? Unless, of course, you have a different agenda.

I'll admit that the second one is more artful in that it doesn't come right out and say that I don't qualify as a Christian. Still, the personal attack is there.

I wonder: is this just par for the course in the Christian tradition? Even granting that disproving the classical heresies was a really important thing, the advocates of orthodoxy were mainly assholes (for instance, Athanasius calls Arius a forerunner of the Antichrist and refers to the doctrine Arius has "vomited forth"). Is the personal attack simply part of what it means to debate as a Christian?

Another question: If calling myself a Christian means associating myself with jackasses who won't accept that I even am a Christian, is it worth the trouble?

| permalink | Main Page