Debate: exploring various views
Debate can vary from rational to emotional, but the essence remains: listening to different views in order to make an informed decision.
Whenever a group meets to work through an agenda, the proven procedure is to give information, have a motion and amendments, give members a fair chance to voice their opinion about the motion and amendments, and eventually vote for or against them.
Parliament, legislatures, councils, boards, committees, and law courts all function on the principles of fair debate. Members can listen to various viewpoints, give their own opinion, and make an informed decision. If one side drowns out the other side with noise, civilized debate is thwarted, and nothing constructive is done.
It is difficult to listen to two people speaking simultaneously (as in some leaders’ debates on television). When more than two jump in, listening becomes impossible. Therefore, chairpersons allow only one person at a time to address the meeting.
Autocrats and mobs do not listen to debate – they adhere to only one opinion: their own. In a democratic society, candidates make their platforms known, they tour the country to explain their policies, answer questions from the electorate, and eventually people cast their votes. Again, there is ample opportunity to listen and to decide.
When people of different views listen to each other, they see different sides of the problem, steering them away from one-sidedness, enabling them to get a more comprehensive understanding of the issues, and devising more realistic and effective solutions.
When one is not willing to listen to other viewpoints than one’s own, at least grant others freedom of expression and of choice according to the Charter.
Although God’s wisdom and knowledge is infinitely superior to ours (Is. 55:8-9), he is willing to listen to us. He urges people to pray: “Call upon me in the day of trouble; I will deliver you, and you will honor me” (Ps. 50:15).
On two occasions, God wanted to wipe Israel out for their rebellion, but relented when Moses interceded for them (Ex. 32, Num. 14). Even in his anger, God was willing to listen to a human being.
Esau wanted to kill Jacob for his cheating. However, when they met 20 years later, they began to communicate, and decided to forgive (Gen. 33).
When God called Moses and Gideon for special tasks, they were unwilling and presented various excuses. God listened to them, reasoned with them, and eventually convinced them (Ex. 3, Judges 6). Through the prophet Isaiah, God invited Israel, “Come now, and let us reason together” (Is. 1:18).
Jesus did not turn his back on his adversaries, but engaged in two-way debates with them (Matt. 9, 12, 16, 22, John 3, 6, 8, 9).
Jacob Van Zyl of Lethbridge is a retired counsellor and the author of several faith-based books.