Out of the same mouth come praise and cursing. My brothers and sisters, this should not be. - James 3:10
In our previous post we examined the importance of words and how they are used directly in spiritual warfare. We saw how scripture - and the mystery of Christ as the Word - is the sword we wield: the Truth of God.
Today we begin to practically apply upright speech by learning about discourse. Two points I want to make before we proceed:
1 - I realize this is a presentation of formal rhetoric; it would not be natural or cordial to approach casual “how are you” chit-chats like this (though as we all know, sometimes the most benign conversation can turn awkwardly into a debate like a sea storm seemingly rising out of nowhere). Obviously, every convo should not turn into linguistic dispute. However, as touched on in a number of previous posts, we live in a world so bogged down with fake news, faulty logic, and diabolical deception, that we do need to be vigilant in any conversation.
2 - I’m also not saying we need to throw Bible verses around at people in every conversation - similarly not natural or courteous. This is not just about quoting scripture, but rather the comprehension of what is being said and how to rhetorically convey our own views with accuracy (See previous posts introducing the Trivium). While I am arguing that critical thinking is part of “spiritual warfare,” misunderstanding and cognitive dissonance does not have to be overtly “satanic." In my whimsical quiz on finding your spiritual style, I poked fun at the tendency to see the devil under every rock. All we’re doing on a basic level is getting ourselves used to spotting contradictions and inconsistencies. To put it another way, there’s Disinfo and Misinfo - one is nefarious, the other is just plain unawareness.
THE “HIERARCHY OF ARGUMENT”
Fools find no pleasure in understanding but delight in airing their own opinions. - Proverbs 18:2
How, then, should one speak? It may seem obvious to just “tell the truth,” but that’s sort of a naive live-in-a-vacuum existence in which we are not taking in and "re-tweeting" information that has a tendency to end up like the game of telephone. We need to be both discerning of other’s words, and fair in return. I came across a handy chart that outlines discourse in a systematic way. I add a scripture verse to each level, since we made evident in the last post just how important the Word of the Lord is in this work (and also, cuz #biblenerd). As we work our way up the chart, you can see how clarity and precision are achieved.
NAME CALLING
At the bottom of the chart, the most base-level discourse is displayed - one which shuts down conversation entirely, is intentionally nasty to the speaker, and is utterly unedifying. No knowledge is gained, and it is the kind of word-sword that causes pain. (I hope the crude language on that level does not offend you…but to me it sounds like an insult that would be uttered by Shakespeare on the middle school bus, which, let’s admit, has some charm.) This is also known as a logical fallacy called the “appeal to ridicule.”
Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. - 1 Peter 3:9
AD HOMINEM
The next level up - the ad hominem (Latin for “at/against the man”) will be addressed in subsequent posts on logical fallacies. But you get the gist of it here: rather than commenting on the message, you shoot the messenger - this time not just because he’s an “ass-hat,” but because you don’t like or understand what he says and are too mentally lazy to address it. It's a cheap shot as a way to duck out of an argument you are not able to face. I venture to guess that 80% of political debates consist of this tactic.
“Let no corrupting talk come out of your mouths, but only such as is good for building up, as fits the occasion, that it may give grace to those who hear.” - Ephesians 4:29
RESPONDING TO TONE
This one trips me up because I loathe arrogant, haughty, patronizing tones in people’s voices and writing. It may be a serious chink in my armor that I must resist, lest I respond re-actively instead of proactively. Make sure the tone isn’t making us deaf to what they are saying; they could be saying something accurate but in an ungraceful way, or they could be saying something faulty but we’re unable to respond clearly because of defensive pride.
The soothing tongue is a tree of life, but a perverse tongue crushes the spirit. - Proverbs 15:4
CONTRADICTION
Ever heard of “Black-pilling?” It’s finding the honest fault in something but not articulating what we can do about it, leaving the conversation at a dead end that is oftentimes demoralizing. At this level we’ve noticed what’s off about their statement and we counterattack, but we don’t have anything in opposition to offer. Pointing out the problem without a solution is not constructive. If we don’t have the answer, we could say something like, “That doesn’t sound right to me but I’m not sure why - let me think about it and get back to you.” Or if you’re able to, hold your tongue and formulate your counterpoint and return to the conversation later with information. It only adds to the problem if you offer up half-baked information yourself just to save face.
Even fools are thought wise if they keep silent, and discerning if they hold their tongues. - Proverbs 17:28
COUNTER ARGUMENT
This would be when er've either researched and returned to the conversation to make our point, or we’re able to do so on the spot. This is good, but the reason this still isn’t at the top of the discourse pyramid is because many times this scenario is a side-argument that takes place in the ditch next to the main point the opponent is trying to make. we’ve caught an inconsistency, but it may be just a “Strawman” - another logical fallacy we will discuss later, which is refuting - albeit nobly - a tangential point within the discourse, but does not address the heart of the matter.
If I speak in the tongues of men or of angels, but do not have love, I am only a resounding gong or a clanging cymbal. - 1 Corinthians 13:1
REFUTATION
Now we’ve arrived at a point where we can not just notice and point out where a claim misses the mark, but we can back up our position with facts, quotes, and references. This leaves not much room for counter-attack and lends credibility to what we are saying - not just because we have sources, but because it shows we’ve thought long and hard about this; it’s not just our emotional reaction or or personal subjective opinion, but one over which we sought wisdom and have done our due diligence. Again, we might not have all the references we want at hand, but in any respectable dialog, our opponent will be open and eager to wait for us to return at another time with data points of proof.
You, however, must teach what is appropriate to sound doctrine. - Titus 2:1
REFUTING THE CENTRAL POINT
The capstone of discourse is being able to pull out the weed by its root. There are many logical fallacies - ad hominem, strawman, red herring, etc - which detract from the central point; if allowed to stand, they will haunt the conversation and contort everyone in a game of linguistic Twister. In a formal debate, this could be your downfall, for their point remains planted victoriously despite all noble pruning attempts. In the art of discourse, make sure you do not allow the conversation to go off on any rabbit trails. The temptation comes when you have a very strong and rehearsed counterpoint to the side-story, which would make you look oh-so-wise to refute, but you must ignore it and remain focused. Trickier yet: the main point they are making aloud might not even BE the root of the issue, which might be intentionally disguised, or they might not even know the true essence of their stance. This is where illumination can occur - the mic drop moment. Burrow down - listen - get to the heart of their message: it may surprise everyone, including the opponent. If you can expose it and present a well-stated, substantially supported refutation: Boom.
What you have said in the dark will be heard in the daylight, and what you have whispered in the ear in the inner rooms will be proclaimed from the roofs. - Luke 12:3
Of course we know that this isn’t about “winning” a debate - coming out on top as some sort of Grammar Superhero. This is about pointing out the Truth, which ultimately points to God, but at the very least, dispels darkness, even in the quaintest corners of the universe. The war over the collective human mind still rages, but one small front has been advanced. And remember to give all glory to God, the creator of our minds and tongues.
And whatever you do, whether in word or deed, do it all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father through him - Colossians 3:17