Thread by @TheAlanNoble

A word for myself and maybe you: “A soft answer turns away wrath,
but a harsh word stirs up anger.”

When someone pushes against their community’s norms, typically I see two possible responses:

1. They are warmly, gently, and *patiently* engaged with, including an honest assessment of their criticism of the norm. When this is done, the person usually remains in the community and they and/or the community (and it’s norms) mature and adapt.

2. They are viewed as a threat to the community and their boundary-crossing is strongly and publicly condemned without honest consideration of the criticism. When this is done, the person is alienated from their community and incentivized to push further.

And the further boundary pushing results in confirmation bias for the community (“See! We told you they were trouble makers!”). And another round of even stronger condemnation. At which point usually an outside community embraces the person and confirms their bias about the group

All of which to say, to myself and others, what we desire often shapes how people respond. If you genuinely desire someone to see their error and repent, you will act in the former way. If you desire to be seen condemning error publicly, you will follow the latter.

But such things have eternal consequence. So we must earnestly and genuinely desire the good of those we disagree with, hoping in faith that they will come to wisdom. I am terrible at this.