2026 Christmas Gift Guide
‘The Sing! Hymnal’ Suite
How Christians Can Overcome Polarization and Engage in Culture with Civility
Let Us Reason Together
Everyone has suggestions for moving forward through the sludge of cultural animus. I won’t claim that my suggestion is the best way or the only way; rather, it is a component of what I think we need as a civilization—a serious commitment to an open and honest airing of viewpoints that do not fit neatly into our culture-destroying social media and cable-news boxes. Allow me to specify.
There is a relationship between the reality of division, the need for reason, and the possibility of reconciliation. In a well-known passage of Scripture, the prophet Isaiah declares:
Come now, let us reason together, says the Lord:
though your sins are like scarlet,
they shall be as white as snow;
though they are red like crimson,
they shall become like wool.
If you are willing and obedient,
you shall eat the good of the land;
but if you refuse and rebel,
you shall be eaten by the sword;
for the mouth of the Lord has spoken. (Isa. 1:18–20)
Understandably, going to these verses to explain what is at the heart of America’s continued polarization may seem odd. Stay with me.
Notice what Isaiah says: “Let us reason together, says the Lord.” God calls us to reason together, which is another way of saying: “Let us talk this through. Let us understand what the nature of things truly is.” Scripture is essentially saying something miraculous: “Though you, sinful humanity, are far from me, I’m going to bring you back to me.” God wants to make clear the dire separation. He is basically saying, “If we’re going to get back together, let’s understand how far the divide is.” He’s brutally honest with Israel.
Prodigal Culture
Andrew T. Walker
Examining 10 personal, social, and existential crises affecting men and women today, Andrew T. Walker explains why the Christian moral tradition is the remedy to social decline.
There’s a parallel lesson for us: To reason about disagreements means to explain our beliefs in a self-controlled manner. In other words, we do not let our emotions take precedence over our intellect. Do you notice how rare this control of our emotions is? The conditions of our culture make it practically impossible. One is expected to either “own the libs” or “own the cons,” not “understand the libs” or “understand the cons.” We’re a post-rational society in an age of therapeutic feelings, where emotion functions as today’s version of “might makes right.”
The language of the gospel is both candid and comforting in addressing polarization. No greater polarization exists than the strife between God and us apart from Christ. It’s not only that God considers us cut off from him; Scripture describes the state of fallen humanity as “alienated and hostile in mind, doing evil deeds” (Col. 1:21). But the gospel is the most excellent demonstration of overcoming polarization in that “he has now reconciled [us] in his body of flesh by his death, in order to present [us] holy and blameless and above reproach before him” (Col. 1:22). How is polarization overcome? Not by us, who live in the flesh, but by a God who is the grand initiator, who “shows his love for us in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us” (Rom. 5:8). Overcoming polarization, from an earthly perspective, is a frame of mind that each of us will need to commit to in advance. Yet the sinful world, in all its grand aspirations for kindness and civility, will be unable to pull it off apart from a divine work.
So, as a culture, we must learn to reason. But to reason deeply means having an honest airing of differences and an honest willingness to hear the other’s side make its argument before we make our own. We must listen and empathize (in the true sense), even if we disagree. We need to subject ourselves to interrogation. Socrates once said, “The unexamined life is not worth living.”1 That’s another way of saying our society’s unreasoned, impulse-driven nature prohibits deep thought from testing our assumptions and convictions.
What does this mean practically? Let me suggest a few questions to ask yourself:
- Can I express my honest opinion with self-control?
- Am I willing to expose myself to viewpoints that would test my own?
- Do I feel free to express my honest opinion?
If you answered no to any of these, I humbly suggest that you help till the soil for a more peaceable society—one where we don’t equate difference with hate. We must mature as a civilization and stop erecting emotional roadblocks simply because someone disagrees with us. Think. Reason. Get honest.
It’s no mere coincidence that Isaiah’s words from God, quoted above, juxtapose reason and reconciliation. Understanding the true nature of the divide—through reason—is the precursor to finding peaceful coexistence. Nowhere is the American experiment premised on a comprehensive agreement. Some argue that America’s constitutional structure was designed to prevent political majorities from wielding raw numerical power over others and to guard against the extremes of disagreement. We have constitutional means, but, more than the Constitution, we have the spiritual resources to have reasoned discussions. So, what’s stopping us?
What Civility Is Not
If we hope to overcome our polarization and pursue civility, we must know what civility is not. Civility is not any of the following:
-
Downplaying the truth. If we are not honest about what we believe, all we are doing is papering over our true beliefs.
-
Downplaying the divide. Polarization requires that we state the honest nature of irreconcilable views. While we can be polite, we need not be superficial in our attempts to mitigate divisions, as though they were less severe than they are. Sometimes there are truly irreconcilable visions for how society should be governed.
-
Avoiding difficult truths. Civility does not mean steering clear of tension or disagreement.
-
Silencing dissent. When we confidently hold our convictions, we can freely let others express opposing views. We don’t need to silence dissent.
-
Performative politeness. Simply being “nice” while inwardly dismissing your interlocutor fails to respect him or her as a human being.
-
False equivalency. While no group or movement is perfect, acknowledging imperfections on both sides of an issue doesn’t imply that the two sides are equally valid or invalid. Often one side is closer to the truth, and we must earnestly argue for that truth.
-
Self-censoring. Many individuals self-censor out of fear of appearing uncivil. Incivility occurs when insults replace reasoning and emotions run out of control.
-
Conflating disagreement with disrespect. In a hypersensitive age like ours, disagreement is often equated with disrespect, even hatred, for the other person. But disagreement is not necessarily personal hostility, especially if great strides are taken to be charitable and kind.
What Civility Is
Much of what comes under the rubric of “civility” does not advance our way out of deep conflict. If the section above exposed imitators of civility, we must build a positive case for true civility and genuine depolarization.
Identifying the True Nature of the Debate
When disagreements occur, people often talk past each other, resorting to preprogrammed talking points to deflect arguments. In the pitched conflicts over gender and sexuality in our society, for example, the debate gets cast as cruelty versus compassion. Progressives believe they are defending LGBT-identified persons from the cruelty of Christian teaching. But what is the real subterranean debate? The debate is a conflict over rival accounts of human nature.
Practicing the Golden Rule
Civility requires a commitment to decency and justice. Jesus’s maxim “So whatever you wish that others would do to you, do also to them, for this is the Law and the Prophets” (Matt. 7:12) is as simple as it is brilliant. In heated disagreement, I should treat my debating partner with the level of respect and decorum that I would want for myself.
Making Actual Arguments
Emotivism is the lingua franca of our age. Because our culture primes us for emotion-based reasoning, we short-circuit the more challenging task of making arguments. We adopt careless statements like “Love Wins” or “It is Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve” to simplify complex debates. Arguments require logic, data, intellectual consistency, and evidence to be successful.
Civility requires a commitment to decency and justice.
Admitting Error
No one is prone to admit mistakes, but it is necessary for personal integrity and honest debate. Perhaps you’ve made a factual mistake, or you’ve let your emotions get the best of you. Humility is a tremendous resource for repairing our social fabric.
Accepting the Reality of Difference
We also need to come to terms with the fact that in a world like ours, where there are tremendous differences in how people perceive the world, sometimes no amount of argument can move someone to abandon a flawed perspective. I’m not celebrating this; I’m simply accepting that in an age where we are free to speak our minds and hold opposite positions, no matter the merits of our arguments, there may be continued disagreement. We all might wish that the only outcome of debate is that people lay down their arguments in the face of better arguments, but that is not how people are. They hold their convictions not just for intellectual reasons but also for emotional connections. Accepting the reality of prolonged and deep disagreement does not mean we refrain from making arguments; it means we acknowledge the limitations of how far arguing and debating can take us.
Learning to Disagree Agreeably
Depolarization requires a commitment to uphold virtues like patience and restraint. Before entering an intense debate, it’s important to do some self-examining and ask, “Can I handle disagreement?” It’s also important to consider whether my conversation partner is willing to entertain a competing perspective. Questions like these are crucial in determining whether it is worthwhile to engage in debate. There are conversations I do not have because I know the person in front of me does not disagree agreeably.
Accepting the Minimums
It’s okay to admit that not everyone will agree with us or be our friend. Accepting that we have little in common does not mean we demean others. I have neighbors whose worldview is diametrically opposed to mine. The differences are so stark that they could make having any deep relationship impossible. We disagree on fundamental principles. There may be people with whom we can be respectful, even though we have little in common beyond the air we breathe. We can commit to peacefully addressing our disagreements on how society should be organized by going to the polls and accepting the outcomes of elections. And that is okay.
Recalibrating Victory
We could wish that overcoming polarization meant everyone would accept the error of their ways and join our side. But that is an overly optimistic approach to cultural repair. I count it a win if the person I speak with abandons his or her stridency toward me. I do not need someone to agree with me to win a debate; I want that person to see that my position is reasonable and worthy of consideration.
The Bible’s Call to Civility
Whether or not generic appeals to kindness resolve American polarization, we should turn to Scripture and learn how it instructs Christians to relate to the outside world. Importantly, we should be clear that the Bible’s command on our relationship with outsiders is not only for the sake of winning them to our side but also for the sake of our unfailing civility itself.
Although often overlooked, the Bible offers much insight into how to treat non-Christians who disagree with us.
First, extend love and kindness toward all. Jesus says in Matthew 5:44, “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.” There is no asterisk to indicate to whom this verse applies. Romans 12:17–18 says: “Repay no one evil for evil, but give thought to do what is honorable in the sight of all. If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all.”
Second, we are to demonstrate respect and gentleness toward all. First Peter 3:15 says, “In your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect.” Colossians 4:5–6 says: “Walk in wisdom toward outsiders, making the best use of the time. Let your speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how you ought to answer each person.”
Third, we must fuse the fruit of the Spirit with a spirit of forbearance. A book titled The Patient Ferment of the Early Church captures this well.2 The author speaks of the church situated on the margins of society with no promise of immediate victory. The church was still called to minister in that society, showing a better way. Liberal democracy, of its own design, does not possess the internal resources to withstand secular bombardment. Those of us who care about civility have a vested interest in furthering a Christian consensus, which will take time—an eon of time, measured not in years but in decades and generations. We lament the divergent pluralism of our culture even as we are called to work within it. This requires patience and long-suffering forbearance.
The Bible does not provide exception clauses in these passages. Christian, you are called to demonstrate these virtues as a reflection of the Holy Spirit inside you. That does not mean you cannot be truthful or even forceful in your interactions, but it does mean that the Lord Jesus requires his followers to practice love, kindness, respect, and gentleness.
Notes:
- Plato, Apology, 38a5–6.
- Alan Kreider, The Patient Ferment of the Early Church: The Improbable Rise of Christianity in the Roman Empire (Baker Academic, 2016).
This article is adapted from Prodigal Culture: A People in Ruins and the Way Back Home by Andrew T. Walker.
Related Articles
4 Issues Your Children Are Facing That You Never Had To
Andrew T. Walker, Christian Walker
Parenting in today’s culture can seem like boating into uncharted waters. The good news is that though the culture may throw us new challenges, Scripture speaks a better word to anchor our parenting.
Can Humility and Social Media Coexist?
We cannot stop the incessant screaming and scrambling that is the internet. But we can try to reduce our own involvement in the problems and do whatever we can to contribute to a healthier culture.
Podcast: The Cure to Our Polarization and Outrage: Humility (Gavin Ortlund)
Gavin Ortlund talks about misconceptions we often have about humility—that it corresponds to weakness or that it hides our abilities—and discusses how humility is so foundational for experiencing true joy in Christ.
