Consider Both Sides When You Express Yourself

I asked a friend why some UBFers are upset with this post that I wrote: Sin is having an identity other than in God. He explained it so well in an email to me:

"It was a good article, Dr. Ben. I think with any critical self reflection, we can inadvertently dismiss the heart of an entire community's efforts, which is ironically the antithesis of your article. It's not necessarily your duty to always cover all grounds, but I can see why people would feel dismissed by what you wrote since you didn't counter it with any mention of people's good underlying, heart's intention. It is probably true that not all people have the right heart's motive, but some, even many do. Though they may have been misled to think that using social pressures is okay, I find many people just want to be used by God for the salvation of souls and the development of Jesus' disciples."

Very useful points for me to always consider are:

1. "Dismissing an entire community's efforts." I failed to realize this.
2. "It's not necessarily your duty to always cover all grounds." Yet, I should always attempt to do so.
   
3. "Not countering what I write with any mention of people's good underlying, heart's intention." I've done this occasionally, but not often enough.
4. "Some, even many do have a right heart's motive." I believe that this is true, and that they would be hurt by the dismissive way I write.
5. "They may have been misled to think that using social pressure is okay." I keep pounding this point, but I perhaps should back off on this, or write about this very tenderly and gingerly (which I may not know how to do!).
6. "Many people just want to be used by God for the salvation of souls and the development of Jesus' disciples." Without a doubt I know that this is true. I should remember Phil 1:18.

I thought this is so useful for me to remember and consider every time I need to express myself or write something, anything. (Here is David Weed's very useful comment on (abusing one's) freedom.)