I can remember in seminary dueling with a number of different critics regarding Reformed theology. God’s sovereignty was a regular topic of debate. For the record, I did not attend a Reformed seminary, hence truths taken for granted at Reformed institutions were not widely accepted at my institution. The subjects of discussion usually would come around to the views of John Calvin, the sixteenth-century Reformer. This was an inevitable occurrence because his name is embedded in the popular term Calvinism. In the debates, people regularly dismissed his views for one reason or another, or they would attribute things to Calvin that he never said or wrote. I challenged my interrogators with the following question: “Have you read Calvin’s Institutes or any of his writings?” The usual answer was negative. They had not. I then responded, “Don’t you think in the interest of fairness, that you shouldn’t so quickly dismiss what you haven’t read or fairly considered?” Sometimes this question caused the person to pause and back away from his accusations of heresy. I don’t know if these people ever changed their minds or read Calvin, but they recognized that they probably shouldn’t condemn what they haven’t read.
In the interest of fairness, I started reading the writings of those with whom I disagreed. I read, for example, the works of Jacob Arminius. I read the documents of the Council of Trent. I also read the works of a number of atheist philosophers; I found Frederich Nietzsche to be riveting. In these different works I discovered that I still disagreed with them but I now knew very specific reasons as to why. Plus, I could now legitimately say that I had considered what they had written and not dismissed it prejudicially.
All of this is to say, in any dispute you need to do your best to listen to both sides of the argument. How fair is it to prejudice one side over the other? Would you want to be snubbed and have someone completely ignore your point of view and then write it off? I suspect not. This fairness principle applies not only to theological debates but to any conflict in life whether for bickering children, spouses at odds with one another, or a pastor trying to reconcile two parties. But the principle is also especially true in theological debate. Be fair. Don’t accept what other people say about Arminius, for example. Read him for yourself and quote him directly. And in theological debates, you need to follow the advice of one of my professors—never pick the worst example of a position—pick the very best example. Anyone can reject a poor argument, one riddled with fallacies and bad exegesis. Look for the best articulation of a position—it does you no good to reject a straw man. In order to convince someone of the truth of your view, you need to demonstrate that you’ve wrestled with the very best that the other side has to offer.
Always, therefore, go straight to the source!