by Donnie Collings
Monday, April 20, 2026
In our culture, religion is polarizing. Often, we are even predisposed to avoid engaging in religious discussion. In this article, I would like to present an approach Christians can follow to build bridges with those who: 1) firmly hold to differing beliefs, 2) will listen to you just to tell you where you are wrong, or 3) have never had their own beliefs challenged to deeper reflection. My overarching question is this: “As Christians, when have we fulfilled our duty in sharing the Gospel?”
I currently teach Bible at a Christian School where the demographics are mostly non-Restoration Movement across both students and staff. I consider it a mission field and treat the overall objective as teaching the Bible on a deeper level. The school aims to teach factual information in its Life of Christ and Old and New Testament classes. In the deeper thought classes, such as Bible Doctrines (systematic theology) and Christian Ethics, they allow me to present whatever view(s) I wish. The only requirement from my administrators is that the classroom must retain an atmosphere of respectfulness—I do not, and will never be asked to teach anything, I personally find disagreeable. In this environment, hearts and minds are being reached, and views are being considered that have never been heard before by these students. However, the beginning point of my success—where all my predecessors failed—begins with mutual respect for students as Christ followers who are all striving to follow the same God.1
In any given class period, I may have as many as a half-dozen faith groups represented, and some from the same faith group but coming from different congregations. A few students are considering ministry as their life’s work after high school. When engaged in discussion, students often speak from their faith group’s distinct perspective. I’m continually asked my views on a wide range of topics, including: dispensationalism from Revelation, perspectives on women in church leadership and as preachers, role of Holy Spirit (particularly regarding tongues and ongoing prophecy today), baptism ‘for’ or ‘because of’ salvation, and the various views on origins.
Despite the wide-ranging diversity in these topics, I have found that students generally approach them all the same way: they will set aside some Scriptures while elevating others to formulate their position. For example, in the discussions I have had with my classes on Acts 2:38 and other ‘hallmark’ baptism verses, the typical response students will offer is, “I see what you’re saying, BUT...” followed by retreating to the safety of whatever familiar teaching they are accustomed to. This is the pattern for 98% of doctrinal conversations I have with students when discussions stray from our textbook. However, because I have been with these students for a few years, I have become a safe and trustworthy person to ask these types of questions—even though they know going in that we have differing perspectives.
In my approach, I accept their Scriptures in building a doctrine. When exchanging dialogue with students with varying perspectives, my approach is also largely the same: 1) Here are the supporting Scriptures for my position—AND ALSO—I accept the Scriptures you present (as applicable) in formulating a doctrinal position. Together, they build a more comprehensive biblical picture of the topic at hand. Carried out in this manner, no one is choosing between which Scriptures to downplay or ‘sweep under the rug’ based on conflict with a preconceived doctrinal position. Their rebuttal to my approach is generally something along the lines of, “YEAH (I see what you’re saying), BUT... (meaning I do not accept your scriptural assertions because they do conflict with my doctrinal position[s]). When faced with, “Yeah, but... You never know where the rest of that sentence is going.2
What principles can be learned from an AND ALSO approach to engaging others in the Scriptures?
We must never divide Scripture by setting aside what we do not like or what conflicts with our preconceived ideas. Instead, we should seek further understanding in matters where we are unclear.
In dialogue, we are all seeking the same God—and regardless of how different from each other, our current understanding is our starting point. From there, we should move forward together with mutual respect. We are on the same side—Satan is the enemy.
Presenting new ideas, especially if they challenge long-held ideas, is often hard. Be patient and demonstrate love. The person you are sharing with may need time to wrestle with and reflect on new ideas independently. (Sensationalizing or laying down ultimatum-type statements are generally not helpful in truly reaching another’s heart or mind.)
Our goal as Christians is an accurate presentation of the Gospel—to present a convincing and compelling case. We cannot force anyone’s acceptance of a biblical position or teaching—this is their choice to make.
Lastly, until someone takes their last breath, they have time and opportunity to change their views to follow the commands of Scripture more closely (and this works both ways if we find a more scriptural position than the one we currently hold)—it is not anyone’s place to cast final judgement (only to warn others what Scripture says from a point of genuine concern). Our role is outreach, Truth spreading, and reasoning together from the Scriptures—we are not The Judge.
Using these principles as ground rules for engagement, many have found a safe space and freedom to consider positions they otherwise may have never encountered, and have given them serious reflection. So, back to our question, “As Christians, when have we fulfilled our duty in sharing the Gospel?” When we have fully and accurately presented it and cast it in the best light possible.
1 I think we sometimes forget this. Sometimes we become so focused on championing one another in theological battle that we forget that Satan is the adversary—not each other.
2 After the [. . .] be prepared for anything and everything—from the independently well-reasoned response, to something someone heard or read somewhere, to a full-on retreat to the safety of a source more trusted than yourself (e.g., but my dad says, grandma has always said, you mean to tell me that my passed-on relative is eternally separated from God because they didn’t believe this?)
I think I will attempt to answer the question in three parts: 1. I should not go out of my way to be unnecessarily offensive. 2. I should not be afraid of being offensive when necessary. And 3. I should get busy doing practical good deeds that, in general, people will find it hard to object to.
In his 2015 book, “Extreme Ownership,” author Jocko Willink defines the title concept as follows: “On any team, in any organization, all responsibility for success and failure rests with the leader. The leader must own everything in his or her world. There is no one else to blame. The leader must acknowledge mistakes & admit failures, take ownership of them, and develop a plan to win.”
A few years ago, I was blessed with the opportunity to become a part of the Board of Directors of International Disaster Emergency Service (IDES). I’ve been exposed to IDES and their incredible ministry for as long as I can remember and have, on several occasions, had the joy of sharing in its work. From participating in work trips to a storm-ravaged Pearlington, Mississippi after Hurricane Katrina, to helping with shed building projects after a tornado ripped through our neighboring region in 2012, to volunteering with numerous “God Always Provides” (G.A.P.) food packing events, IDES has always been a familiar and beloved mission to me.
7133 Central Parke Blvd.,
