Meeting in the middle

I think this comment of Bavinck is fascinating:

"But it is common to all those who take the ‘middle way’ to show a greater preference ‘for that extreme they go halfway to than for that from which they go halfway’" (Reformed Dogmatics, 3:532, HT: Steve Duby)

I think that explains a lot of discussions and tensions between Christians. Their convictions about theology and practice may be very similar, but more important than their present position is their personal history.

For example, two people may wholeheartedly confess that they believe in "the forgiveness of sins [AND] the resurrection of the body". But the person who was brought up believing that forgiveness of sins was the sum-total description of salvation will by most alert to any non-physical understanding of salvation, whereas the person brought up a legalist will be especially protective about God’s free-grace toward sinners.

If we understood people work this way there would be a slowness to express your initial instinctual response, more mutual appreciation of others concerns, and therefore less conflict.