Recently, I have found the "slippery
slope" argument being used quite a bit among conservative Evangelical
Christians to argue that holding certain beliefs will inevitably lead to belief
in a number of bad things, usually theological liberalism. Do you believe in:
women in ministry; continuation of the spiritual gifts; or, a different
interpretation of any passage in the Bible that threatens the status quo? Then,
as the argument goes, you may be on the "slippery slope" towards
liberalism.
Yet, there are several problems in using the
"slippery slope" argument. For example, today's comic by Scott Adams
(June 06th, 2015) shows how Dilbert's boss uses a "slippery slope" argument
as a way to stop a conversation and avoid solving a problem at work. You can
access this comic here. As seen in this comic, a "slippery
slope" argument does not answer questions, resolve arguments, or provide
solutions to problems.
Given this, why do people invoke this argument? It can
be used to shut down debate. It is a conversation stopper! In using this
argument, a person conveys the message that it is more important to control the
argument than to answer questions or debate important concepts.
A few other problems include:
1. The
misuse of the truth is a slippery slope, itself. I have noticed that people
invoking the slippery slope argument only see one slippery slope that leads to
liberal doctrine and diluting the Gospel message. They do not see how their
refusal to debate an issue on its own merits can be a slippery slope towards
legalism and intellectual rigidity, even if they are doctrinally correct.
2. Those who
invoke the "slippery slope" argument do not see how this argument can
be used against them, as well. For example, I once had a Roman Catholic
friend who argued that the Reformation was wrong because it put the Church on
the "slippery slope" to disunity and opened the door to doctrinal
heresy. Ironically, many of my friends today who invoke the "slippery slope"
argument are Protestants who do not see how this argument can be used against
them.
3. Invoking the "slippery slope" argument
does not prove or disprove a proposition. Much like an ad hominem argument,
if you cannot win with logic and facts, attack the man. That is, if you cannot
win an argument, resort to the "slippery slope" to shut down
debate.
Indeed, I find it hard to refute "slippery
slope" arguments because it shuts down the discussion. It suggests that no
matter how correct my proposition may be, it must be wrong because it inevitably
leads to something worse. This is why it is so important to understand
that "slippery slopes" go both ways: they not only can lead
to false doctrine and a dilution of the Gospel, "Slippery
slopes" can also lead to legalism and rigidity.
One way to avoid the temptation to use the "slippery
slope" argument is to check one's motives. Paul wrote, "Let your
speech always be gracious, seasoned with salt, so that you may know how
you ought to answer each person" (Colossians 4:6 ESV). Are you
trying to provide a proper answer, or are you trying to control the argument
and control the other person?
Again, one can avoid the “slippery slope” argument
by addressing issues each on their own merit. If something is true (for
example, that salvation is by faith in Christ alone, and not by works -
Ephesians 2:8-10), then we must argue for this truth and not be swayed that
such beliefs may be "slippery slopes" towards Church disunity. Can
you argue for a doctrine on its own merits?
Certainly, if a belief or doctrine is wrong, then one must persuade
others of its error. In doing so, we must be like the Jews of Berea who
“received the word with all eagerness, examining the Scriptures daily to see if
these things were so” (Acts 17:11 ESV). This is necessary because, as John Locke
wrote,
All the Life and Power of
true Religion consists in the inward and full perswasion
of the mind: and Faith is not Faith without believing…true and saving Religion consists in the
inward perswasion of the Mind, without which nothing can be acceptable to God.
- A Letter Concerning Toleration,
edited by James H. Tully, 1983, Hackett Publishing Company, Inc., p. 26-27.
Using the "slippery slope" argument does not
effectively persuade someone about the truth of a belief or proposition. At
best, this argument installs an unhealthy fear in a person rather than nurturing a living
faith. At worse, it fails to refute bad doctrine or promote the message of
Christ. It is an argument based on fear, and is motivated by fear. Therefore,
Christians must seek to persuade others of the truth of a doctrine with the
help of the Holy Spirit rather than shut the argument down with fear.
No comments:
Post a Comment