I have seen this many times in the last few months from posters in a debate when all other arguments have been debunked. In most cases, in the debate world, those that fall into ad hominem are viewed as having lost the real debate and trying to get as many hits in as they can before being closed down by the other side. Or as a means that while they are losing the real debate, by using ad hominem argument, they may change the subject of the debate in order to hide weak areas in their argument there by dodge the subject and place focus on areas that they feel they have the upper hand. Where as this is a given tool and strong tool in the debate arena to use to win debates at all cost, what does it say about us as believers when it comes to doctrine? Are we to “win” at all cost? Is our focus even to be toward winning? When it comes to doctrine, are we to win the game, or look for the truth? We should all know the source. It is our DUTY to know what was said by the man, in the context of the subject. As believers, what is our final source? What context must we make SURE we understand to be right? If it is said by a man that red is red and no matter who it was that said red is red, if we find in our final source red is green and we understand this to be true in full context of our source, the one that said red is red is wrong. Yet on the other hand if we see from our final source that indeed just as the one that claimed red to be red, it is in fact red, and we understand this to be true in full context, it is our DUTY to agree and not attack the man that said this, for if we do attack the man, we are really attacking our final source, which did agree with the man. Should we play the ad hominem card in doctrine? Should not our final source be Gods Word, no matter who said it? What do you think?