Formal Debate Proposed

Discussion in '2003 Archive' started by KenH, Apr 25, 2003.

  1. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I have challenged and Scott Emerson has accepted to have a formal debate. If Scott declines to participate, I am willing to formally debate any other Arminian/non-Calvinist, per the setup below.

    Here are six topics I would suggest for this formal debate and who defends what position -

    1) Man's ability(Scott) or inability(Ken)?

    2) Election – particular(Ken) or non-particular(Scott)?

    3) Atonement – general(Scott) or definite(Ken)?

    4) Regeneration – monergistic(Ken) or synergistic(Scott)?

    5) Peserverance – maybe(Scott) or certain(Ken)?

    6) Calvinism's Effect on Evangelism – energizing(Ken) or deadening(Scott)?

    No pejorative language allowed and no attacks on any individual, living or dead.

    -----------------------------------------------

    Also, Clint Kritzer suggested the following in an earlier thread about this –

    An example of this platform would be:

    1. Opening remarks
    2. First rebuttals
    3. Second rebuttals
    4. Conclusionary remarks

    Each of these essays would be submitted to the moderator of the debate via email and would not be posted by the moderator until both debaters had submitted their response. Each step of the debate would have a word limit, such as:

    1. Opening remarks - 750 words
    2. First rebuttals - 1000 words
    3. Second rebuttals - 1500 words
    4. Conclusionary remarks - 1000 words

    As each submission is admitted, the thread would be immediately closed. A parallel thread for discussion by the membership would be established.

    Ground rules would also need to be established such as the allowance of UBB coding, the citing of links for source of quotes only (to protect the integrity of the word limit), time limits for responses to be submitted, formatting opponents quotations in UBB coding being held against or not held against the word count, etc.

    Needless to say, the posting rules of the Baptist Board at large would also apply. A panel of judges could also be established if the participants wished to have the debate judged. This option was not established before.

    -----------------------------------------------

    I would suggest we have a week between each phase of our response. For example, we could have opening remarks due to the debate moderator by May 11, the first rebuttals due by May 18, etc. This would give us a 24 week debate to cover all 6 topics.

    Is this okay with you, Scott? Please make any suggestions you might have.

    Now, who will step forward to be the debate moderator and set the formal ground rules. I have no preference, Calvinist or non-Calvinist.
     
  2. DanielFive

    DanielFive
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2003
    Messages:
    683
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ken,

    I look forward to following the debate. I would suggest any one of Pastor Larry, Bro Dallas, Bro Glen, Ray or Bill for the moderator role.

    I would appeal to Scott to start with topic one, as suggested above.

    In the words of J C Ryle : "There are very few errors and false doctrines of which the beginning may not be traced up to unsound views about the corruption of human nature. Wrong views of the disease will always bring with them wrong views of the remedy"

    I think both Calvinists and Arminians would agree with that statement.

    God Bless

    Enda

    PS The moderator might want to move this post to the parallel thread [​IMG]
     
  3. tyndale1946

    tyndale1946
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,179
    Likes Received:
    226
    I'm not in any position... body, soul, and spirit to monitor a debate at this present time. If Pastor Larry has the time he may and if not I just don't know. I believe a moderator has to monitor a debate and not just anyone... It just might pick up my spirit to watch Ken and Scott duke it out [​IMG] ... Brother Glen [​IMG] & [​IMG] Sister Charlotte [​IMG]
     
  4. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would enjoy reading the debate of these points as well. I love the BB and the C/A forum, but I tire of the same points defended in the same ways and always from a perspective seemingly seeking for 'buzz' word and or cliches as if these hold within themselves the power to change the opinion of any one of us on either side. I also thank enda for his vote of confidence in me as a moderator, but I believe this might better be fulfilled by someone with a greater understanding of the Arminian side than I possess (technically speaking) I have been brought up in that system of theology, but never saw it presented systematically as a debate would provide. Furthermore, I believe a present moderator of the BB would be more qualified to perform the functions of that post.

    If Pastor Larry and Tyndale agreed I would not mind doing it, but I do not feel adequate for the task. Because of the proposed time frame I could operate without restraint from other responsibilities. But the particulars should be left up to the two moderators here on this forum and perhaps a consensus of participants. I do believe it would be a refreshing change in the approach to this forum.

    Well, I have said enough. [​IMG] Anyone have anything on their heart? Shall we gather at the river? (Used by Hollywood because it has religious overtones, but is non-denominational and non offensive to movie goers :rolleyes: )

    God Bless.
    Bro. Dallas [​IMG]
     
  5. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I would also throw the idea into the pot that even an outside moderator from this forum could be moderator.

    Brother Dallas, the moderator is simply to enforce the ground rules. He doesn't have to be well schooled on either side of the debate. The moderator is to make sure we keep it between the ditches so to speak. [​IMG] And I am confident that you as well as several others could admirably perform that task.

    So we are down to needing a moderator being selected and Scott agreeing, or someone else if Scott decides to decline, to belly up to the bar, so to speak, and agree on the subjects to be debated and the ground rules.
     
  6. tyndale1946

    tyndale1946
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Aug 30, 2001
    Messages:
    6,179
    Likes Received:
    226
    Brother Dallas and Ken I believe to monitor a debate a moderator must be used... One who is a moderator already... If Pastor Larry is unavailable I would like to see Brother Clint... He has the experience... I cannot and I need not explain to anyone why... Brother Glen [​IMG] & [​IMG] Sister Charlotte [​IMG]
     
  7. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Brother Clint would be a good one. Also, I noticed that Helen is a BB moderator in another forum. I think she would do a good job, also.
     
  8. Frogman

    Frogman
    Expand Collapse
    <img src="http://www.churches.net/churches/fubc/Fr
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2001
    Messages:
    5,492
    Likes Received:
    0
    I agree with the need of the monitor being a BB moderator. I would not mind who was chosen...wouldn't they have been elected to that place? :eek: Then how could I stand against it except in the rebellious will of man? [​IMG]

    I just want to say that I would love to see such a 'formal debate' here on the C/A forum. It would do good for both sides I think.

    God Bless.
    Bro. Dallas [​IMG]
     
  9. Yelsew

    Yelsew
    Expand Collapse
    Guest

    WOW, a topic worthy of debate. Who determines right and wrong views?
     
  10. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    That's why we debate. [​IMG] But ultimately, God does.
     
  11. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Hey, Scott, where are you? [​IMG]
     
  12. ScottEmerson

    ScottEmerson
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    Jun 3, 2002
    Messages:
    3,417
    Likes Received:
    0
    I'm here. I'm up for it. I think we need ground definitions on ability and inability. Just let me know when my first treatise is due.
     
  13. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    Great. [​IMG]

    Now we need a debate moderator. MODERATOR! WE NEED A MODERATOR! [​IMG]
     
  14. KenH

    KenH
    Expand Collapse
    Active Member

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    32,485
    Likes Received:
    0
    I will not be on this board much during the next week as I will be traveling out of town for 5 out of the next 8 days through next Sunday for dog agility classes and AKC agility trials.

    I am set up to receive an email notification when anyone responds to this thread. So if a moderator is named and the ground rules are set up, I'll know about them when they are posted in this thread.

    I hope we can get this debate started in the next few weeks. [​IMG]
     

Share This Page

Loading...