HOW TO DEBATE PROPERLY

I voted, but I dont really concern myself with any "rules of debate".

(I'm sure some people are saying "yeah, we know!)

The most profitable way to discuss these things is to just share what one prayfully believes God is laying on their heart to share. Let the Holy Spirit take it from there.

btw, it apears that neither Jesus nor Paul concerned themselves with any "rules of debate". Several times people tried to stone Jesus and Paul was making people so mad he caused riots.

God bless,

Mike

 

people need to go back to school and learn how to read properly - and to write properly.

i for one failed english and need to take it over in the fall semester...

 

Claudia: Jesus used parables alot and I think it was because He was being careful not to publically humiliate anybody. He wanted them to realize he was talking about them but not have everyone in the world realize it.

HP: Excellent point. I get a bit unsettled everytime I hear, “Do you know who that was being addressed to? That was only to Christians!.”

Sorry, but sometimes when we speak to a crowd, or a church body, or an individual, we are giving them what might be termed ‘the benefit of the doubt.’ One might be addressing one that you have no confidence in yet professes to be a Christian. You 'could' start out by saying , “I believe you are deceived as to your salvation. You say you are saved and act that way? If you were a Christian you would act differently than you do. You need to repent and get right with God.” Wisdom may point to a different tactic. One might approach it this way. “As believers God calls us to a holy walk. Scripture tell us that if we are going to walk with Him, we should walk even as Christ walked. Scripture invokes us to examine ourselves to be of the faith. If we find that Scripture and our conscience warns us of actions that are displeasing to Him, we are told to repent of the wrong and place our faith in Him, and that if we confess our sins He is just and able to forgive us of our sins, and that the blood of Jesus Christ will cleanse us from all unrighteousness.”

Notice how I addressed the individual as a believer, solely upon the merits he claimed to be, not that I had any confidence in his salvation. By placing us both on the same level for communication sake, in some cases one might find a more receptive spirit.

I believe much of Scripture is written in the same way. It may be addressed to Christians solely on the merits of the audience claiming to be such or were simply present with them, when the author knew full well he was addressing a mixed crowd and desired to communicate truth to all present.

We do the same thing by mentioning ourselves in the first person on certain points that may not be a problem we have at all at the time, but rather to form a bond from which to build, a way of saying “But for the grace of God, there goes I as well, or But for the grace of God it might indeed be my problem as well as yours, or It is my problem, (although I might be in total victory at the moment).” There is often a need for us to identify with the problems of others in order to form a bond in order to reach them or communicate truth to them.

I am sure I am just preaching to the choir.

 

claudia said "Just think, the Saviour of the world asking a mere human being for a favor!

I think this made her more receptive to His message. What do you think?"

in response to that, this is what i replied to in the missions forum:

here's the link ---> http://www.baptistboard.com/ubb/ultimatebb.php/topic/9/633.html#000005

 

The woman presents a failed argument to Christ attempting to divert the point away. Christ simply ignores it and presses the truth home "again".

That is an instructive point.

But in Matt 22 we SEE Christ in OPEN debate with Sadduccees. Here is pure brilliance as Christ USES the COMMON beliefs of BOTH and the infallible point of scripture as "proof" for the resurrection.

His argument is constructed so that they have "no compelling response".

Although the Sadducees do not outwardly admit to this defeat by anything other than "Silence" the Pharisees (who were no friends of Christ) saw clearly that Christ's argument was compelling and devastating to the Sadducees' position.

So also did the crowd see this.

So if you ask the Sadducees "why so silent on the inconvenient points Christ has brought up in his argument FOR the resurrection" you could have gotten a wide number of dodges and half-truths.

But it was "pretty clear" to everyone else.

And who knows - maybe there was a Sadducee or too that when home with something to think about - that they could not "admit to" because of pride of the moment.

In Christ,

Bob

 

It is always instructive to see the response and reaction of those whose argument has failed. In the case of the Woman at the well - she seemed willing to drop a failed argument as soon as light was shed upon the subject.

I really like to meet people like that! It is always a pleasure!

 

State the facts and let the chips fall where they may. But I'd like to add if someone ask a question or for more scripture to a post about something that someone had said. It would be wonderful to get a reply. To me it shows that either they don't know what they are talking about or that I was posssibley right and they just don't want to admit that a woman could possibley be right!

 

claudia said "wow 85 percent of the people who voted on the poll said we should just state the facts in a debate and let the chips fall where they may."

haha. i guess it goes to show that baptists like to speak bluntly. no?

lol.

 

Sorry, double post.
**Acually the processing page locked up on me.**
If it happens don't hit your refresh button!

 

Claudia,

I think sometimes we DO need to repeat it back to the person and see if we understood it correctly. Stating the facts and just letting the chips fall is not usually enough to really come to an understanding of each other. To some degree that is what we should do, don't try to dance around what our real point is....but we should also add a little tact to what we say and not jump to any conclusions that the other poster did not outright say.

 

Doctrine is the most important element when debating. After all that is what we are after, the truth of the matter. If it isn't then there is no use in a debate. That eliminates one of your choices right away.
Secondly, as the Bible teaches; the truth hurts. Doctrine divides. Thus, while in many cases, a viewpoint may be stated more tactfully, one should develop a hardskin and realize that his position is going to be attacked. It is a debate. Realize that your position is going to be challenged, and sometimes not in the most tactful way. Thus people need to "battle-ready" as good soldiers of Jesus Christ. Soldiers are not cry-babies.
Don't be emotional. Suck it up.
At the same time realize that personal attacks and offensive language unbecoming of a Christian is not tolerated.
Debate the issue, not the person. Avoid attacking the person. Stick to the topic at hand.
DHK

 

Claudia,

Up to 86% now.

(Thats how I voted, btw)

Mike