baptist DEBATE forums

Bro Luke,

With all due respect, I do understand where you are coming from, and what you mean by this statement. However, someone can make a case for their beliefs and why the opposing side's are wrong without degrading someone. I have read some on here who have said...."or remain in ignorance". Where is this "iron sharpeneth iron"? This is like grinding the head of the axe with a whetstone instead of sharpening it.

When did it become right to have your feelings hurt? I can make a point, and prove them with scripture, and do it in a sensible manner and not degrade the one I am debating with.

One doesn't have to be like a bull in a china shop to get their point across. I can tell you I disagree with you, and do it in a way that is not authoritative, demeaning, arrogant, I am smarter than you, etc. If we don't agree with something, we don't agree. That's the way I feel about debates. They are just that, debates! But some people on here have gotten pretty personal in their attack of those who hold the opposing view. You know I love you, Bro Luke, don't you? I am not bashing you with this, but making some points on what I have observed going on in here.[/B]

i am I am's!!

Willis

 

Bro. Luke,

I am thankful that we can see "eye-to-eye", even though our theologies are different in many ways!! This is what I am trying to point out. Too many times on here, people get huffed and puffed up and really don't seem to consider the other one's feelings. That's why I try to stay away from some on here. It's their way, or no way. I can agree and disagree in love but some on here don't seem to have that capacity. Plus, sometimes, "tones" are hard to get a handle on from a computer screen and keyboard. I have went back and read something I posted, and hoped it didn't "sound" the way it looked on here. That was my point, too. It's hard to "hear" on here, and know if someone is being "snippy", or joking, or trying to make a point pleasantly, and it just came out wrong!!

i am I am's!!

Willis

 

Good post Luke. I agree with everything you said. Folks that carry their feelings around in their hands should not debate, and I do not think you to be arrogant or abrasive, perseverant maybe, but not arrogant or abrasive.

 

The truth will stand on it's on. It does not need abrasiveness, rudeness, loudness, or the attempt to sound authoritative. These are fleshly attempts to force what we "perceive" is the truth onto someone else.

To flat out say "I am right and you are wrong" is arrogant, because there is always the chance that we may be wrong. If what we say is true, it will stand. God really does not NEED our help. We are to join Him in His work, but leave the results to Him.

 

Why can't you be "authoritative"? BEcause few of us here are in an actual position of spiritual authority over any other member of the BB. We do have a few husband/wife members where the husband could be considered the wife's spiritual authority, but for the rest of us:

WE HAVE NO HIGH PRIEST! Our spiritual authority is the Word and the Holy Spirit. We may not like the divisions this appears to create within our ranks, but this is how God has decided to set up His church.

So, when you set yourself up as the end all/be all of a discussion/debate, you are being arrogant! What God expects out of you where you live, among the people He has set you in to witness to, might be very, very different from what God needs me to do.

It's not about getting feelings hurt. Its about each of "working out our salvation" according how the scriptures apply to our own lives.

Name calling and arrogance have no place in the lives of believers who are called to peace, joy and love. We are supposed to love one another in such a way for it to be clear we love the Lord. We often fall short of that here.

 

I don't think this is only a debate forum. I consider this forum to also be a discussion and information exchange forum. I stopped debating on here long ago, but I do sometimes participate on here as a discussion and information exchange participant.

 

Quarreling should not be hidden behind the word "debate." It need not include arrogance, abrasiveness, haughtiness, questioning another's salvation, name-calling, etc. especially among preachers and teachers to whom Paul has instructed to be "gentle to all" and "patient" and "humble."

I am sure the curious unbelievers who check in here get a jolly good laugh at how some treat others, same as the devil enjoys watching Christians shoot each other. While we are busy in this place hitting one another over the head with our remarks, someone out in the world needs a cup of cold water.

 

The last four posts are spot on and evidence of the Holy Spirit's presence. :thumbs:

The fact is, without truth you can be as abrasive, authoritative, frank or type in the largest font available...but if it not truth or based on truth it goes for naught and opinions will not be changed.

How many opinions have been changed by simply being abrasive or rude? I've changed numerous views over the years but the ONLY reason was due to truth.

 

“Logical” debate should, and does if practical, stem from the science of philosophy. This scientific branch of philosophy (logic) is concerned with drawing out the truth by presenting reasons for a claim, and if those reasons are true would justify accepting the claim. To begin this process, one must first understand the differences between an “argument- *A*” (two people disagreeing and trying to win a fight) and a “philosophical argument- *B*” (intelligent debate primarily aimed at drawing out the truth) then they will quickly learn to recognize “rhetoric”. (Rhetoric is a language used to primarily persuade or influence the beliefs or attitudes rather than to “prove” logically the truth of a claim.) Simply, being abrasive and flexing testosterone serves no purpose in drawing out the truth of a claim, it is *A*, it is intimidation meant to influence, it is “rhetoric”. Using rhetorical devices may enhance the persuasive force of *A* but they do not add to the logical force of arguments - *B*.

You’ve heard the saying around hear about the preacher’s notes which say “weak point, pound the pulpit hard” …this is a classical and humerus example of logical fallacy BECAUSE …(BTW, capitalizing “because” is also using rhetoric language to attempt to influence, but does not add to the truth) ….it uses a rhetoric device in an attempt to prove a point , but does it, really?

The problem is that centering on *A* is offensive to others and is not geared to drawing out the truth, it is merely fighting to win. If one really wants to be a good Christian debater he should be aware of these differences and proceed appropriately. At a minimum he/she should try to hold back the meaningless rhetorical language for the above reasons.

 

Amen to that.

 

The difficulty, I believe, is that we are so convinced we are correct, and only we are correct that it is easy to just dismiss others as either ignorant or disobedient, or possibly not even belonging to Christ in the first place.

There is a lot of difference in saying to someone, "I don't believe you are correct and here's why." And saying, "Only someone who is ignorant and out of touch could possibly believe some of the garbage like you spew here!"

Granted, what that person believes is something we might consider theological garbage, but do we have to say it that way? Even if we are correct and their viewpoint is garbage, do you think we will convince them of their error with this attitude?

If you were attempting to convince someone on the street about something, and they were filthy, would you say, "Man you need a bath!" Oh, and like I was saying...

 

I don't think you can agree anymore than 100%. I say this with authority.