• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Spurgeon.us formally hosted C/A debate!

W

whetstone

<img src =/11288.jpg>
Dear BB regulars,

Spurgeon.us has decided to begin hosting formal debates. We would like to have two members of Baptist Board that frequent the C/A debates section enter a formally moderated debate on our board. The rules will be posted once the debate forum opens, but ultimately it will be classic debate style with:

Opening statements
Rebuttal
Second Rebuttal
Closing statements

A debate moderator will be assigned to the opponents to ensure the rules of the debate are enforced. Only the two participants and the moderator will have permissions to post in the debate itself, so it is guarunteed to be a stimulating experience!

Here's what we're looking for: If you would like to volunteer yourself or nominate another member for this formal debate, please say so in this thread. Once enough volunteers/nominees are gathered, I will post a poll in which each side of the issue can vote for the member they feel best represents their position (i.e. the Calvinists would choose the member they feel best defends Calvinism). Once the two participants are agreed upon, the debate will begin at Spurgeon.us

We will also have a discussion room where members can talk about points being brought up in the debate.

If this sounds like something you'd like to do, please feel free to post! God bless!

Daniel Allen
webmaster
www.spurgeon.us
 
W

whetstone

<img src =/11288.jpg>
Ok, i'll be first. I nominate Pastor Larry for the Calvinist side.
 
4

4His_glory

New Member
I would like to nominate

Bob Ryan to the Arminan side, and RC to the Calvinist side if Pastor Larry does not want to do it.
 
BobRyan

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Originally posted by 4His_glory:
I would like to nominate

Bob Ryan to the Arminan side, and RC to the Calvinist side if Pastor Larry does not want to do it.
Click to expand...
I accept.
 
W

whetstone

<img src =/11288.jpg>
RC and Larry, how does this sit with you? and any other nominees or volunteers for the arminian side?
 
P

Pastor Larry

<b>Moderator</b>
Site Supporter
If God has ordained it, he won't want to refuse. That's how I konw God hasn't ordained me to do it. I don't want to waste my time rehashing old arguments that have already been thoroughly beat up.
 
W

whetstone

<img src =/11288.jpg>
Originally posted by Pastor Larry:
If God has ordained it, he won't want to refuse. That's how I konw God hasn't ordained me to do it. I don't want to waste my time rehashing old arguments that have already been thoroughly beat up.
Click to expand...
well to be truthful, nothing we say or have said is anything new. Men have been arguing about it for 1000 years. My goal isn't to do something new, but to channel some of the negative energy into a more positive medium.

Sounds like we have a nomination for Jarthur. Does he accept?
 
J

Jarthur001

Active Member
I do think there are better ones that can argue Calvinism than I.

Like..., jdcanady would be my pick ..very low key, yet very sharp. RC another good one and much better with words than I. If jdcanady or RC or other names brought up, can not, I will give it a shot.

But as you know from reading other post of mine, i do not up hold john calvin, but I up hold many doctrines that have become known as Calvinism.

also...Johnp should be considered. If you read johnp...you will see he holds back on his replies. some of us share all we know as soon as we can..but john pulls his debater in with short answers...and then hammers him with the truth. John could hammer the guy at the 1st, but in john’s way of doing this, the debater argues all points before hearing the truth. A classic debate tool. However in a short format, I feel john would bring out the guns sooner.


Let me suggest a few things as a outline of the debate in fairness.

1st, I think there should be at least 2 debates. Debate 1 should have a debate moderator from 1 side. The next debate should have a moderator from the other side. The 2nd debate partakers, can be by others not in the 1st debate, if need be

2nd if this is a topic debate...define the subject before hand so that the moderator can apply the rules.

3rd. If this an debate where both sides field questions by the moderator, there should be a limit set. In other words, this could go on for ever, and we need to see the end in site.

4th.. It is my view that the fairist way to debate is to have such a order where the the lead closes last.

so in my view the order should be

1,2
2,1
1,2
2,1

or...

1,2
1,2
2,1
2,1

Other wise all we hear is one persons statements and the other persons attacks of that statement.

Last...Most debates have time limits to reply. This is a bit different in that we have no idea what the other person is doing ...not being in the same room. Some of us are at work, and it may take a day to reply. So...Last, is there a time limit to reply? If so, how long?

This last one is more for me. i type slow..and hardly ever check my typing. if i have the time and it were me in this debate, I will reread my writings before sending. That way..we ALL can read them...even me.

Also..most post come from me while at work. If there is a short time frame to reply, i’ll have to do this at night where i can set aside all other things and just debate. that is..if it is me that takes this on.

anyway..these are just some ideas. Whoever takes this on, needs to know the rules.

...larry says he is out., so my vote is for jdcanady..then RC or johnp....and if they can not...i’ll be glad to give it a shot.


In Christ...James
 
J

Jarthur001

Active Member
Lets put this another way.....

I'll be glad to share my views, i just want to allow others this chance as well. So..if by the end of the day, no one comes forward..i will accept.

If this turns out to be the case, give us the rules, time and subject and let the debate begin.

In Christ...James
 
H

here now

Member
Hi Daniel,

I would like to nominate Scott J.
(for the Calvinist side)

Also, I think you should allow time for Scott J. and RC to respond to their being nominated. I know they both are frequently on here, but I have noticed that RC has not replied yet.

Thanks,
Here Now
 
W

whetstone

<img src =/11288.jpg>
Originally posted by Jarthur001:
But as you know from reading other post of mine, i do not up hold john calvin, but I up hold many doctrines that have become known as Calvinism.
Click to expand...
Precicely the way most Calvinists believe.

1st, I think there should be at least 2 debates. Debate 1 should have a debate moderator from 1 side. The next debate should have a moderator from the other side. The 2nd debate partakers, can be by others not in the 1st debate, if need be
Click to expand...
If a moderator from Baptist Board would like to host a debate in which myself or any of the Calvinists on Spurgeon.us are invited to participate, I will be all for it. However, since Spurgeon.us is hosting our own debate, we will have our own moderators. We will be impartial mind you- and if anyone is wondering, I won't be one of the debate moderators.

We will have as many debates as the participants desire. I'm opening a permanent moderated debate forum.

2nd if this is a topic debate...define the subject before hand so that the moderator can apply the rules.
Click to expand...
I believe we should start with something simple. Perhaps- how did election occur? (foreknowledge or forordination) or 'does 1 John 2:2 teach universal atonement?' any ideas?

3rd. If this an debate where both sides field questions by the moderator, there should be a limit set. In other words, this could go on for ever, and we need to see the end in site.
Click to expand...
It won't be. The moderator simply introduces the opponents, defines the terms and allows the opponents to debate. He will only interfere if there is a problem. The debate should only be 10 posts long- introduction by the moderator, 2 opening statements, 4 rebuttals, 2 closing statements, and a conclusion by the moderator.

4th.. It is my view that the fairist way to debate is to have such a order where the the lead closes last.

so in my view the order should be...

Other wise all we hear is one persons statements and the other persons attacks of that statement.
Click to expand...
Since the opponents will be replying to each others opening statements and rebuttals, it won't be the way you say. Our mods are testing our format on the site right now and it is fairly successful.

Last...Most debates have time limits to reply. This is a bit different in that we have no idea what the other person is doing ...not being in the same room. Some of us are at work, and it may take a day to reply. So...Last, is there a time limit to reply? If so, how long?
Click to expand...
Debates can take no longer than 3 days. This will keep topics fresh with around 6 new debates starting each week (we allow 3 active debates at maximum).

...larry says he is out., so my vote is for jdcanady..then RC or johnp....and if they can not...i’ll be glad to give it a shot.
Click to expand...
Jdcanaday. Alright thanks.


Dan
 
BobRyan

BobRyan

Well-Known Member
Can someone please direct me to that debate forum?

It has been said that there are other debates that have taken place there - and I would love to see some of that history.

Bob
 
W

whetstone

<img src =/11288.jpg>
it is hidden at present until we have perfected the formula. I'm in a debate with one of our administrators (on CCM actually ;) ) and we're going to open it up fully in a few days. sorry for the delay but I want to make sure the format works correctly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top