My View of Debates

[A.W. Bowman]

When discussing Bible doctrines and related topics, there will almost always be a difference of opinion concerning how a word or phrase should be translated and/or interpreted. In attempting to get past hard positions and to expose the truth, the following approach has worked quite well for me in the past: I want to share my approach to theological discussions, debates, and other personal foibles. That is, how do I seem to frequently come out “on top” of theological and doctrinal discussions, even when it is pretty apparent that I have no idea what I am talking about to many? Simple, I don’t take the subject, opposing points of view, or myself too seriously. But, to the issue Is my drive to push to reveal the central point of a question the result of an overpowering drive, or some hidden inner need to be right at any cost, or is it to be at the head of the class, as it were? What about my unassailable knowledge of the Bible and even sharing in the Wisdom of Solomon? Could it be my unique relationship with the Holy Spirit that most other mortals have not yet achieved? Or, what about being able to sling words around so that even when they do make sense, folks trying to read and decipher them get overwhelmed and give up? (That is the best bet so far!) Or is it something else altogether? The answer is: It is something else altogether. A very top view of the procedure. When I approach any religious, theological, or doctoral exchange, whenever I can, I wait before joining a discussion until I understand what each participant aims to achieve and decide if participating is worth the time and effort. I attempt to answer the questions: 1. What is the purpose of this discussion from the different individuals' points of view? Why is this discussion even taking place? When I read a letter or note or hear an argument, what is the author(s) attempting to gain from this exchange? What is the goal of the exchange? 2. Why do people say what they are saying? What personal needs are expressed? What is the emotional situation of the exchange, and why is it “critical” to the author(s)? Then comes my self-examination: I go through the above questions, with myself as the subject. Why should I get involved? What is my payoff? Do I want to win, assist, teach, or am I just bored? Or do I wish to learn something myself? Am I still teachable? Most religious discussions have only two purposes. The first is to validate what one already holds to be true. The second purpose is to justify the first purpose. Discussions to discover “truth” are like a man looking for gold in his bathtub. It is a wonderfully cleansing and invigorating pursuit, but it seldom results in finding pay dirt. The results of most discussions are usually unsatisfying because almost everyone in these discussions is already convinced that they are “right” and have the “truth”. What is left is the futile attempt to prove the superiority of one’s position over all of the others – to be “right” in their own sight. When discussing Bible doctrines and related subjects, there will almost always be a difference of opinion concerning how a word or phrase should be translated and/or interpreted. In attempting to get past hard positions and to expose the truth, the following approach has worked quite well for me in the past: I would like to share my “secrets” concerning theological discussions, debates, and other personal foibles. That is, how is it that I seem to frequently come out “on top” of theological and doctrinal discussions, even when it is quite apparent that to many, I really have no idea what I am talking about? Simple, I don’t take the subject, opposing points of view, or myself too seriously. But, to the issue: Is my drive to push to reveal the central point of a question the result of an overpowering drive, or some hidden inner need to be right at any cost, or is it to be at the head of the class, as it were? What about my unassailable knowledge of the Bible and even sharing in the Wisdom of Solomon? Could it be my unique relationship with the Holy Ghost that most other mortals have not achieved? Or, what about being able to sling words around so that even when they do make sense, folks trying to read and decipher them get overwhelmed and give up? (That is the best bet so far!) Or, is it something else altogether? The answer is: It is something else altogether. A very top level view of the procedure: When I approach any religious, theological, or doctoral exchange: When I can, I wait before entering a discussion until I understand what the participants are trying to accomplish and see if participating would be worth the time and effort. I work to answer the questions: 1. What is the purpose of this discussion from the different individuals' points of view? Why is this discussion even taking place? When I read a letter or note or hear an argument, what is the author attempting to gain from this exchange? What is the goal of the exchange? 2. Why do people say what they are saying? What needs are expressed? What is the emotional situation of the exchange, and why is it “that critical” to the author? Then comes my self-examination: I go through the above questions, with myself as the subject. Why should I get involved? What is my payoff? Do I want to win, help, teach, or am I just bored? Or, do I wish to learn something myself? Am I still teachable? Most religious discussions serve only two purposes. The first is to confirm what someone already believes to be true. The second is to justify that first belief. Conversations focused solely on discovering “truth” are like a man searching for gold in his bathtub. While it’s a refreshing and energizing pursuit, it rarely results in finding pay dirt. Most discussions tend to be unsatisfying because everyone involved is already convinced they are “right” and have the “truth.” So, all that remains is the futile effort to prove that one’s position is superior to all others (Right-Wrong games). May all the debates on this board be for the truth. So far, it looks very promising!

 

[David]

When discussing Bible doctrines and related topics, there will almost always be a difference of opinion concerning how a word or phrase should be translated and/or interpreted. In attempting to get past hard positions and to expose the truth, the following approach has worked quite well for me in the past: I want to share my approach to theological discussions, debates, and other personal foibles. That is, how do I seem to frequently come out “on top” of theological and doctrinal discussions, even when it is pretty apparent that I have no idea what I am talking about to many? Simple, I don’t take the subject, opposing points of view, or myself too seriously. But, to the issue Is my drive to push to reveal the central point of a question the result of an overpowering drive, or some hidden inner need to be right at any cost, or is it to be at the head of the class, as it were? What about my unassailable knowledge of the Bible and even sharing in the Wisdom of Solomon? Could it be my unique relationship with the Holy Spirit that most other mortals have not yet achieved? Or, what about being able to sling words around so that even when they do make sense, folks trying to read and decipher them get overwhelmed and give up? (That is the best bet so far!) Or is it something else altogether? The answer is: It is something else altogether. A very top view of the procedure. When I approach any religious, theological, or doctoral exchange, whenever I can, I wait before joining a discussion until I understand what each participant aims to achieve and decide if participating is worth the time and effort. I attempt to answer the questions: 1. What is the purpose of this discussion from the different individuals' points of view? Why is this discussion even taking place? When I read a letter or note or hear an argument, what is the author(s) attempting to gain from this exchange? What is the goal of the exchange? 2. Why do people say what they are saying? What personal needs are expressed? What is the emotional situation of the exchange, and why is it “critical” to the author(s)? Then comes my self-examination: I go through the above questions, with myself as the subject. Why should I get involved? What is my payoff? Do I want to win, assist, teach, or am I just bored? Or do I wish to learn something myself? Am I still teachable? Most religious discussions have only two purposes. The first is to validate what one already holds to be true. The second purpose is to justify the first purpose. Discussions to discover “truth” are like a man looking for gold in his bathtub. It is a wonderfully cleansing and invigorating pursuit, but it seldom results in finding pay dirt. The results of most discussions are usually unsatisfying because almost everyone in these discussions is already convinced that they are “right” and have the “truth”. What is left is the futile attempt to prove the superiority of one’s position over all of the others – to be “right” in their own sight. When discussing Bible doctrines and related subjects, there will almost always be a difference of opinion concerning how a word or phrase should be translated and/or interpreted. In attempting to get past hard positions and to expose the truth, the following approach has worked quite well for me in the past: I would like to share my “secrets” concerning theological discussions, debates, and other personal foibles. That is, how is it that I seem to frequently come out “on top” of theological and doctrinal discussions, even when it is quite apparent that to many, I really have no idea what I am talking about? Simple, I don’t take the subject, opposing points of view, or myself too seriously. But, to the issue: Is my drive to push to reveal the central point of a question the result of an overpowering drive, or some hidden inner need to be right at any cost, or is it to be at the head of the class, as it were? What about my unassailable knowledge of the Bible and even sharing in the Wisdom of Solomon? Could it be my unique relationship with the Holy Ghost that most other mortals have not achieved? Or, what about being able to sling words around so that even when they do make sense, folks trying to read and decipher them get overwhelmed and give up? (That is the best bet so far!) Or, is it something else altogether? The answer is: It is something else altogether. A very top level view of the procedure: When I approach any religious, theological, or doctoral exchange: When I can, I wait before entering a discussion until I understand what the participants are trying to accomplish and see if participating would be worth the time and effort. I work to answer the questions: 1. What is the purpose of this discussion from the different individuals' points of view? Why is this discussion even taking place? When I read a letter or note or hear an argument, what is the author attempting to gain from this exchange? What is the goal of the exchange? 2. Why do people say what they are saying? What needs are expressed? What is the emotional situation of the exchange, and why is it “that critical” to the author? Then comes my self-examination: I go through the above questions, with myself as the subject. Why should I get involved? What is my payoff? Do I want to win, help, teach, or am I just bored? Or, do I wish to learn something myself? Am I still teachable? Most religious discussions serve only two purposes. The first is to confirm what someone already believes to be true. The second is to justify that first belief. Conversations focused solely on discovering “truth” are like a man searching for gold in his bathtub. While it’s a refreshing and energizing pursuit, it rarely results in finding pay dirt. Most discussions tend to be unsatisfying because everyone involved is already convinced they are “right” and have the “truth.” So, all that remains is the futile effort to prove that one’s position is superior to all others (Right-Wrong games). May all the debates on this board be for the truth. So far, it looks very promising!

I appreciate your thoughts here, and I don’t think we should be prideful in our discussions. However, I do struggle when we seem to make light of God’s Word. We are to be earnest, painful in our doctrine for it is a matter of life and death (Philippians 3:19; 1 Timothy 4:16). Paul’s final exhortation to Timothy was, “Pay attention to yourself and your teaching. Persevere in these things, for as you do this you will save both yourself and your hearers” (1 Timothy 4:16). This is not a gentle suggestion, it is a command.

While it is right to be humble, it is also a command to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3) and “rightly handle the word of truth” (2 Timothy 2:15). I think it takes much more work, effort and care than a nonchalant attitude. Panning for gold in your bathtub comes across as a condescending dismissal of something which Jesus Himself says sets us free (John 8:31–32). That’s not very Christ-honoring cynicism if you ask me.

Throwing words at one another to try to drown each other out, especially if you are uncertain about what is true, doesn’t make you smart, it makes you a deceiver (2 Corinthians 4:2). We are to speak the truth in love, so that we may all grow into the fullness of Christ and our speech may be “seasoned with salt” (Ephesians 4:15). I find that this is best done with a foundation of Scripture, rather than mere cleverness.

Questioning our motives is not a problem, but it seems like we are throwing the baby out with the bathwater if we let that conclude a discussion is worthless, as “everyone thinks they’re right anyway.” We are also commanded to study Scripture “with great diligence” (Acts 17: 11), to test everything (1 Thessalonians 5:21) and to “spur one another on toward love and good deeds” as iron sharpens iron (Proverbs 27:17). It’s not about winning debates in a culture where deception abounds, it’s about standing for truth.

As Christians, we have a calling to “speak as the oracles of God” (1 Peter 4:11). We are not here to entertain, or to outsmart one another, we are here to glorify God by holding fast to His truth. We can treat that, and our discussions, with a little more seriousness (remember, in light of the glory of God and coming back to Scripture alone).

We must confront those who teach a false gospel because souls are at stake. Galatians 1:8 says that even if an angel preaches a different gospel, “let him be accursed.” This isn’t about opinions, it’s about truth. Promoting “what feels right” over what Scripture actually says only leads people away from Christ. God’s Word it is not up for debate. It is the final authority, and we are commanded to “contend for the faith” (Jude 3), not compromise it. Silence in the face of error is not love, it’s neglect. Truth must be spoken, clearly, boldly, and biblically.

A true follower of Christ is not going to be silent when the gospel is being distorted. Jude 3 tells us to “earnestly contend for the faith which was once delivered unto the saints.” To defend the truth is not an option for a genuine disciple of Jesus. “He that is not with me is against me,” Jesus said (Matthew 12:30). If we truly love Christ we will love His Word and if we love His Word, we will not be silent when it’s being abused. To sit quietly while others are being led astray is not faithful, it is failure. Real Christians contend for the gospel because they know it is the power of God unto salvation (Romans 1:16).