How pointless is debate?

[Darias]

Over the course of the past few months, I have noticed several of my Christian brethren say things like this:

. . . there's no point in debating theology with unbelievers.

[...]

[If] you found the Bible to be true and accurate, then we would have a foundation on which to begin. If you do not, then any theological debate we might have would be a fruitless dialogue that would result in absolutely nothing in the end but two people's opinion who aren't any closer to agreeing with each other then when they first began.

[...]

As for the offer to debate, I'll pass. We cannot debate theology if you do not consider the Bible to be true. . . . I don't see the point.
_____

• ( "How do we know a sinner when we see one?" Page 29, Post 282 )

. . . I have about 15 hours into a reply to your post above, but I have decided to scrap it. I hate doing this, because I feel that in it I very strongly and adequately demonstrated that my position is Biblically consistent. However, I have said before that I do not debate theology with people who do not believe the Bible. . . .

[...]

I see no point in giving you any more of my time, at least regarding Biblical matters. . . . debating anything Biblical with you is certainly pointless.
_____

• ( "Once saved, always saved?" Page 20, Post 199 )

I refuse to debate the Bible and theology with unsaved people. It's pointless.
_____

• ( "Prayer is a waste." Page 3, Post 28 )

-----

This attitude concerns me. Two of these posts were addressed to me, a believer -- and while I take no offense at the responses in general, it does make me wonder.

If Christians are unwilling to debate other Christians on important matters of belief, how do they expect to convince non-believers to believe in their world-view?

And second, if Christians are unwilling to discuss the Bible, doctrine, or theology with non-believers, how do they expect anyone to join the faith? Are Christians just hoping people will accept Christ for fear of hell, or out of ignorance of the teachings of the faith?

Third, is this seemingly collective pessimism towards debate the result of the inability to actually support a strong argument, or is it the result of an unwillingness to exchange ideas and admit the possibility of being wrong? Or is it cased by something else?

I'd really like to know. If no one is willing to give an answer, than may I ask, "Why are you here?" After all, this is a forum called Debating Christianity and Religion.

[otseng]

Let me ask you this, do you think that him stating that Darias is not a true Christian would be a violation of the forum rules or not?

No because AmazingJesusIs made a judgment about Darius based upon an inference from scripture (Matthew 7:16-20).

I think this is the crux of the matter. I view that stating that someone is not a true Christian is a violation of the rules, whether it is actually true or not is not the issue. Now, if it was not against the rules and I took action on him for that, then I would not be acting properly. (And I think this is the position that you hold.)

[Goose]

Let me ask you this, do you think that him stating that Darias is not a true Christian would be a violation of the forum rules or not?

No because AmazingJesusIs made a judgment about Darius based upon an inference from scripture (Matthew 7:16-20).

I think this is the crux of the matter. I view that stating that someone is not a true Christian is a violation of the rules, whether it is actually true or not is not the issue.

Now, I’m not saying I agree the inference AmazingJesusIs has made about Darius is itself sound (that is not my point). But AmazingJesusIs did not appear to merely state it as an ad hominem. He justified it with an inference from scripture. If this is an attack then you did the same thing. You inferred something about another member – that AmazingJesusIs was not able to understand a rule because he did not heed your warning. AmazingJesusIs did the same thing with Darius. AmazingJesusIs inferred something about another member – that Darius is not a true Christian because he rejects Biblical inerrancy. By drawing logical inferences about each other you are either both attacking another member or you are both not. Hence the two options I proposed to remain consistent...

• 1. Restore AmazingJesusIs to the BK group or;
  2. Remove yourself as well.

I’ll leave it to you to decide the right thing to do.

[otseng]

Let me ask you this, do you think that him stating that Darias is not a true Christian would be a violation of the forum rules or not?

No because AmazingJesusIs made a judgment about Darius based upon an inference from scripture (Matthew 7:16-20).

I think this is the crux of the matter. I view that stating that someone is not a true Christian is a violation of the rules, whether it is actually true or not is not the issue.

Now, I’m not saying I agree the inference AmazingJesusIs has made about Darius is itself sound (that is not my point). But AmazingJesusIs did not appear to merely state it as an ad hominem. He justified it with an inference from scripture.

I'm not saying anything about the validity of the inference. He could've presented a dozen arguments to justify his belief that Darias is not a Christian, it doesn't matter. Merely stating that he believes that Darias is not a true Christian is a violation of the rules.

Hence the two options I proposed to remain consistent...

• 1. Restore AmazingJesusIs to the BK group or;
  2. Remove yourself as well.

I’ll leave it to you to decide the right thing to do.

Since I view AmazingJesusIs had violated the rules, actually the right thing to do was to issue him a formal warning.

[Goose]

I'm not saying anything about the validity of the inference. He could've presented a dozen arguments to justify his belief that Darias is not a Christian, it doesn't matter. Merely stating that he believes that Darias is not a true Christian is a violation of the rules.

But then also stating the belief that someone does not seem to be ABLE to understand a simple rule, as you did, is equally a rule violation as well then. Surely you see this. Otherwise you are merely picking things out of the air as it suites you personally.

Since I view AmazingJesusIs had violated the rules, actually the right thing to do was to issue him a formal warning.

Okay, but you should have received a formal warning too then, right? Does this mean you will restore AmazingJesusIs back to the BK group then (assuming he wants back in)?

[WinePusher]

Let me ask you this, do you think that him stating that Darias is not a true Christian would be a violation of the forum rules or not?

No, I don't think that's a violation of the forum rules, but then again I'm WinePusher. I think it reflects poorly on the character of him, as the virture of refrainment from judging others has been ignored on his part, but it isn't equivalent to an attack or personal statement. Consider the nature of this thread, is it not assuming the close mindedness of fundamentalist biblicists? I think AmazingJesusIs' point is a good one, he is saying that if a person is going to pass judgement and criticize fundamentalist aspects of Christianity and the way they approach debate, then it's also legitimate to point out that person's shortcomings in relation to Christianity. It shouldn't be a one way street where liberals get to ridicule conservative christians and their debate tactics but liberal christians are off limits from any types of criticism.

[Darias]

Otseng, please lock the thread and restore AmazingJesusIs to his group, at your discretion of course.

It's not worth hearing it -- not for you or me...

My apologies to everyone for creating this thread; it has been a huge waste of everyone's time.

[fewwillfindit]

Otseng, please lock the thread and restore AmazingJesusIs to his group, at your discretion of course.

It's not worth hearing it -- not for you or me...

My apologies to everyone for creating this thread; it has been a huge waste of everyone's time.

I disagree. I think it is a much needed conversation.


Edit: my comment is not in regards to the dialogue between Otseng and Goose.

[otseng]

I'm not saying anything about the validity of the inference. He could've presented a dozen arguments to justify his belief that Darias is not a Christian, it doesn't matter. Merely stating that he believes that Darias is not a true Christian is a violation of the rules.

But then also stating the belief that someone does not seem to be ABLE to understand a simple rule, as you did, is equally a rule violation as well then. Surely you see this. Otherwise you are merely picking things out of the air as it suites you personally.

I've already apologized if it's construed as a negative statement towards him.

Since I view AmazingJesusIs had violated the rules, actually the right thing to do was to issue him a formal warning.

Okay, but you should have received a formal warning too then, right? Does this mean you will restore AmazingJesusIs back to the BK group then (assuming he wants back in)?

I will let AmazingJesusIs speak for himself. And why are you so adamant on speaking for him?

[Darias]

Let me ask you this, do you think that him stating that Darias is not a true Christian would be a violation of the forum rules or not?

No, I don't think that's a violation of the forum rules, but then again I'm WinePusher. I think it reflects poorly on the character of him, as the virture of refrainment from judging others has been ignored on his part, but it isn't equivalent to an attack or personal statement.

Well he didn't just say "I don't think you are a Christian." He said this:

You can't be a true Christian who has been saved by Jesus Christ the Messiah and believe that Bible is not true and that Scripture is errant, whether it's all sixty-six books, or one verse.

You have mislead yourself. It's not the fact that you're not a Calvinist or Reformed Baptist, it's that you're not a Christian, and I know you're not a Christian because you claim that Paul's texts shouldn't be taken as real Scripture, and that you pick and choose your pieces of the Holy Bible to suit your own needs. That's not what a Disciple of Christ does. You make a bad name for us true converts.

The reason why "fellow" Christians don't debate with you is because we are not "fellow" Christians. We know we are Christians, and your belief that the Bible is false deems you un-Christian. It is without reason to debate theology with non-Christians.

Consider the nature of this thread, is it not assuming the close mindedness of fundamentalist biblicists?

I created this thread because I wanted to know why Christians refused to debate with me because I have a commonly held view of the Bible which they disagree with -- to the point of saying that it is a waste of time to debate with me -- as if I'm not worthy of discussion.

It has nothing to do with "close-mindedness" -- I have no idea where you got that from.

I think AmazingJesusIs' point is a good one,

Do you realize that he called me a false Christian and that I give a bad name for others because I don't believe in Biblical inerrancy and because I believe in an Omnibenevolent God. DO YOU NOT believe the same? You believe that Evolution is a fact, which is contrary to the scriptures (sure the Bible doesn't mention evolution, but it does stress the literal creation of kinds.) Do you believe that God is love? Of course you do.

Yet you didn't speak up when I was assaulted with ad-hominems of the legitimacy of my personal faith in God (even though opinion which warranted such such condemnation is the same as yours). Instead you say that it was right. You go to the point of saying it's not even a personal attack.

I'll take a guess as to why.

It's because I'm a liberal, and I've disagreed with you in the past on a range of issues. That's the only reason why.

he is saying that if a person is going to pass judgement and criticize fundamentalist aspects of Christianity and the way they approach debate, then it's also legitimate to point out that person's shortcomings in relation to Christianity.

Just because I debate strongly does not mean that I use personal attacks. I strive not to attack the person. Though I let loose on doctrines and ideas, I never question the legitimacy of someone elses' faith. I never call them names. I never condemn them to hell. I never accuse them of leading others to hell, and I never ever justify such dickery with Holy scripture.

Why then do you think that it is perfectly okay to resort to using ad-hominems when one cannot defend their opinions or positions, in reference to doctrine, etc.? It's never okay to do that.

It shouldn't be a one way street where liberals get to ridicule conservative christians and their debate tactics but liberal christians are off limits from any types of criticism.

I welcome a fiery discussion. You can slice and dice my views all you want. Bring it if you can -- just don't play God and tell me where to go if your argument doesn't hold water.

[otseng]

Let me ask you this, do you think that him stating that Darias is not a true Christian would be a violation of the forum rules or not?

No, I don't think that's a violation of the forum rules, but then again I'm WinePusher. I think it reflects poorly on the character of him, as the virture of refrainment from judging others has been ignored on his part, but it isn't equivalent to an attack or personal statement. Consider the nature of this thread, is it not assuming the close mindedness of fundamentalist biblicists? I think AmazingJesusIs' point is a good one, he is saying that if a person is going to pass judgement and criticize fundamentalist aspects of Christianity and the way they approach debate, then it's also legitimate to point out that person's shortcomings in relation to Christianity.

Would you consider it appropriate if I said you were not a true Christian since I believe in the Bible more literally than you do? Is this not the same criteria that others are placing on Darias since he is not as literal as others? My point is no, it is not appropriate in any circumstance to say if someone else is not a true Christian if that person has claimed to be a Christian himself.

It shouldn't be a one way street where liberals get to ridicule conservative christians and their debate tactics but liberal christians are off limits from any types of criticism.

Commenting on debate tactics is certainly allowed.