Let me begin by saying that I agree that there should be a debate room, ProveMeWrong! I think a debate room would be an excellent way for Christians to both engage with non-believers and getting a different perspective from other beliefs! It would also be a great way to hear the arguments from the other side directly instead of creating strawmen and faulty caricatures of an opposing view. I motion that we do have a debate room!
I'll now turn my attention to two comments Samster's made about debating.
1)
Debates lead to strife, arguments, and quarreling
Here, I think we have a little common ground, Samster! I tend to agree with you, that debate can lead to strife, arguments, and quarrelings; but I don't think they
always do. I'm sure most of us here have had our share of debates which have turned into exactly what you described. I think a key distinction must be made here; strife and arguments are a result of the participants, not because of debate itself.
It is such a shame to watch debate turn into an argument rather than a civil exchange of ideas between two participants. Thus, I can understand your apprehention towards such endevors. However, I have personally participated in a few debates in which there wasn't the slightest hint of strife or arguing. Let me give you a quick example. I was debating God's existence with a young man and out of no where, he brought up the homosexual topic. We carefully navigated through such a topic which is typically associated with your description of debate, with ease, kindness, and grace. At the end, he said, "you're not like other Christians who I've talked to about these issues. You're tolerant of me and my life style". I say this not to boast or to be prideful, but rather show that debating isn't always full of tention, strife, quarreling, or arguing.
I've also witnessed similar results occur with other debaters. For example, over the span of a twenty five plus year career, William Lane Craig has participated in a plethora of debates in which both participants weren't angry, no sign of strife, or arguing.Therefore, I believe there is a balance between arguing and
arguments (a series of statements which lead to a conclusion called premises), between fruitful and fruitless debates, and between a good debate and a bad one.
I'll now shift my attention to the uncommon ground you and I share.
Surprisingly, you said, "
Our bible says not to do those things" to which I need clarification. Where do you read of such commands? When you cite them, I'll deal with them.
In the mean time, I'd like to present a Biblical case for using debate.
All throughout Acts, Luke records Paul on mutiple occassions debating with various people from philosophers to Jews. Let me just cite two examples.
1) Acts 17:17-34:
Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there. Then certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him. And some said, “What does this babbler want to say?”... And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new doctrine is of which you speak?... Then Paul stood in the midst of the Areopagus and said...[1]"
I want to stop here to point out that Paul is now engaged in a debate. Now debate is defined as,
a contention by words or arguments as: a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides [2]." That is to say, an idea that is discussed between two sides in opposition of each other. 2) Acts 15:1-2:
Some men came down from Judea and began to teach the brothers: "Unless you are circumcised according to the custom prescribed by Moses, you cannot be saved!". But after Paul and Barnabas had engaged them in serious argument and debate, they arranged for Paul and Barnabas and some others of them to go up to the apostles and elders in Jerusalem concerning this controversy."--Holman Christian Standard Bible
Both the King James version[3] and New King James version[4] say the same thing but word it differently while maintaining the same meaning in the text. In the King James version,
disputation is used instead of debate while the New King James version it uses
dispute. The word dispute means,
to engage in argument : debate; especially: to argue irritably or with irritating persistence [5]."
Based on these two examples and their explanations, it should be obvious by now that Paul regularly engaged in debate.
I would like to point out that the true irony here would be if you respond in opposition to anything I've said in this post. For doing so would condemn you for the very thing that you said the Bible commands us not to do; i.e. debate. Thus, you would effectively undermine your own position which in philosophy would be called a self-refutation.
I thank you for reading this lengthly post, Samster! I look forward to your response.
God bless,
-Brandon
[1]
Acts 17:17-34 NKJV - Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue - Bible Gateway
[2]
Debate - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
[3]
Acts 15:1-2 KJV - And certain men which came down from - Bible Gateway
[4]
Acts 15:1-2 NKJV - Conflict over Circumcision - And - Bible Gateway
[5]
Dispute - Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary
