Why debates aren't allowed

[Janette]

...makes me want to overturn tables

Wow.

Just reading your story about your daughter's reply set my blood pressure rising. While I agree that no one may be "convinced" against his will, there is nothing that drives me higher up a wall than people who are bound and determined to cling to their idea no matter what degree of proof to the contrary you lay at their feet.

People like that can put me into a panic if I care about them. It's like watching someone drink poison. You want to yell and scream and just yank the glass out of their hands, but you can't, because the poison is in their minds and their hearts rather than some external thing you could get away from them.

Jesus walked the earth for but three years and fulfilled some 20 prophecies out of the old testament. He also healed the sick and raised the dead. The voice of the Lord God Himself spoke aloud to a crowd by saying "This is my Son....." yet when the time came for people to acknowledge Him, they turned away.

They were content to be "happy" with their ignorance too.

---

I was raised in a household where my biological father was "always" right. No matter what he said or did, he would declare that he was somehow granted some kind of automatic correctness.

By contrast, my mother was "always" wrong or uncertain. Between her own father (who I gather wasn't much different than her first husband) and my father, she'd learned to never be sure of anything. She either couldn't make a decision or else she'd go off half cocked and make rather poor choices.

After my father finally abandoned us and stayed gone, God blessed my mom and me with the presence of my stepdad. I only wish I could have appreciated him while he was alive. As I've gotten older though, I find myself relying more and more on his view of things.

He was a quiet man, and he often prefaced his words with "I could be wrong but...." and then he would speak his mind.

He was *rarely* wrong. But he was *always* open to the possibility of it. I have tried very hard to live in his example.

Be willing to be wrong, and you can turn any debate back into a discussion. Be willing to admit that there is your side, your opponent's side, and THEN the truth (which is usually somewhere inbetween everyone's perceptions), and you'll avoid most arguments. Be open to the idea that there is A Truth out there to find and you may one day see the very face of God.

But stand firm in the belief that you will be "right in your own eyes" (Judges 21:25) no matter what someone tries to tell you or teach you, and you stand to end up like everyone else who has clung to that particular motto.

 

[Jonah2005bt]

Ezekiel 3:4-11

Originally Posted by Janette

Wow.

Just reading your story about your daughter's reply set my blood pressure rising. While I agree that no one may be "convinced" against his will, there is nothing that drives me higher up a wall than people who are bound and determined to cling to their idea no matter what degree of proof to the contrary you lay at their feet.

People like that can put me into a panic if I care about them. It's like watching someone drink poison. You want to yell and scream and just yank the glass out of their hands, but you can't, because the poison is in their minds and their hearts rather than some external thing you could get away from them.

Jesus walked the earth for but three years and fulfilled some 20 prophecies out of the old testament. He also healed the sick and raised the dead. The voice of the Lord God Himself spoke aloud to a crowd by saying "This is my Son....." yet when the time came for people to acknowledge Him, they turned away.

They were content to be "happy" with their ignorance too.

Hi Janette, reading what you posted reminds me of a Scripture that always stuck well with me.

In Ezekiel 3:4-11, though The Almighty GOD was referring to the house of Israel HIS own people, I find the scripture still stands with us today, for we now, are also GOD'S People, we are HIS children.

4. And He said to me: "Son of man, go to the house of Israel and speak with My words to them.
5. "For you are not sent to a people of unfamiliar speech and of hard language, but to the house of Israel,
6. "not to many people of unfamiliar speech and of hard language, whose words you cannot understand. Surely, had I sent you to them, they would have listened to you.
7. "But the house of Israel will not listen to you, because they will not listen to Me; for all the house of Israel are impudent and hard-hearted.
8. "Behold, I have made your face strong against their faces, and your forehead strong against their foreheads.
9. "Like adamant stone, harder than flint, I have made your forehead; do not be afraid of them, nor be dismayed at their looks, though they are a rebellious house.''
10. Moreover He said to me: "Son of man, receive into your heart all My words that I speak to you, and hear with your ears.
11. "And go, get to the captives, to the children of your people, and speak to them and tell them, `Thus says the Lord God,' whether they hear, or whether they refuse.''

 

[calluna]

Janette, I see a different side to the story, I think the daughter in the first post was actually diffusing the situation and was actually saying that she would rather be wrong and happy, than to be right and have discord between her and her dad. Hey....don't need to turn this into a debate.

By the way Your first dad sounds very much like mine. It was a tough household to live in.
I think in a way it is just wise to have that 'I could be wrong but....' attitude. When we have that staunch 'I am always right' approach, and then everything crashes down and we are proved wrong, we just look very foolish and we have to eat humble pie. Well I suppose there are those who are so stubborn and prideful who wouldn't eat humble pie, but anyhow....this is a good thread.

:shade:Calluna

 

[seekermeister]

Years ago, when my daughter was a teenager (she's 36 yrs old now), she and I regularly got into discussions that evolved into the bitterest of arguments. We would literally be nose-to-nose screaming at each other sometimes. One night, in the middle of one of these arguments, she suddenly stopped yelling for a minute. Then she said quietly, "Oh well. I'd rather be happy than right" and left the room. She had learned (and was teaching me) that heated arguments do not accomplish anything positive and no one 's mind is changed;that even if you win, you lose; that, as Shakespeare wrote, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

All too often, debates on the internet begin with two or more people sharing and discussing opposing opinions on an issue in civil, respectful ways. But eventually one or more of them gets frustrated with those who do not agree with him. He gets irritated and, perhaps, insinuates that one or all of the others is of inferior intelligence; which, of course, elicits a response and the fight is on. This is not limited to secular websites. There's another "Christian" website that I used to hang out on where people would hurl unbelievable insults at each other.

We don't say "no" to debates here at TalkJesus to cut off discussion of divergent opinions. We say "no" to debates because they almost inevitably lead to heated, insult filled arguments and visitors to our site who read the posts involved or "listen in" in the chat rooms would end up shaking their heads and moving on, thinking "Why in the world would I want to be a part of that?" God is not glorified and people are not edified in such battles.

SLE

I certainly have no interest in changing the forum's policy, because it is all too often true. However, as a veteran of many debate forums, I have found them very useful because they can creat an environment of understanding, rather than argument. I must admit that this is not always true, but I have always made a point of attempting to shape debates into discussions, rather than arguments. I have told more than one person, attempting to argue with me, that I never argue with anyone. This doesn't always work, in fact, sometimes it makes it worse. When it gets to that point, I simply don't respond. You might wonder why I involve myself in this fashion, and the answer is simple...some people listen, whether they admit it or not, and by that means I can plant a few seeds, and hope that they someday grow enough for someone to reap.

I am quite content that there is no debate forum here, because I can find plenty of them elsewhere, and this forum is a good haven for when I get weary.

 

[SpiritLedEd]

Seekermeister, we do have discussion on TalkJesus. I'm involved in one or two these at the present time and while there has been sharp disagreement, the posts have been (up to now) quite civil and courteous, reflecting God's love.

I believe that Chad was using a narrow definition of "debate" when he posted that rule, defining debate as something like verbal combat wherein the opponent is to be vanquished. Sadly, it is this kind of debate that he and I saw most of the time on Christian web sites.

Your broader definition of debate is valid because it is synonymous with polite disagreement as opposed to open warfare. And I, for one, would be loath to oppose such discussion.

SLE

 

[Chad]

Brother Ed, you said that perfectly well and summed it up nicely. Its exactly what I wanted to post the other day, but have been a bit emotionally stressed out to post anything lately.

I hope everyone understands clearly now the rule of debating.

 

[seekermeister]

I may still avoid "debates", because while I never use profanity, derogatory epithets, etc. I have found that some people find my blunt courteous truthfulness to be quite offensive, and I'm too old to change now for any forum. Therefore, I will just sporadically interject where I might be of some use.

 

[Chad]

I feel the same way brother. Actually, its not much our blunt-to-the-truth style, but more those who pridefully refuse to accept the truth and admit their wrongs, or at least their misundertanding of Scripture for example.

If we let the Holy Spirit lead, there would be great communion and Christ loving fellowship.

 

[seekermeister]

Agreed. I have always maintained, that any person that actually understood the Bible would be open to God, because after speaking to many atheists, who indignantly declare how many times that they have read it, quickly make it very clear that they didn't understand any of it. This is why I have sought to reach them, because the only thing that I know how to do is to teach. But this too often falls on deaf ears. Therefore, instead of making the Bible my primary subject, I usually focus on the things that they tend to use as their alternate god...science. I appreciate the good things that have been accomplished through science, but this is offset by the bad. It seems that no matter how carefully I attempt to share this focus, that many people get very perturbed, as though I have committed a sacrilege. What disturbs them more, is when I compare their beliefs to that of some religious fanatics. I don't have much use for any kind of religion, I only have faith.

 

[Blayz]

Therefore, instead of making the Bible my primary subject, I usually focus on the things that they tend to use as their alternate god...science.

Has this approach worked any better that the biblical one?

What disturbs them more, is when I compare their beliefs to that of some religious fanatics.

And you find this a useful ministering tactic? Having been on the receiving end of this argument, I can confidently state you are confusing "disturbs" with "annoys", and are thereby having the exact opposite effect to that which you intended.

You might like to read Catseye's IMHO excellent thread entitled "Ministry?" in the Ethics & Morality forum on this board.

I wonder how many of these people will stand before our Lord and He will say to them, Depart from Me, I never knew you!

Were I a Christian I would wonder that too.

 

[Chad]

Has this approach worked any better that the biblical one?



And you find this a useful ministering tactic? Having been on the receiving end of this argument, I can confidently state you are confusing "disturbs" with "annoys", and are thereby having the exact opposite effect to that which you intended.

You might like to read Catseye's IMHO excellent thread entitled "Ministry?" in the Ethics & Morality forum on this board.



Were I a Christian I would wonder that too.

So what's stopping you from being a Christian? Pride? Lack of knowledge? Your here on a Christian forum after all. What are your intentions? I only hope your intentions is to learn about Jesus out of sincerity and nothing else. Otherwise, any other reason just shows your here with bad motives right? Right.

Tell me, do you think this world is a coincidence, which is why you wish to remain an atheist? You know, the only planet with life (and abundant of it may I add) out of the entire galaxy of billions of things like stars, planets, moons, asteroids, comets, meteors, etc? You know, its strange that the sun is 400x the size of the moon AND 400x further away from earth than the moon is, yet symmetrically they look nicely the same size when you look up to the sky and see both together. How sweet of GOD to design our sky to look this beautiful.

You want to talk about your atheistic beliefs, open a new thread for that. This thread remains about debates and it not intended to talk about your personal views otherwise. On a side note, an atheist who believes there is no God must have absolute knowledge of all things that DO exist. Do you have this knowledge? Think.

 

[Blayz]

So what's stopping you from being a Christian?

I cannot answer that without breaking your site commandments.

Your here on a Christian forum after all. What are your intentions? I only hope your intentions is to learn about Jesus out of sincerity and nothing else. Otherwise, any other reason just shows your here with bad motives right? Right.

Obviously. I would hope that those posts I have made so far are an indication of my motives, which are to understand the Pentacostal/Christian mindset and biblical interpretation.

Tell me, do you think this world is a coincidence.... How sweet of GOD to design our sky to look this beautiful.

Once again, as your own rules have stated, this is not the forum for this kind of discussion, as I am severely hampered in my responses by the site regulations.

You want to talk about your atheistic beliefs, open a new thread for that.

I think that would be a bad idea, it would offend far too many people, and serve no real purpose.

At any rate, if you you could overlook your own sense of pride and suspicion at my motives, and consider instead that perhaps I posted in good faith, and re-consider exactly what I said and asked. I am clearly in no position to interpret scripture, not for the least reason that I am not guided by the Holy Spirit. I am however, in an excellent position to tell you what doesn't work when it comes to ministering and witnessing, having been on the receiving end of both for many years.

Am I wrong? Is it not one of your fundamental tenets to reach out to unbelievers and spread the Word? Was Catseye wrong in his post? You yourself said it contained truth.

Chad, I am not here to cause dissension nor with malicious intent. I have been a member of this board for over a month and in that time made 11 posts (1 of which was an apology to you). SM's approach simply does not work, he admitted it mostly falls on deaf ears. Perhaps if a Christian approached me in a non confrontational way with a message that made sense, I'd be on your side of the fence, not mine. (OK, well that is probably not the case, but it certainly applies to others, even if not to me).

 

[seekermeister]

Blayz,

Does there seem to be any irony in there being a debate about debates? Do you find that there is something awry with you making assumptions about my methods, based on nothing more than what little that I have written here? This is a form of accusation that is not characteristic of Christian behavior, but then, being a token atheist, I guess that is to be expected.

If you would care to have a debate with me, then I would suggest that it be somewhere else than here.

Blayz,

SM's approach simply does not work, he admitted it mostly falls on deaf ears.

Regardless of the approach that anyone takes, it is going to fall on many deaf ears. I have no expectation of ever being able to reach everyone. If I can reach only one, that is sufficient for me.

 

[Faithful Son]

I've decided to remove your signature brother Blayz, which stated "Token Atheist". I'll have to ask you not to use it again.

This site is about Jesus however. Jesus said if you aren't with Him, you are against Him. I do not accept that signature as being something for Jesus, so it will stay removed.

God bless

 

[Chad]

I cannot answer that without breaking your site commandments.

Obviously. I would hope that those posts I have made so far are an indication of my motives, which are to understand the Pentacostal/Christian mindset and biblical interpretation.

Once again, as your own rules have stated, this is not the forum for this kind of discussion, as I am severely hampered in my responses by the site regulations.

I think that would be a bad idea, it would offend far too many people, and serve no real purpose.

At any rate, if you you could overlook your own sense of pride and suspicion at my motives, and consider instead that perhaps I posted in good faith, and re-consider exactly what I said and asked. I am clearly in no position to interpret scripture, not for the least reason that I am not guided by the Holy Spirit. I am however, in an excellent position to tell you what doesn't work when it comes to ministering and witnessing, having been on the receiving end of both for many years.

Am I wrong? Is it not one of your fundamental tenets to reach out to unbelievers and spread the Word? Was Catseye wrong in his post? You yourself said it contained truth.

Chad, I am not here to cause dissension nor with malicious intent. I have been a member of this board for over a month and in that time made 11 posts (1 of which was an apology to you). SM's approach simply does not work, he admitted it mostly falls on deaf ears. Perhaps if a Christian approached me in a non confrontational way with a message that made sense, I'd be on your side of the fence, not mine. (OK, well that is probably not the case, but it certainly applies to others, even if not to me).

The site's regulations hampers your response? No, it would be your hardened heart that hampers your belief in Jesus. As for catseye, why so infatuated by what this person is posting? Find something more reasonable than asking me for an opinion on another person's post, seriously.

You said " I am clearly in no position to interpret scripture" yet you say also "SM's approach simply does not work". Who are you to decide what works or not? Should we listen to "blayz" or Jesus? I listen to Jesus, not human beings who are unbelievers as well. People like you is where truth "falls on deaf ears" regardless of the approach. Why? Hardened hearts, pride, lack of knowledge.

Don't bother opening a thread about atheism. It would automatically be nothing but garbage. That is what atheism is, foolishness arrogance in full bleed. Its disgusting and a pathetic attempt at refusing to obey GOD. Who do you thank for your family and food at the end of the day? Yourself for working hard? Who do you thank for your health? Can you define love? Ask yourself, how did this world come about? I'm not interested in opinions, only truth. I suggest reading the sticky threads here (http://www.talkjesus.com/evidence-prophecy-facts/). You cannot refuse truth whatsoever.

An atheist cannot find GOD for the same reason a thief cannot find the police

 

[rossj.anderson]

Years ago, when my daughter was a teenager (she's 36 yrs old now), she and I regularly got into discussions that evolved into the bitterest of arguments. We would literally be nose-to-nose screaming at each other sometimes. One night, in the middle of one of these arguments, she suddenly stopped yelling for a minute. Then she said quietly, "Oh well. I'd rather be happy than right" and left the room. She had learned (and was teaching me) that heated arguments do not accomplish anything positive and no one 's mind is changed;that even if you win, you lose; that, as Shakespeare wrote, "A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still."

All too often, debates on the internet begin with two or more people sharing and discussing opposing opinions on an issue in civil, respectful ways. But eventually one or more of them gets frustrated with those who do not agree with him. He gets irritated and, perhaps, insinuates that one or all of the others is of inferior intelligence; which, of course, elicits a response and the fight is on. This is not limited to secular websites. There's another "Christian" website that I used to hang out on where people would hurl unbelievable insults at each other.

We don't say "no" to debates here at TalkJesus to cut off discussion of divergent opinions. We say "no" to debates because they almost inevitably lead to heated, insult filled arguments and visitors to our site who read the posts involved or "listen in" in the chat rooms would end up shaking their heads and moving on, thinking "Why in the world would I want to be a part of that?" God is not glorified and people are not edified in such battles.

SLE

I f debates are not allowed how is one going to learn?
Yes there should of course be guidelines.
I'm just wondering and I'm not ready to pick a fight.
When we share our feeling on a certain topic are we not in a sence debateing.
The spelling check button don't seen to work on my p.c.

 

[Chad]

I f debates are not allowed how is one going to learn?
Yes there should of course be guidelines.
I'm just wondering and I'm not ready to pick a fight.
When we share our feeling on a certain topic are we not in a sence debateing.
The spelling check button don't seen to work on my p.c.

Brother Ed answered this nicely on page 3.

Seekermeister, we do have discussion on TalkJesus. I'm involved in one or two these at the present time and while there has been sharp disagreement, the posts have been (up to now) quite civil and courteous, reflecting God's love.

I believe that Chad was using a narrow definition of "debate" when he posted that rule, defining debate as something like verbal combat wherein the opponent is to be vanquished. Sadly, it is this kind of debate that he and I saw most of the time on Christian web sites.

Your broader definition of debate is valid because it is synonymous with polite disagreement as opposed to open warfare. And I, for one, would be loath to oppose such discussion.

SLE

 

[rossj.anderson]

Brother Ed answered this nicely on page 3.

That's put in a very nice way.