This week's debate between Steve and James White.

[Choosethisday]

I also have done some more looking and found this from John Wilkin, the editor of the Journal of the Grace Evangelical Society. http://www.faithalone.org/journal/2005ii/wilkin.pdf This society has been around since 1986 so it likely isn't a loose cannon within Calvinism. Hopefully it doesn't reflect the view of most Calvinists but it would seem to reflect the view of some of their leadership. It would seem there are some common thoughts among Calvinists, at least American Calvinists anyway, that this debate is about essentials!

[darinhouston]

Singlephile, while they may frequently be seen as one individual against another, rightly speaking one should see them as one proposition against another proposition with the individuals representing the positions as advocates.

At the end of the day though debate is more about who did better in presenting and though truth can be ferreted by listening to a debate, a debate doesn't seek truth, per se. That would be a dialectic.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Choosethisday]

The word "debate" has some negative connotations and perhaps the way a debate is typically conducted these may be justified. I would have preferred hearing Steve and Dr. White work strenuously to get to the truth. As I said, while Steve seemed to be trying to strive toward this end it wasn't reciprocated for the most part. After some of the comments from Calvinists I have read since starting this thread I think I have a better idea of where they are coming from, at least some in leadership anyway. While not all Calvinists feel this strongly, many seem to view non-Calvinists as almost a cult with a misleading and perhaps dangerous theology.

[paulespino]

I listened to the debate before and my impression is that Steve is trying to educate or inform James White with his understanding of the bible. He never forced his beliefs to James or to anybody which shows us that he has a humble spirit.

[darinhouston]

One of the main benefits of a debate to me is not coming to a conclusion or convincing the other person he is wrong. Vigorously defending one's own position and even vigorously challenging the other position does several main things: Among other things, (1) it helps me better understand the nuances of a position I don't hold; (2) it helps clarify where differences and commonalities really lie; and (3) it helps me see blind spots in my own position. Even if I learn nothing of another's position, seeing where my position has a false premise or faulty logic is really helpful to maintaining a humble attitude and avoiding doctrinal strongholds.

It's also frequently intellectually stimulating/satisfying. But, James seems to only seek to humiliate the other person or to obscure what may be legitimate points they may have.

[robbyyoung]

These debates are not done in the spirit of "bible study". Normally, confrontation is likely by reason of a presumed false teaching. Therefore, one, if not both parties, are in the spirit of rebuke and exhortation.

Instead of debates, wouldn't it be refreshing to see these influential brothers sit down and have a genuine bible study, and we the audience, follow along for the hours, days, months, or even years to strive for the unity of the faith?

Words matter. Debate is combative and devisive. I wonder who would agree to having bible study together verses debating .

God bless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Robby Young
U.S. Army Retired

[darinhouston]

These debates are not done in the spirit of "bible study". Normally, confrontation is likely by reason of a presumed false teaching. Therefore, one, if not both parties, are in the spirit of rebuke and exhortation.

Instead of debates, wouldn't it be refreshing to see these influential brothers sit down and have a genuine bible study, and we the audience, follow along for the hours, days, months, or even years to strive for the unity of the faith?

Words matter. Debate is combative and devisive. I wonder who would agree to having bible study together verses debating .

God bless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Robby Young
U.S. Army Retired

I think there's a place for both -- competition and argumentation don't have to be confrontational -- too many people do that, but I've seen very spirited and engaged impassioned debates with great love and humility really help clarify positions.

[robbyyoung]

Where in the NT does it say or condone Christians debating one another? I'm just asking because I'm not sure of the matter.

God bless.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Robby Young
U.S. Army Retired

[darinhouston]

I'm not sure it needs to, provided in doing so you can adhere to the other admonitions on how to treat one another. Paul comes pretty close to it by engaging with the philosophers at Mars Hill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[steve7150]

I'm not sure it needs to, provided in doing so you can adhere to the other admonitions on how to treat one another. Paul comes pretty close to it by engaging with the philosophers at Mars Hill.








I'm not sure of the context of "iron sharpens iron" but that sounds relevant to a good debate.