This week's debate between Steve and James White.

[Choosethisday]

Over the last few days I listened to the debate between Steve and Dr. White. I realize the debate is from over 6 years ago but still found it riveting. I also did some web searching and read comments from both sides from back right after the debate and in general the perception of who had the best points depended on from where one started from, which is to be expected. My perception from listening is that Steve was trying to get to the truth and Dr. White was trying to win the debate. I believe Dr. White really believes what he was arguing but he seemed so convinced of being right that he thought it justified to "go for the kill" instead of seeking the truth no matter where that leads. I may be being harsh but this was my perception.

I have a question for those of you who listened back 6 years ago and then followed the fallout. At the end of the last day Steve allowed Dr. White to make a final statement. The statement, hopefully close to verbatim, was "I do believe this is a vitally important issue because it will effect the form of evangelism we pursue and how we seek to defend the faith." I have noticed in talking with Calvinists that they can be passionate over this issue. However, I don't see why either of these concerns expressed by Dr. White would pertain here. I have studied missiology and evangelical movements, and just people from both sides of the argument in general, and there seems little difference in how committed or effective a movement or person is based on their view of this debate. I can understand wanting to present a united front to the secular world on essentials, but this doesn't seem an essential to me. So, my questions are, have there been statements or arguments offered since the debate from the Calvinism side explaining why this would effect how we pursue evangelism? Or why a difference here would effect how we defend the faith?

[TheEditor]

Hi Choose,

I'll have to agree with you. I didn't catch all of the debate because I was in and out of my vehicle and so heard maybe 2 of the 5 debates. But I will say this, of what I heard it turned my stomach.

It reminded me of all the bad parts of my behavior while a JW engaging in endless debates and trying to "win". The endless hammering on one word; one verse, insisting that it can only be taken "one way" and of course this "one way" is "God's way"--and of supreme importance.

I cannot comment on why Calvinists seem so concerned about this doctrine. After all, whatever happens is God's Sovreign Will triumphing anyway, so who cares? I can see if a person believed in free choice and eternal torment caring that the mesage be carried to all people, but it seems completely absurd to care about making sure people understand that we believe in a God that made them for the express purpose of burning them forever. What nonsense!

I think it really boils down to simple pride in many cases. They believe it; they think themselves to be lovers of truth, and you disagree. So, either they are wrong (and we can't have that) or they are not lovers of truth (and they don't believe that) so you are wrong. And, the reason they need you to agree with them is they hate the peace we have in believing that God is merciful when they have to have the angry "kill em all" God. Or at least that my take. I know the few JWs that I have talked to from my past seem annoyed that I don't believe everyone is going to be destroyed at Armageddon.

Regards, Brenden.

[MMathis]

I may be bias here.

The style used by White sounds too much like the grown ups in the cartoon on Tv. Can't think of it but "waa wt waat..." Is all you hear.

Steve is usually making a point. My wife had never heard of Steve until one day she was in the car with me when he was on. She immediately like his method and listens whenever she can.

I'm still not certain what a Calvinist is after all that, which I think is my point.

[TheEditor]

Charlie Brown, my favorite! It was the "muted trombone" sound.

[Ian]

The sucker punch went to Steve at the very end:

"I`ll be taking your calls on this subject for the remainder of the week"

pause

"and probably for the remainder of my career!"

[Singalphile]

I listened to a bit of the different days. I had two thoughts that I've had before that were reinforced.

1. For me, Calvinism would require a level of cognitive dissonance that I couldn't handle. To my mind, it would make everything a sham, and I couldn't deal with the pretending. It seems similar to atheism, in (only) that respect. (Edited to soften the language.)

2. A good question to ask myself or another Christian when discussing different interpretations: Without resorting to absurdity, does this verse or passage necessarily mean what I/you say it means?

Needless to say, many more admirable, godly, and intelligent people than me are Calvinists, including people who I enjoy learning from. So it might just be me.

Edit: Oh, and another ...

3. I don't think debates are very helpful. I would prefer just 2 or 3 friends talking about their differences.

[Choosethisday]

"I don't think debates are very helpful. I would prefer just 2 or 3 friends talking about their differences"

I actually like debates and think they are the best way to get to the truth. When two, or more, knowledgeable people of more or less equal knowledge debate neither is allowed to get away with some of the loose interpretations or outright wrong statements which can and does happen when an unchallenged teacher is presenting a view. And, this puts one in a competitive mindset. I think one is more likely to be clear headed in this situation.

[darinhouston]

"I don't think debates are very helpful. I would prefer just 2 or 3 friends talking about their differences"

I actually like debates and think they are the best way to get to the truth. When two, or more, knowledgeable people of more or less equal knowledge debate neither is allowed to get away with some of the loose interpretations or outright wrong statements which can and does happen when an unchallenged teacher is presenting a view. And, this puts one in a competitive mindset. I think one is more likely to be clear headed in this situation.

I like both and think they each have advantages and disadvantages -- more thoughtful reflection and interaction is better in my opinion. If either party is only interested in "winning," however, everyone loses.

[Choosethisday]

I have reflected more on my questions and am even more concerned with the why of Dr. White's final statement. He is too experienced a debater to just have dropped that statement off the cuff and too knowledgeable of how we see the issue to be confused about the consequences, (good or bad), of our view of soteriology. So it must really be that a Calvinist sees this in as a different level of importance than we do. Has anyone read or heard a well written statement as to why changing our view of this is so important to them?

[Singalphile]

[On debates] If either party is only interested in "winning," however, everyone loses.

I thought I posted again last night, but I guess not (or it mysteriously vanished). Anyway, I wrote the the same thing. A debate is generally described as person(s) A versus person(s) B. In other words, the participants are working against each other. Perhaps these smart, godly people could try working with each other for once, and see how that goes. At the least, understanding and camaraderie could be fostered. That is not impossible in a debate, but I don't usually get that vibe.

I found this Calvinism Dialogue, which seems quite promising (though I'm only up to the intro).

So, my questions are, have there been statements or arguments offered since the debate from the Calvinism side explaining why this would effect how we pursue evangelism? Or why a difference here would effect how we defend the faith? ....
Has anyone read or heard a well written statement as to why changing our view of this is so important to them?

I don't know. I don't know. And, no. I have never understood it. (I would only add, that it might not be so important to many or most of them. I only know one or two Calv. in real life, and they never bring it up.)