How to debate doctrine

[Esaias]

Public Service Announcement:

If all a person wants to do is "share their opinions" and leave it at that, nothing wrong with that. But if you are going to say "the Bible truth is XYZ", you need to be able to defend your claims. Otherwise, you're just being foolish.

State your claim, then SHOW FROM THE BIBLE how the Bible says what you are saying and means what you are meaning.

Then be prepared for questions. People will say "If what you are saying is true, then ABC naturally follows as a consequence." Don't get upset, this is how humans interact, learn, and discuss, and debate. If ABC is NOT correct, you need to SHOW HOW and WHY. It's nothing personal, it's not a personal attack. It's a conclusion drawn from your statements. If it's incorrect, then show how it is incorrect, and why.

If someone makes their case, and you disagree, EXPLAIN HOW THEY ARE WRONG. Don't just make the statement, rather take what they said, refer to the Scriptures, and PROVE how the other side is wrong. And expect questions.

Proof, refutation, counterproof. That's how it works.

[RachelRose]

I thought we had a "debate room?''

Let me start the thread then.

According to the accounts in the New Testament, Jesus was crucified.

John 19:18,23(KJV) – (18) Where they crucified him, and two other with him, on either
side one, and Jesus in the midst.

According to the Levitical Law of Sacrifice in the Torah, the animal brought as
a sin sacrifice had to be slaughtered by the person who offered it:

Leviticus 4:27-29 - (27) And if any one person from among the common people sins
unwittingly, by performing one of the commandments of the Lord which may not be
done, and incurs guilt; (28) Or if his sin, which he has committed, is made known to
him, then he shall bring his sacrifice, an unblemished female goat, for his sin which he
has sinned. (29) And he shall lay his hand upon the head of the sin offering, and he
shall slaughter the sin offering in the place of the burnt offering.

How do we as a follower of Christ explain this?

[Scott Pitta]

Debate skills are sadly lacking. So is humility. Most annoying of all is when posts drift away from the original post.


I prefer one idea or verse per post. The focus helps keep things on track.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Public Service Announcement:

If all a person wants to do is "share their opinions" and leave it at that, nothing wrong with that. But if you are going to say "the Bible truth is XYZ", you need to be able to defend your claims. Otherwise, you're just being foolish.

State your claim, then SHOW FROM THE BIBLE how the Bible says what you are saying and means what you are meaning.

Then be prepared for questions. People will say "If what you are saying is true, then ABC naturally follows as a consequence." Don't get upset, this is how humans interact, learn, and discuss, and debate. If ABC is NOT correct, you need to SHOW HOW and WHY. It's nothing personal, it's not a personal attack. It's a conclusion drawn from your statements. If it's incorrect, then show how it is incorrect, and why.

If someone makes their case, and you disagree, EXPLAIN HOW THEY ARE WRONG. Don't just make the statement, rather take what they said, refer to the Scriptures, and PROVE how the other side is wrong. And expect questions.

Proof, refutation, counterproof. That's how it works.

Well stated.

Perhaps some of the problem is that we try to cram too much too quickly in our posts. People don't get a chance to answer one "essay" before another pops up.

But another thing we can add to your comments is ...we should take people at their word. This is what got Sean in trouble. He'd make crazy statements like "Post-tribbers believe Jesus loves beating his bride". No matter what clarification was offered, he'd simply double down and do it again, and again. That kind of attitude is incredibly rude and should not be allowed to stand. Now, it's another thing all together to respectfully point out to someone what looks like an inconsistency in their beliefs. But if they clarify their remark, just agree to disagree!

Sorry, but Aquila simply pondering the validity of Trinitarians' salvation does not make him a "sell-out" or a "compromiser" or "pro-Trinitarian". That's just one example. Hey, and if I've been guilty of this, I humbly apologize.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Esaias

Public Service Announcement:

If all a person wants to do is "share their opinions" and leave it at that, nothing wrong with that. But if you are going to say "the Bible truth is XYZ", you need to be able to defend your claims. Otherwise, you're just being foolish.

State your claim, then SHOW FROM THE BIBLE how the Bible says what you are saying and means what you are meaning.

Then be prepared for questions. People will say "If what you are saying is true, then ABC naturally follows as a consequence." Don't get upset, this is how humans interact, learn, and discuss, and debate. If ABC is NOT correct, you need to SHOW HOW and WHY. It's nothing personal, it's not a personal attack. It's a conclusion drawn from your statements. If it's incorrect, then show how it is incorrect, and why.

If someone makes their case, and you disagree, EXPLAIN HOW THEY ARE WRONG. Don't just make the statement, rather take what they said, refer to the Scriptures, and PROVE how the other side is wrong. And expect questions.

Proof, refutation, counterproof. That's how it works.

Agree completely.

Something I need to work on. It's easy to draft from discussion to debate to conversation to argument.

I'd also add what Originalist said. If we used some charity and allowed people grace to interpret their own words, perhaps things wouldn't devolve as they sometimes do.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Jason B

Agree completely.

Something I need to work on. It's easy to draft from discussion to debate to conversation to argument.

I'd also add what Originalist said. If we used some charity and allowed people grace to interpret their own words, perhaps things wouldn't devolve as they sometimes do.

Sadly brother, there are a couple of posters on here who are not going to let that happen. They will continue to create straw man versions of what you are sharing, debate the straw man, and then declare you to be "refuted". They are good at stroking their own egos.

[votivesoul]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Sadly brother, there are a couple of posters on here who are not going to let that happen. They will continue to create straw man versions of what you are sharing, debate the straw man, and then declare you to be "refuted". They are good at stroking their own egos.

This isn't helpful any more than what you are condemning. It still makes issues personal, that is, about the person. Make it be about the content of the material being addressed, and you will stay on track every time.