# When to speak and when to remain silent...



## rmdmphilosopher (Oct 27, 2006)

So I'm currently attending a very secular local college, while hoarding up the money to go to Dordt next year, and in ALL of my classes I continually hear violent attacks on Christianity.

Now in my Latin class I have to deal with my teacher trying to say that the biblical account of the origin of different languages (at babel) is impossible given 'philological history'.

In my American Gov. class I have to deal with my teacher trying to say from history that Christianity made the lot of woman worse than any other influence in the world.

Now I have no doubt there are good arguments against these and other attacks I hear... But the question I have, is whether it is wise for me to try and argue the point in class... Because all the other students simply sit there nodding their heads and being fortified in the suppression of the knowledge of God in their hearts, and I feel a great urgency to stand up and say something. But I know that if I do I will almost certainly be beaten simply because my teachers know more of their subject and can bring in more examples of their false ideas, and more ingenious arguments than I from the evidence (simple because they know all the evidence and I don't), and appeals to technicalities that I don't understand... 

Is it wise to open a debate you know you can't win, even if you know you're right?


----------



## Herald (Oct 27, 2006)

Personally, I would not seek debate for the sake of debate. You _are_ in a secular school and should expect the prevalant attitude towards Christianity to be skeptical or hostile. However, I would not shy away from making my beliefs known given the correct venue. One on one discussions with fellow students are often profitable. You're not challenging the institution directly and you can establish relationships. God can use them for His glory. Approach debate or dialog in classes wisely. Is the prof encouraging discussion on a topic? If so, venture in. My advice would be to ask questions instead of making statements. Statements are going to challenge individuals and put them on the defensive. Questions will cause them to think and provide a response. A series of well asked questions can accomplish a great deal more than a "zinger" of a statement. If your prof is up to it, a one-on-one over coffee may be an alternative. Of course it depends on the prof, whether he/she is willing to dialog.


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Oct 27, 2006)

I have been in your position before, and I would suggest not debating openly in class. First of all, there are few teachers out there who will admit they are wrong (even if they think they have been proven wrong) in front of a class of their students. Its a problem of authority. Secondly, nobody wants to be "that guy" who always argues with the teacher. 

That being said, like what was advised above, I usually will talk with individual students after class or outside of class about the material. That way I don't disrupt the class, but at the same time the students start to realize the teachers bias and speculative or invalid arguments. 

Depending on the teacher and what they said, I will talk with them after class about the material, etc. I should also note that you should have a great grade and be one of the best in the class before you do this. Your teacher will think much higher of what you have to say, and give you more time of day.


----------



## tewilder (Oct 27, 2006)

rmdmphilosopher said:


> So I'm currently attending a very secular local college, while hoarding up the money to go to Dordt next year, and in ALL of my classes I continually hear violent attacks on Christianity.
> 
> Now in my Latin class I have to deal with my teacher trying to say that the biblical account of the origin of different languages (at babel) is impossible given 'philological history'.
> 
> In my American Gov. class I have to deal with my teacher trying to say from history that Christianity made the lot of woman worse than any other influence in the world.



There is something important to be learned from this, namely what asses people with PhDs are. When you get to a Christian college, keep on remembering that. Just because they don't offend you does not mean that they know what they are talking about.


----------



## Vytautas (Oct 27, 2006)

rmdmphilosopher said:


> So I'm currently attending a very secular local college, while hoarding up the money to go to Dordt next year, and in ALL of my classes I continually hear violent attacks on Christianity.
> 
> Now in my Latin class I have to deal with my teacher trying to say that the biblical account of the origin of different languages (at babel) is impossible given 'philological history'.



Is the reasoning of the Latin teacher that Babel changed and fixed all the languages so they cannot change, and we know Latin evolved into Spanish, French, and Italian; therefore, Genesis is false?


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 27, 2006)

rmdmphilosopher said:


> So I'm currently attending a very secular local college, while hoarding up the money to go to Dordt next year, and in ALL of my classes I continually hear violent attacks on Christianity.
> 
> Now in my Latin class I have to deal with my teacher trying to say that the biblical account of the origin of different languages (at babel) is impossible given 'philological history'.
> 
> ...



Been there. If the person is of a quiet, "searching" demeanor (wrong metaphor, but bear with me) then work with them Francis Schaeffer style. If they are an ass and a fool, then bloody their apologetic nose. To quote Greg Bahnsen, "Sometimes the apologist's role is not to change their minds but to shut their mouths."


----------



## caddy (Oct 27, 2006)

^
True, but not everyone's a Greg Bahnsen or a Paul Manata on the spur of the moment--even one on one can be difficult.


----------



## a mere housewife (Oct 27, 2006)

I think that if they make idiotic statements about things that bear on what you believe pretty directly you could certainly respectfully disagree, as someone who actually adheres to said doctrine etc. (which ought to be very understandable). I wouldn't know what advice to give about all of those things: but I can understand why you would want to stand up and point out their blatant wrongness. I went to an Arminian college where they were constantly making misstatements: I did confront one of my teachers finally over a statement that Calvinism teaches that we shouldn't evangelize. I got to say "I am a Calvinist, and no that is not what we teach" and then he asked me what we do teach, in a sort of mocking manner. Most of the people in the class booed me down, the teacher dismissed me with heaping scorn, but afterwards someone completely unlikely approached me and said he had been studying Calvinism and trying to understand it and was grateful for what I said. And then everyone knew I was a Calvinist, and those who were interested would come and talk to me about it. Perhaps even if you get booed down and scorned the teacher will be more careful in the future if you pick an area where you can really make him look like he doesn't know what he's talking about-- and at least the other students will know that they can ask you what you think etc. if they are trying to understand Christianity and see that you can make a reasonable case.


----------



## Abd_Yesua_alMasih (Oct 27, 2006)

I would not take the teacher on directly in a debate or anything but if you get the chance just talk about something that seems to contradict what they said. For example you said one of your teachers said "that Christianity made the lot of woman worse than any other influence in the world." I would not talk about Christianity. I would mention things like Chinese foot binding, African mutilation and the Muslim extremes of the burkha. If you just defend Christianity you become like a reactionary and will just annoy the teacher or classmates.

Does this make any sense?


----------



## rmdmphilosopher (Oct 27, 2006)

Thanks everybody for your advice... I'm still trying to sort through what my reaction should be, and I've been trying different things in the different classes (since I have plenty of opportunities to deal with the anti-christianity in almost every class)... In one class (an economics class) the teacher just started making some generally abusive comments about what Christians in general believe, and I raised my voice to contradict him. He didn't like it, and he dismissed my comments with scorn; but I did have several other students come up to me afterwards and ask why I cared so much about Christianity that I would even risk being embarassed by my teacher's sarcasm in front of a class, so it did have some good effects even if I didn't exactly 'bloody his apologetic nose' (unless getting the other students interested *was* bloodying aforesaid nose by contradicting his intended purpose, which was to promote disaffection to Christianity...). 

The thing is, though, to answer with any degree of intelligience the statements of some of my other teachers, who base their arguments against christianity on detailed arguments from their respective disciplines, I have to do even more research than I would just to pass the class.  So it takes quite a lot of time and effort, and then doesn't necessarily guarantee that I'll make a good showing in open argument... Also I'm not sure that one-on-one with the teachers is the greatest idea for two reasons: (1. most of my classes are too large for the teacher to make time for an individual student, particularly one who wants to oppose their statements and not just get help understanding them better; (2. I have a somewhat abrasive personality, and I AM usually 'that guy who always argues with the teacher' in class (and sometimes I'm right and sometimes I'm wrong), so they tend to dislike the idea of continuing the experience outside the classroom. Perhaps this latter, however, is a fault of mine that can be reined in by the Grace of God to allow to pursue one-on-one approaches to my professors...



> Is the reasoning of the Latin teacher that Babel changed and fixed all the languages so they cannot change, and we know Latin evolved into Spanish, French, and Italian; therefore, Genesis is false?



No, not really. His argument is that all known languages seem to have evolved from one root, and the Babel incident is by definition an interuption of the natural process of linguistic evolution so that multiple languages were created so different that all known language should (according to the Bible) NOT be traceable to one root.


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 27, 2006)

rmdmphilosopher said:


> The thing is, though, to answer with any degree of intelligience the statements of some of my other teachers, who base their arguments against christianity on detailed arguments from their respective disciplines, I have to do even more research than I would just to pass the class.  So it takes quite a lot of time and effort, and then doesn't necessarily guarantee that I'll make a good showing in open argument...



Been there, you would be amazed at how fast you can grow intellectually and spiritually in that environment. And no, you don't have any guarrantee that you will do well in a class debate. Class debates are hard to do well in anyway. I have done so-so in class debates and then cleaned the clock at the coffee shop later on that night. 



> Also I'm not sure that one-on-one with the teachers is the greatest idea for two reasons: (1. most of my classes are too large for the teacher to make time for an individual student, particularly one who wants to oppose their statements and not just get help understanding them better; (2. I have a somewhat abrasive personality, and I AM usually 'that guy who always argues with the teacher' in class (and sometimes I'm right and sometimes I'm wrong), so they tend to dislike the idea of continuing the experience outside the classroom. Perhaps this latter, however, is a fault of mine that can be reined in by the Grace of God to allow to pursue one-on-one approaches to my professors...



In this case, don't debate but ask hard questions. Why should they be the only ones who can put other faiths on the spot but not allow their own to be criticized. Usually ask them hard questions like, "If evolution is true, then why is Hitler wrong?"


----------



## caddy (Oct 27, 2006)

*Effects of Christianity on Women*

Another Good source on this would be Rodney Stark, who dispels many myths concerning secular hearsay concerning Christianity and Women--and he does it as a neutral sociologist.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rodney_Stark

For instance in his book, *The Rise of Christianity, *it was explored that _women had much more freedom in early Christianity than in the pagan world._ While it was true that _they lost a large measure of it after the church became institutionalized and patriarchal, _we all know that Christianity did ( and does ) more for venerating women than any other belief system.


See here also

http://www.fathersofthechurch.com/2006/05/02/the-stark-truth/

For further Stark comments concerning women from his book.




Abd_Yesua_alMasih said:


> I would not take the teacher on directly in a debate or anything but if you get the chance just talk about something that seems to contradict what they said. For example you said one of your teachers said "that Christianity made the lot of woman worse than any other influence in the world." I would not talk about Christianity. I would mention things like Chinese foot binding, African mutilation and the Muslim extremes of the burkha. If you just defend Christianity you become like a reactionary and will just annoy the teacher or classmates.
> 
> Does this make any sense?


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Oct 27, 2006)

Draught Horse said:


> If they are an ass and a fool, then bloody their apologetic nose. To quote Greg Bahnsen, "Sometimes the apologist's role is not to change their minds but to shut their mouths."



Actually, that is the direct opposite of the advice that Dr. Bahnsen gave in the College Preparation In Apologetics series. Basically the advice that i gave came from Greg Bahnsen. 

I think to quote Greg Bahnsen better would be his statement: "my job as an apologist is not to change hearts, but to close mouths". In context he is speaking of apologetics and evangelism, explaining how only the Holy Spirit can change hearts, and how apologetics isn't about 'convincing' people necessarily. 

Now I am in a *liberal* arts community college, but its still not as bad as some of the universities. That being said, I haven't come across any professors or teachers who have viciously attacked Christianity.


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 28, 2006)

I quoted Bahnsen directly. I don't deny what you say but I don't see a problem in what I said.


----------



## Cheshire Cat (Oct 28, 2006)

Well, there really is no problem with the quote. Its just the way you put it into your paragraph, it made it seem as if he would promote debating with a teacher in class, which he doesn't. All's good.


----------



## RamistThomist (Oct 28, 2006)

Right. Agreed. Debatng teachers is almost pointless. And they deserve at least some modicum of respect given their position and "scholarship."


----------

