# Tips on debating an inconsistent thinker



## Ianterrell (May 12, 2004)

There is no real universal view held by Pentecostals/Charismatics/Third-Wavers on Depravity, however many within the Pentecostal camp have a severely problematic view on native depravity. Many for example believe that once we are filled with Holy Spirit we are freed from our depravity in full. Any willful decision to sin is hardly affected by internal corruption. I debated for hours this evening with one such believer. Let me try to line up some of the assertions that he made.

1) Man has no natural inclination towards sin. We exist as morally upright creatures until we commit our first act of sin, at which point we become soiled. Man is neither guilty of Adam's sin, not is he affected by it. Man in his normal state can live a sinless life without the aid of Christ! 

2)There could be no natural moral difference between Christ and ourselves or that would represent an unfairness on God's part. We must be able to keep the law perfectly or else God's statement,&quot;This is not to hard for you&quot; to the Israelites becomes void.

(My arguement at this point is not that we cannot keep the law, but that we willfuly do not do so. but I digress...)

3)Christ had selfish desires represented in his prayer to Gethsemene. When he prayed take this cup from me, that was his flesh speaking. When he prayed &quot;not my will but they will be done&quot; it was the spirit speaking. He says that his praying that God would take his cup from him would be sinful without the addition of but not my will by thy will be done? 

This individual seems particularly skeptical of the idea of their being native corruption, but then contradicts himself with his view of sanctification. In sanctification Christ makes us free from depravity all together its gone. And yet this same individual uses empty rhetoric about killing the old man. Apparently he has some sense of truth but in articulation it comes out a jumbled inconsistent mess. He simply cannot think consistently in terms of theology he is working with a buch of marred fixtures. 

In debating with such a fellow, what would you recommend. I am thinking I should write to him in lengthy responses so that all the pieces of the biblical Doctrine of Man, and Doctrine of Salvation can be viewed relating in harmony.


----------



## C. Matthew McMahon (May 12, 2004)

If you have already debated him for hours, and I assume you systematically walked him through the Scriptures teaching on sin, then he is in darkness and needs a regenerate heart.

When dealing with the stiff-necked, I find tracing church history to be of help with them at this point. First Source historical quotes from heretics that agree with him. Let him read them. then tell him who they are quoted by. Let him see, historically, who he is in league with, then walk him through the Scriptures again. It cannot be a shouting match. You MUST have the information you will present &quot;masterfully understood.&quot; Otherwise you will be wasting your time, unless the Lord simply and sovereignly regenerates him through the bible.


----------



## Ianterrell (May 12, 2004)

Actually from talking to him he may be a Christian, but a terribly confused one if that. There are many today who think that OT believers were saved by works for example (more than a handful of Dispensationalists).

Paul, I completely agree.

Matthew, thanks for your suggestion. Ironically this guy considers Augustine a heretic. He blamed him for fueling Roman Catholicism. Oh my, what a terribly mis-informed thing to say.


----------



## alwaysreforming (May 12, 2004)

Yikes! Better you than me! I'm not sure I'd have the patience for him at this point. If you still do, then the Lord be with you, Brother! Perhaps you'll win him over!

The mere fact that he has given so much thought to the issue (that he even knows who Augustine is, for example) at least shows that he's interested and not apathetic. I'd say pray hard, and follow Matt's advice. That sounds like a good strategy.


----------



## fredtgreco (May 12, 2004)

Ian,

You are not dealing with a believer based upon what you have said. The man is a Pelagian who denies original sin.

The place to begin is Romans 5, along with Romans 3 and Genesis 2-5. Especially go through what would be very striking to the reader in Genesis 5, not how long they lived, but &quot;and he died. and he died. and he died&quot;

Ask him why men die. Ask him what Paul is saying in Romans 5.


----------



## JohnV (May 12, 2004)

Inconsistency is nothing new. We have people on this Board who debate one another, each one thinking the other to be inconsistent. But that is another thing than what you are pointing to, Ian. 

There is nothing so exasperating as having to deal with someone who manipulates the facts to his liking, and supposing that to be factual. In the case of many, probably like theone you are dealing with, arguing in order to convince him of what consistency is is as much the battle as arguing what the Bible says. He doesn't have to know history, obviously, as long as he can make up his own mind about who Augustine is regardless of the facts. This is quite common, as a matter of fact. 

The idea of consistency is altogether strange to some people who are still living in the shadow of the anti-philosophy/ anti-reason scheme of thinking that prevailed in the churhes not so very long ago, and still does in some places. I have relatives who want me to throw out all my dictionaries, for example, because they think that they are tools of the devil, keeping minds from the real intent of the Scriptures, which is digging out the feelings of meaning and purpose from the text. Get this: they use Scripture to prove it. Is that consistent by any stretch of the imagination? Yet they think they hold this view in some kind of integrity, and just laugh at my shallow &quot;doctrinal&quot; religion. 

I agree with Fred and with Matt: deal with him with patience, slowly revealing the &quot;facts&quot; of the faith, it's history and it's teachings (actual quotes from the past, and the Bible; ) but also remembering that he is one who needs the gospel, not one who has it. For one who has the gospel knows who he is before his God: that God is holy, and he is not; and that he needs a true Saviour Who was man and God for a very good reason.


----------



## Ianterrell (May 13, 2004)

Thanks so much for the advice guys, you've been very helpful and encouraging. Paul, I don't think he's conciously illogical, though he certainly isn't trained in the school of logic.


----------



## Preach (May 13, 2004)

I like what everyone has said, especially Fred. Find out what his view of sin really is. Then ask him why babies die. Press the sin issue, and make him wrestle with it. In the process, if he is not saved, and if he never will be, then you will actually be incresing the wrath he will receive in eternal torment (for he will be building up wrath for the day of wrath). May God's infinite wisdom and justice be praised. Be encouraged my brother, God is sovereign. You be faithful, continue to earnestly strive in prayer with God for this man, and trust the Lord for the outcome. With God all things are possible. I trust that the PB will continue to uphold you in prayer.
&quot;In Christ&quot;,
Bobby


----------



## Gregg (May 14, 2004)

I used to be more consistant when I had Bouncy.


----------

