Iron sharpening iron

[Scott Bushey]

I would like to delineate the difference between Christian debate that is biblical and fruitful vs debate that is fleshly.

Main Entry: 1de·bate
Pronunciation: di-'bAt, dE-
Function: noun
: a contention by words or arguments: as a : the formal discussion of a motion before a deliberative body according to the rules of parliamentary procedure b : a regulated discussion of a proposition between two matched sides

Main Entry: ar·gue
Pronunciation: 'är-(")gyü
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): ar·gued; ar·gu·ing
Etymology: Middle English, from Middle French arguer to accuse, reason & Latin arguere to demonstrate, prove; Middle French arguer, from Latin argutare to prate, frequentative of arguere; akin to Hittite arkuwai- to plead, respond
intransitive senses
1 : to give reasons for or against something : REASON
2 : to contend or disagree in words : DISPUTE
transitive senses
1 : to give evidence of : INDICATE
2 : to consider the pros and cons of : DISCUSS
3 : to prove or try to prove by giving reasons : MAINTAIN
4 : to persuade by giving reasons : INDUCE

Pro 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

Act 17:11 These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

Act 15:1 And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.
Act 15:2 When therefore Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them, they determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.
Act 15:3 And being brought on their way by the church, they passed through Phenice and Samaria, declaring the conversion of the Gentiles: and they caused great joy unto all the brethren.
Act 15:4 And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the church, and of the apostles and elders, and they declared all things that God had done with them.
Act 15:5 But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses.
Act 15:6 And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter.

Act 15:36 And some days after Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us go again and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word of the Lord, and see how they do.
Act 15:37 And Barnabas determined to take with them John, whose surname was Mark.
Act 15:38 But Paul thought not good to take him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with them to the work.
Act 15:39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;

Obviously it is clear that believers disagree. The difference between the world and us is that we should act according to Christ in how we diseminate our information. This is not to say Christ or the apostles at times were short, and to the point. Is the Puritan Board breaking the rules of Christ and His scriptures by our debating practices?

 

[Me Died Blue]

I would say one definite and essential difference between debate and arguing is that the latter is attempting to get one's point across and convince others as an end in itself and often as a means to increase one's ego as well, even if they do not even directly realize it as such. The former, on the other hand, is attempting to get the point across and convince others to display and further God's glory through the spreading of truth and the education and building up of the others involved. Very often, a telling sign of which one is being done is the manner, words and patience of those involved.

In any case, I think we are all guilty of turning debate into argumentation at some times, but that fact is anything but a reason to end debate altogether, for doing so would both relativistically (?) decrease the care and importance of doctrine as well as lessen the possibility of mutual sharpening between believers - after all, sharpening by its very nature requires some grinding!

 

[Scott Bushey]

Chris,
Compare this passage with your example above:

Act 15:39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;

 

[Me Died Blue]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Chris,
Compare this passage with your example above:

Act 15:39 And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus;

I think they are consistent, for Paul was certainly not diverging and making the judgment he made just for the sake of being right or for his own self-image - rather, it was certainly being done to maximally further God's highest purpose and glory, which in turn always gives all the saints involved the greatest benefit as well, including those that disagree at the time.

 

[Scott Bushey]

 

[Puritanhead]

From someone who has studied law and pre-law... w/ logic, debate and comms, et al... I duly note that...

an argument need not be seen in its pejorative context, as a matter of fact, a statement that is not an argument is considered illogical...

When you present a position-- you present an argument! When you present an argument and receive a rebuttal argument, whether dissenting in whole or in part, than a debate ensues.

 

[Scott Bushey]

Originally posted by Puritanhead
From someone who has studied law and pre-law... w/ logic, debate and comms, et al... I duly note that...

an argument need not be seen in its pejorative context, as a matter of fact, a statement that is not an argument is considered illogical...

When you present a position-- you present an argument! When you present an argument and receive a rebuttal argument, whether dissenting in whole or in part, than a debate ensues.

Ryan,
Thanks for the clearifications. In that regard, when would debate and argumentation become unfruitful to the believer?

 

[Puritanhead]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey

Originally posted by Puritanhead
From someone who has studied law and pre-law... w/ logic, debate and comms, et al... I duly note that...

an argument need not be seen in its pejorative context, as a matter of fact, a statement that is not an argument is considered illogical...

When you present a position-- you present an argument! When you present an argument and receive a rebuttal argument, whether dissenting in whole or in part, than a debate ensues.

Ryan,
Thanks for the clearifications. In that regard, when would debate and argumentation become unfruitful to the believer?

1) When it's illogical... 2) and when rhetorical manners are absent... and 3) when it's not done in the spirit of 2 Timothy 2-24. People can be tongue-in-cheek obviously and humor one another. With regards to the debating decorum, I've been an infringer and a victim at times, so I know bad rhetorical manners when I see them.

Logical fallacies are bad rhetorical manners, and they are easy to creep into. So it's good to know them, and sharpen your rhetorical skills as it's not a sound argument to use them anyway-- the deliberate use of such fallacies shows a fundamental lack of respect for the person you're debating. Everyone uses them from time to time.

Logical Fallacies Guide

 

[Puritanhead]

1 Peter 3:15 (New King James Version)

But sanctify the Lord God in your hearts, and always be ready to give a defense to everyone who asks you a reason for the hope that is in you, with meekness and fear...

 

[Scott Bushey]

Excellent suggestions.

 

[Ex Nihilo]

Originally posted by Me Died Blue
I would say one definite and essential difference between debate and arguing is that the latter is attempting to get one's point across and convince others as an end in itself and often as a means to increase one's ego as well, even if they do not even directly realize it as such. The former, on the other hand, is attempting to get the point across and convince others to display and further God's glory through the spreading of truth and the education and building up of the others involved. Very often, a telling sign of which one is being done is the manner, words and patience of those involved.

In any case, I think we are all guilty of turning debate into argumentation at some times, but that fact is anything but a reason to end debate altogether, for doing so would both relativistically (?) decrease the care and importance of doctrine as well as lessen the possibility of mutual sharpening between believers - after all, sharpening by its very nature requires some grinding!

Another type of productive debate is when ideas are being put forward to test their validity and not to demonstrate how RIGHT one is. I often find it useful, if I'm on the brink of adopting an idea, to debate it out with others and have attention called to weaknesses in the evidence that I didn't see on my own.

I don't think it's wrong to debate something one is firmly convinced on, but it does seem to be true that when both sides are immovably convinced, it's much easier for the debate to degenerate into a bitter argument. But debates between two firmly convinced sides are still useful, both in forcing each side to think even more thoroughly through ideas and in allowing an audience to benefit from seeing the strength of both sides directly compared. Without hearing or reading a direct debate on an issue, someone who is undecided has to sift through a lot of evidence and mentally construct the debate, which is very difficult. I guess the danger could lie in someone being convinced of a position simply because its proponent was a better debater. Another danger is for people who are good debaters themselves to think they are always right because they always win the argument.

It's especially something to be careful of for people with a background in competitive debate. In competitive debate, judges have to be trained to separate their personal opinions from what is being argued and to vote only for the arguments presented in the round without considering extra knowledge. It's a contest of personalities rather than a truth-seeking exercise. (I once had a judge comment after a round, "If this were a truth-seeking exercise, the negative would win... but it's not.") Christian debate, meanwhile, should always be a truth-seeking exercise, and the participants and observers have to be careful to look at the arguments for their own merits and not give undue weight to the style in which they are presented.

 

[CCWoody]

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Pro 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

I would just like to point out that a man will sharpen the countenance of his friend, not a perfect stranger. Being the only Calvinist in an Arminian sea, I have some interesting perspective on using your iron against those who have no wish to learn anything from you or anyone else for that matter.

It goes over about as well as not bothering to "catch" someone who is "falling out" (slain in the spirit) and then announcing to the crowd around you after they turn to see what the bug thud is about that "you'd think the Holy Spirit would provide for that;" of which I also have some interesting perspective.

 

[VirginiaHuguenot]

Originally posted by CCWoody
It goes over about as well as not bothering to "catch" someone who is "falling out" (slain in the spirit) and then announcing to the crowd around you after they turn to see what the bug thud is about that "you'd think the Holy Spirit would provide for that;" of which I also have some interesting perspective.

 

[toddpedlar]

Originally posted by CCWoody

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Pro 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

I would just like to point out that a man will sharpen the countenance of his friend, not a perfect stranger. Being the only Calvinist in an Arminian sea, I have some interesting perspective on using your iron against those who have no wish to learn anything from you or anyone else for that matter.

It goes over about as well as not bothering to "catch" someone who is "falling out" (slain in the spirit) and then announcing to the crowd around you after they turn to see what the bug thud is about that "you'd think the Holy Spirit would provide for that;" of which I also have some interesting perspective.

I have to admit I've never thought of that. (of course I've never been anywhere in the vicinity of such a 'slaying')

T

 

[JohnV]

I can't vote. I can't agree with any of the three options. But what I can do it everything that has been said, especially Chris and Evie.

 

[calgal]

Originally posted by CCWoody

Originally posted by Scott Bushey
Pro 27:17 Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

I would just like to point out that a man will sharpen the countenance of his friend, not a perfect stranger. Being the only Calvinist in an Arminian sea, I have some interesting perspective on using your iron against those who have no wish to learn anything from you or anyone else for that matter.

It goes over about as well as not bothering to "catch" someone who is "falling out" (slain in the spirit) and then announcing to the crowd around you after they turn to see what the bug thud is about that "you'd think the Holy Spirit would provide for that;" of which I also have some interesting perspective.

Been there, seen that. So to Woody. And the Arminian response is that we are cold, heartless book learned and all around bad bad people!

 

[BobVigneault]

Here's something to keep in mind. Debating and arguing do hone our debating skills but that is not the end we seek. We are seeking to learn and teach and preach the whole counsel of God. We are obligated by scripture to do that and yet because of the noetic effect of sin, we can never comprehend the whole counsel of God.

We do one another a tremendously valuabe service by challenging, debating, arguing, and even knocking down the others observations for in doing so, we do procure more of God's counsel. To sharpen another's iron is to expand the bulk of our knowledge and hammer down and condense the best parts to a fine edged weapon - a weapon used to tear down strongholds and set captives free.

 

[BobVigneault]

Sorry, my post didn't really add to the thread or answer Scott's question. Just think of it as a short devotional.