More On "Christian" Debate As Strifes of Words

Posted : 30 Jul, 2012 04:53 AM

More On "Christian" Debate As Strifes of Words



On a Christian forum a guy said: "Words change meaning over time. New

translations and/or revisions of

older versions are necessary or else people will misinterpret. A

translation isn't any good for someone if they misinterpret it because

the translators poured different meaning into words than the modern

day reader does.



Many words in the KJV were fine for their time and there is nothing

wrong with the word choices. That being said, many word changes in

modern versions are not wrong. Because the meaning poured into various

English words has changed, indeed, changing the English words to

something that does mean what a Greek or Hebrew word meant is

desirable. Clinging to KJV wording at this point for the sake of

wording is merely tradition. I'm not saying tradition is good or bad.

I'm just saying tradition is what clinging to those words merely is.



So if strife captures the meaning better than debate, then change the

English word. There is no problem with this. "



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



"Debate is contention in argument; dispute, controversy; discussion.."



"With the increasing popularity and availability of the Internet,

differing opinions arise frequently. Though they are often expressed

via flaming and other forms of argumentation, which consist primarily

of assertions, there do exist formalized debating websites, typically

in the form of online forums or bulletin boards. The debate style is

interesting, as research and well thought out points and counterpoints

are possible because of the obvious lack of time restraints (although

practical time restraints usually are in effect, e.g., no more than 5

days between posts, etc.)."



Debate can be carried out without the use of untrue statements,

without attacking the opponent in any way, and without deception and

attempting to move the opponent off his position by side stepping the

main issue. Debate can also be done honestly by use of statements

based on facts researched by the debators. But debate is often driven

by pride and the desire to win an argument by almost any means, and is

contention or strife, the desire to batter or beat the opponent by

verbal means. Because debate can be civil and honest does not mean

that Christians do not oppose contentious quarreling by use of false

statements, attcking the opponent in any way and by use of ridicule.



http://www.thefreedictionary.com/debating



"Middle English debaten, from Old French debatre : de-, de- + battre,

to beat; see batter."



Strong's Exhaustive Concordance defines number

2054, eris, as "a quarrel, i.e, by implication wrangling,

contention, debate, strife, variance."



To argue that debate as a quarrel, as contention, and strife is now

acceptable for Christians is to admit that Christianity has been taken

over by the world, and by humanism. Humanism, as Solzhenitsyn said

several decades ago, has taken over Christianity in the West. It

helped Christian Zionism or dispensationalism take over so many

denominations from the late 19th century to the middle of the 20th

century.



Paul in I Corinthians 1: 10-11 says "Now I beseech you, brethren, by

the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that ye all speak the same thing,

and that there be no divisions among you; but that ye be perfectly

joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

11. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them

which are of the house of Chloe, that there are contentions among

you." Contentious is from eris.



I Corinthians 11: 16 says "But if any man seem to be contentious, we

have no such custom, neither the churches of God."



II Corinthians 12: 20 says "For I fear, lest, when I come, I shall not

find you such as I would, and that I shall be found unto you such as

ye would not: lest there be debates, envyings, wraths, strifes,

backbitings, whisperings, swellings, tumults:"



Here the Greek

word eris is translated as debates and eritheia is translated as

strifes. Again, a debate can be strife or contention by words. A

debate does not have to be contentiousness expressed verbally, but

human nature has not changed though some claim the meaning of debate

has changed.



Paul uses a different Greek word in II Timothy 2: 23, mache, "But

foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender

strifes."



And in I Timothy 6: 3-4 he uses an interesting Greek word, logomachia,

"If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even

the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is

according to godliness; He is proud, knowing nothing, but doting

about questions and strifes of words, whereof cometh envy, strife,

railings, evil surmisings."



This is a significant text, because what Paul is saying is that those

who get off into doctrines that were not taught by Christ and the

Apostles tend to get into logomachia, or strifes of words." Lets see

what Strong's says about logomachia.



Logomachia is number 3055 in Strong's and is said to mean

"disputations, strife of words."



As a Christian one cannot argue that because the committee in England,

including Westcott and Hort, which created the 1881 British

Revised Version, decided to replace debate in Romans 1:

29 (which is in the KJV) with strife, and that the meaning of debate

changed from a negative to a neutral meaning since 1611, that

therefore it is not wrong for Christians to engage in strifes of words

driven by pride to get the best of the opponent.

Post Reply