Thread: Christian Debate: Discussion or Word Fights?
Admin
Christian Debate: Discussion or Word Fights?
Posted : 6 Aug, 2012 07:38 AM
Christian Debate: Discussion or Word Fights?
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, and or misrepresenting what was said by the opponent.
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 contenton, and strife is now acceptable for Christians is to admit that the church Christianity you belong to and know has been taken over by the world, or by humanism. Debate as a quarrel and word battle to get the best of the opponent out of one's own pride is from human flesh, which includes pride, called self-esteem by the self psychologists.
"For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world." I John 2: 16
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.
Those who try to follow Jude 1: 3, and earnestly contend for the faith once delivered unto the saints, would not want to be part of the world and agree that quarrels and battles using words against others is acceptable. Contending for the truth is acceptable.
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." One might translate logomachia as "word fights."
As a Christian one cannot argue that because the commitee in England, including Westcott and Hort, ( for 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 for some kinds of debates, that therefore it is not wrong for Christians to engage in strifes of words driven by pride to get the best of the opponent.
Halhback shared ~ As a Christian one cannot argue that because the commitee in England, including Westcott and Hort, ( for 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 for some kinds of debates, that therefore it is not wrong for Christians to engage in strifes of words driven by pride to get the best of the opponent.
*** YUP !!!�some people just like to Debate everything�.
I don�t know what Bible you read or use�in the AV1611 ( family Bible) it is [[[ Strife ]]]�and in some of other KJV�s I own�It is written�
Rom 1:29 Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, [[[ debate, ]]] deceit, malignity; whisperers,
Strife occurs in 6 verses in the KJV
Rom 13:13
1Cr 3:3
2Cr 12:20
Gal 5:20
Phl 1:15
1Ti 6:4
Debate occurs 4 times in 4 verses in the KJV
Pro 25:9 H7378
Isa 27:8 H7378
Isa 58:4 H4683
Rom 1:29 G2054
There is no [[[ debate ]]] in what Strife means� ;0)...xo
