Featured Weaker Brother?

How do you connect pursuading to knowledge...one is pure salesmanship while the other is derived from truth & study.

 

Like brainwashing perhaps?

 

No. Persuasion entails having a firm grasp on a subject and an even stronger desire and methodology to bring others to this same knowledge of truth.

 

Thinking isn't knowing is it?

 

So lets play this thing out...if someone like Iconoclastic feel they have a strong on a subject...say "Calvinism" (& lets not turn this into a c&a food fight...just using 'C's for the sake of analagy, ...you do understand my point right!

My suggestion though is, isn't it far better to allow the person the liberty of self study & discovery? Yes coup could be there to help out....to answer questions & even offer up your opinion...at least that's my stance on all this.

 

You could stand out of the way and let them find things out on their own. That would be the opposite of persuasion. Using your analogy debate happens when two people try persuading each other to what they believe is truth. Each person is different. Some like to do self discovery, some would rather have a number of viewpoints presented to choose from.

 

Are asking for permission?

 

Forgedabout it.

 

Some folks use "debate" as an excuse to act like the south end of a mule.

 

What's your point?:smile:

 

I find myself in agreement with Rick and webdog in regards to persuasion. Persuasion is not the same thing as forcing someone. I was recently accused by a very dishonest person on this board of trying to force my belief on others. Presenting one's side of an issue is not forcing someone to believe a thing. This is, after all, a debate forum. If a person is going to engage in vigorous debate they need to have thick skin.

As to the weaker brother - the admonition is to accept the one who is weak in faith (Rom. 14:1) and to not put an obstacle or stumbling block in their way (Rom. 14:13). So, we are able to extrapolate that the weaker brother is one who is weak in faith. Why are they weak in faith? There could be a number of contributing factors but the main reason is a lack of knowledge. How so? Let me use a relevant illustration.

In the two previous threads on drinking no one, absolutely no one, was able to prove that drinking is a sin. They cited social ills, health concerns, and harming the conscience of the weaker brother; but no one was able to prove it was sin. I contend that the reason why these individuals object to drinking, on other than biblical grounds, is because they lack knowledge in what the Bible says regarding the topic of Christian liberty. Their lack of knowledge leads to a lack of faith. Ergo they are weak in that area. They should not be weak in faith once they are properly instructed. Unfortunately that is not always the case. In that case it is proper for those who are strong in faith to willingly check their liberty in the presence of those who are weak in faith. It does not mean that those who are strong in faith must permanently check their liberty. Neither party is to regard with contempt the other party (Rom. 14:3), nor are are they to judge their conviction (Rom. 14:4).

 

Dishonest ....on BB, HEAVEN FORBID:laugh:

And how did you extrapolate 'forced' out of my comments? Is this a cleaver way to to manipulate me to send you Taylor Ham & Pectors? :laugh: