Debating versus Arguing

[KJVBibleThumper]

Look, we are all Christians here, we are brothers in Christ, and as such we should be able to discuss things in a mature manner. Many of the posts that are posted here would immediately disqualify the poster if this was an actual, formal debate.

I have asked before, and I am going to ask again, if you reply to anything posted anywhere, make it a logical, reasoned post. I frankly do not enjoy arguing, I enjoy debating, if I am going to respond to a post, I try to research what I am talking about and logically present my response. You may not agree with me, but I would appreciate it if in your response, you would give a logical, reasoned rebuttal.

I think it is safe to say that most of us are on here because we have strong beliefs and like to defend them, a true belief is different then an opinion, our beliefs should always be backed up with Scripture and sound, reasoned thinking. A statement along the lines of "well this is my opinion,you are all wrong" carries no weight for any position.

And please, lets avoid personal attacks on posters, stick strictly to the facts in responses. Lets face it, we are all sinners, and we are all flesh, if somebody attacks you personally then the flesh is going to want to respond in a similar manner. If somebody responds to your post in an immature manner, you are going to instinctively want to respond back in the same manner. "Jas 1:19 Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath..."

As regarding facts, in my Apologetics class, I was taught the difference between hard facts and interpreted facts. There are unmistakable facts out there, there is the Textus Receptus and there is the Alexandrian Text, there is a King James Bible and there is an NIV Bible, but we interpret the evidence differently based on our belief system. All evidence is interpreted by a belief system.

So can we please be mature in our posts? I honestly try to not even read posts that are fact-free. It only stirs me up for no good reason, and as some of the older members can attest to, I can definently get stirred up and then the hellfire and brimstone starts.

Thanks for listening,
Thumper :godisgood:

 

[webdog]

Quit arguing

 

[franklinmonroe]

Look, we are all Christians here, we are brothers in Christ, and as such we should be able to discuss things in a mature manner. Many of the posts that are posted here would immediately disqualify the poster if this was an actual, formal debate.

I have asked before, and I am going to ask again, if you reply to anything posted anywhere, make it a logical, reasoned post. I frankly do not enjoy arguing, I enjoy debating, if I am going to respond to a post, I try to research what I am talking about and logically present my response. You may not agree with me, but I would appreciate it if in your response, you would give a logical, reasoned rebuttal. ...

Amen, brother.

 

[Rippon]

From the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary :

1 An argument is a statement or set of statements that you use in order to try to convince people that your opinion about something is correct.

2 An argument a discussion or debate in which a number of people put forward different or opposing opinions.

The above are the primary meanings of argument.However,the first connotative meaning that pops in the heads of people is that an argument is a noisy disagreement with anger.

 

[Jim1999]

You mean like the sermon notes say" Argument weak, bang pulpit and shout~?

Cheers,

Jim

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

From the Collins Cobuild English Dictionary :

1 An argument is a statement or set of statements that you use in order to try to convince people that your opinion about something is correct.

2 An argument a discussion or debate in which a number of people put forward different or opposing opinions.

The above are the primary meanings of argument.However,the first connotative meaning that pops in the heads of people is that an argument is a noisy disagreement with anger.

Very true, Websters puts it even clearer: (emphasis mine)


'ARGUE, v.t.
1. To debate or discuss; to treat by reasoning; as, the counsel argued the cause before the supreme court; the cause was well argued.2. To prove or evince; to manifest by inference or deduction; or to show reasons for; as, the order visible in the universe argues a divine cause.3. To persuade by reasons; as, to argue a man into a different opinion.

However, as you say, these days, when people hear the word "Argue" they instantly think of a whole bunch of negative connotations for it.

Debate has much better connotations, and that is why there are "Debate Clubs" and such in schools.

If we all would just make sure our posts show what is mentioned above, then we would get a lot further and a lot more respect. We are here to set an example to the world, and the squabbling that frequently goes on here is a poor showing.

I do not expect everybody to agree with my positions and beliefs, but I do not intend to debate them with people who will not respect my beliefs and convictions. Lets all keep in mind that first and foremost we are Christians, and that we are to be mature, let's also keep in mind again what I mentioned above about hard evidence and interpreted evidence.

I sincerely believe that if you do not hold to a KJVO position, that you are in serious doctrinal error, but since you are my brothers in Christ, my job is to present the evidence that I have for it, not because I want to boost my ego by defeating my opponents in debates, but because I want to correct a very serious error that I see. My job is not to attempt to ride roughshod over all opponents to my position on this board. My job is to, with love and grace show what I believe are the doctrinal errors of the non-KJVO position. I realize that many believe differently then I do about this and that there are many who sincerely believe the same thing about me and my position. That is fine, as long as we remember that our spirit is to be right in this toward God and our fellow brothers in Christ.

If the spirit is right, then the rest will come easily.

Thumper :godisgood:

 

[Rippon]

Speaking of Webster -- what do you think of his lightly modified 1833 KJV version?Is it still the Word of God? If not,then why does Benjamin Blayney's modification of 1769 get special treatment from the KJVO camp?You all have extended "inspiration" from 1611 all the way to 1769 -- 158 years!

[Added in] You could at least extend your generosity for another 64 years!

 

[Rippon]

I sincerely believe that if you do not hold to a KJVO position, that you are in serious doctrinal error, but since you are my brothers in Christ,

Here is another case where the words different folks use may have different meanings attached.

Serious doctrinal error sounds like heresy to me.But do you mean that it doesn't quite reach that level of departure from biblical orthodoxy?After all,you said that those not holding to a KJVO position are still your brothers in Christ.It's hard for me to understand how those having serious doctrinal errors can be my brothers and sisters in Christ.I guess even the word "serious" needs to be fleshed-out.

All the truths which the KJV proclaims also is declared within the pages of all valid modern English versions.So the only serious doctrinal error is that we are not extolling the KJV as the only inspired Word of God.Is that correct?

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Speaking of Webster -- what do you think of his lightly modified 1833 KJV version?Is it still the Word of God? If not,then why does Benjamin Blayney's modification of 1769 get special treatment from the KJVO camp?You all have extended "inspiration" from 1611 all the way to 1769 -- 158 years!

Brother, this is not the thread to start an argument over anything.
If you want to discuss it, by all means post a new thread on the subject or PM me if you want to discuss it personally, but be sure to include facts and quotations.

Thumper :godisgood:

 

[Rippon]

Brother, this is not the thread to start an argument over anything.
If you want to discuss it, by all means post a new thread on the subject or PM me if you want to discuss it personally, but be sure to include facts and quotations.

Thumper :godisgood:

I'm just asking some reasonable questions.You could attempt to answer with some reasonable replies.Put forth some sound arguments.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

My job is to, with love and grace show what I believe are the doctrinal errors of the non-KJVO position.

Doctrinal errors?

Okay - show us the doctrinal error of being non-KJVO.

Doctrinal means based on the word of God. Opinion has no place in a doctrinal discussion.

Specifically how am I in doctrinal error when I use the NKJV. I will need scriptural evidence to be proven guilty of doctrinal error.

 

[tinytim]

Please show me my doctrinal errors because I use the NIV.

 

[Rippon]

Roger,TT and I have asked the same question with no response forthcoming as of yet.BT,are you afraid that providing a response to our perfectly legitimate question will engender arguments?Well then,why would you say such an inflammatory thing and then try to avoid the ramifications by telling us that this thread is not the place for arguments?! I can't figure that one out.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Roger,TT and I have asked the same question with no response forthcoming as of yet.BT,are you afraid that providing a response to our perfectly legitimate question will engender arguments?Well then,why would you say such an inflammatory thing and then try to avoid the ramifications by telling us that this thread is not the place for arguments?! I can't figure that one out.

A charge of 'doctrinal error' against a brother is a serious charge. I would like to see a reasoned answer to your debate point.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

Here is another case where the words different folks use may have different meanings attached.

Serious doctrinal error sounds like heresy to me.But do you mean that it doesn't quite reach that level of departure from biblical orthodoxy?After all,you said that those not holding to a KJVO position are still your brothers in Christ.It's hard for me to understand how those having serious doctrinal errors can be my brothers and sisters in Christ.I guess even the word "serious" needs to be fleshed-out.

All the truths which the KJV proclaims also is declared within the pages of all valid modern English versions.So the only serious doctrinal error is that we are not extolling the KJV as the only inspired Word of God.Is that correct?

You are absolutely correct, the same word means different things to different people. As an example of what I mean, I am not a Calvinist and I think that they have serious doctrinal errors, but I know many Calvinists that believe in eternal security, salvation by faith, the Trinity, etc. They are saved and are thus my brothers in Christ. But I disagree with them majorly over the definition of election and predestination, and believe that to hold that God picks certain people for heaven and certain people for Hell is a serious doctrinal error. (And no, I am not trying to start a Calvinism/Armenianism debate here, this was just the first example that popped into my head)

Again, there is the problem of hard facts as opposed to interpreted facts, a hard fact is that the NASB omits 1 John 5:7, that is a fact. Now, does this weaken the doctrine of the Trinity? I say yes, you may say no. Declaring that "All the truths which the KJV proclaims also is declared within the pages of all valid modern English versions" is an example of interpreted evidence. I say that they are mostly weakened and in some cases lost, you say differently.

We are each interpreting the evidence within our particular belief system, another example, when I stand and look at the Grand Canyon, there is no doubt that it is there, but becaue of my belief system when I look at it, I see that during the Flood, vast quantities of mud were laid down very rapidly due to water action, when an Evolutionist looks at it, he sees millions of years of water erosion.
He is wrong according to the Bible, but I am wrong according to his bible(Darwin), and no, I am not equating non-KJVO's with evolutionists, it is just the best example that came to mind of what I am trying to convey.

Again, let me point out that as a KJVO, I stand on Psalms 12:6-7 in my Bible(and no arguments please over this passage, this is not the time and the place for it, plus it all turns into a flame war from what I have seen), now, in a MV, it says something completely different. And no, I am not saying which one is right or wrong right now, just trying to make a point, I am reasonably sure that most people know my stand on that passage.

I am just trying to call attention to the fact that there is a lot of "fluff" posts that go on here, and in a serious debate, these have no place, every point made needs to have a fact, and the facts and points should follow eachother in logical succession. Show respect for the other brother's opinion.

I hope I have made myself clear, this has been one of the most difficult posts I have ever made as far as trying to get a message across without being confrontational. I just would like to see more love,grace, and respect for the other brothers opinion on here, and more scholarly, well reasoned posts, then I see.

God Bless,
Thumper :godisgood:

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Y

Again, let me point out that as a KJVO, I stand on Psalms 12:6-7 in my Bible(and no arguments please over this passage, this is not the time and the place for it, plus it all turns into a flame war from what I have seen), now, in a MV, it says something completely different.

NKJV -

The words of the LORD are pure words, Like silver tried in a furnace of earth, Purified seven times. You shall keep them, O LORD, You shall preserve them from this generation forever.
(Psa 12:6-7)

Also 1 John 5v7 in the NKJV

For there are three that bear witness in heaven: the Father, the Word, and the Holy Spirit; and these three are one.

How does this MV differ?

I still await support your serious charge that I, your brother in Christ, am guilty of doctrinal error. This kind of accusation hardly engenders 'reasoned debate.'

 

[SBCPreacher]

I sincerely believe that if you do not hold to a KJVO position, that you are in serious doctrinal error...

I sincerely don't care if you think I am in doctrinal error because I don't hold to the KJVO opinion, and yes, it's your opinion. As soon as you can show me in the KJV where it says explicitly that "the KJV is God's preserved Word" then I might believe you. But, it's not there, no matter how hard you try to make it there.

As has been said, it's a pretty serious charge to say that someone is in doctrinal error.

 

[KJVBibleThumper]

A charge of 'doctrinal error' against a brother is a serious charge. I would like to see a reasoned answer to your debate point.

Indeed it is, but the fact that I believe it does not in one way diminish the fact that I believe you all are my brothers, and as such worthy of respect in dealing with.
I am more then happy to provide a reasoned answer, but I do not wish to see this thread turn into an argument and get shut down, I did not start it for that. Also, the volume of responses I am getting make it difficult to respond, by the time I finish one post, there are three more. :laugh:

I would be more then happy to deal with one person, one on one, in a calm, reasoned public debate. But I refuse to drag that into this thread, however, I would enjoy a polite, reasoned debate between just one person and me. No other people posting. I am one person and I can't spend my life on here answering a constant barrage of posts. :tongue3: I also have to get back to college next week and I do not think I can log into here from PCC's internet.

Pick somebody, and I will be more then happy to address the issue in public where all can see.

Thumper :godisgood:

 

[Rippon]

Psalm 12:6-8

"The Lord's promises are pure,
like silver refined in a furnace,
purified seven times over.
Therefore, Lord,we know you will protect
the oppressed,
preserving them forever from this lying
generation,
even though the wicked strut about,
and evil is praised in the land." ( NLTse)

I find no evidence to use this passage to support the contention
that the NLTse alone is God's inspired Word.

 

[NaasPreacher (C4K)]

Indeed it is, but the fact that I believe it does not in one way diminish the fact that I believe you all are my brothers, and as such worthy of respect in dealing with.
I am more then happy to provide a reasoned answer, but I do not wish to see this thread turn into an argument and get shut down, I did not start it for that. Also, the volume of responses I am getting make it difficult to respond, by the time I finish one post, there are three more. :laugh:

I would be more then happy to deal with one person, one on one, in a calm, reasoned public debate. But I refuse to drag that into this thread, however, I would enjoy a polite, reasoned debate between just one person and me. No other people posting. I am one person and I can't spend my life on here answering a constant barrage of posts. :tongue3: I also have to get back to college next week and I do not think I can log into here from PCC's internet.

Pick somebody, and I will be more then happy to address the issue in public where all can see.

Thumper :godisgood:

This forum is not designed for one on one debate.

To make it simple - show us how using a NKJV/NIV/NASB etc is a serious doctrinal error.

Would you not expect the same if I said "Those who hold to a KJVO position are in serious doctrinal error?' Would you not expect be to give Bible evidence for it?

My young friend, you cannot make such a serious charge toward your brethren and then set the rules for responses.