Does anyone ever yield on here?

[Salty]

I once thought I was wrong in a discussion with Allan. But I was mistaken.

NO, No, NO; you thought you were mistaken, but you were wrong....

 

[Winman]

For example, I want to defeat the ideals of mormonism. I do that in part because I care about the mormon who holds the ideal I am trying to defeat. I also do it because I want Truth to prevail.

This is how I feel about Calvinism. I sincerely believe it is error. I present many scriptures to you that I believe absolutely refute your view. I also want truth to prevail. I do this because I care about you.

I don't know what you mean about running away. I have never run away. I don't come on the forums everyday, but I come back in a few days and present my views again.

I want to know the truth. I have changed my views on a few subjects over the years. I believed in original sin for years. It was my own study that led me to question it, and reading a few good articles on the subject confirmed in my mind that is was not scriptural. I do believe all men are sinners, but I do not believe sin is passed down genetically. Sin is a moral and spiritual problem, not physical. So I have changed my view on this.

If you could show me convincing scripture that clearly shows our sin nature is passed down from father to son, I might be persuaded to believe in original sin again. So far no one has done that.

 

[North Carolina Tentmaker]

Sorry Luke, but I don’t think that defeat is the right word. You talk about victory in a debate coming when error is eradicated and the truth surfaced. Well there are plenty of times that one party may have thought they totally proved their point, but their opponent still does not see it.

I have had many spirited disagreements on this board and some have caused me to re evaluate my positions. Over the years some of my positions have changed, not because I was beaten, but because I learned and grew. I have never felt the need to totally defeat anyone on this board.

You mentioned Mormonism Luke, and I think that is a great example. Of the many Mormon missionaries that have visited at my home over the years I have never one time led one to Christ on my porch. (I will talk all day on the porch but I don’t invite them inside, just one of my rules). I never really expected to. What I hope I have done is present my case and created that seed of curiosity that will drive that individual to study and seek the truth on their own long after our conversation ends. My goal has never been to defeat, embarrass, or prove them wrong. I only want to expand their understanding, just a little bit, planting and cultivating seeds that may someday come to harvest.

This board is a great source of learning for me. We can disagree and argue, but in the end we are still brothers and sisters in Christ each trying to uplift the other. Yes, I know there are exceptions to this rule and some conversations end rather quickly, but I hope all of you here on the board know how much you have helped me in my spiritual and intellectual growth.

 

[Luke2427]

This is how I feel about Calvinism. I sincerely believe it is error. I present many scriptures to you that I believe absolutely refute your view. I also want truth to prevail. I do this because I care about you.

I don't know what you mean about running away. I have never run away. I don't come on the forums everyday, but I come back in a few days and present my views again.

I want to know the truth. I have changed my views on a few subjects over the years. I believed in original sin for years. It was my own study that led me to question it, and reading a few good articles on the subject confirmed in my mind that is was not scriptural. I do believe all men are sinners, but I do not believe sin is passed down genetically. Sin is a moral and spiritual problem, not physical. So I have changed my view on this.

If you could show me convincing scripture that clearly shows our sin nature is passed down from father to son, I might be persuaded to believe in original sin again. So far no one has done that.

I've not said a word to you about original sin. The thread to which you are referring has absolutely nothing to do with ORIGINAL sin. The thread is about depravity.

For the purposes of that thread, I don't care if you were born totally depraved or if you became totally depraved when you reached the age of accountability. The point is that you are thoroughly wicked.

If you want to discuss original sin, start a thread on it.

But don't pretend that you didn't avoid posts 131 and 128.

And BTW, I was not talking about you in particular when I started this thread. I was talking about an unfortunate trend that when people's position is totally undermined, as yours has been, rather than saying, "You know, you have a point. I'll have to think about that", they just run away or result to ad homenim.

 

[Luke2427]

Sorry Luke, but I don’t think that defeat is the right word. You talk about victory in a debate coming when error is eradicated and the truth surfaced. Well there are plenty of times that one party may have thought they totally proved their point, but their opponent still does not see it.

I have had many spirited disagreements on this board and some have caused me to re evaluate my positions. Over the years some of my positions have changed, not because I was beaten, but because I learned and grew. I have never felt the need to totally defeat anyone on this board.

You mentioned Mormonism Luke, and I think that is a great example. Of the many Mormon missionaries that have visited at my home over the years I have never one time led one to Christ on my porch. (I will talk all day on the porch but I don’t invite them inside, just one of my rules). I never really expected to. What I hope I have done is present my case and created that seed of curiosity that will drive that individual to study and seek the truth on their own long after our conversation ends. My goal has never been to defeat, embarrass, or prove them wrong. I only want to expand their understanding, just a little bit, planting and cultivating seeds that may someday come to harvest.

This board is a great source of learning for me. We can disagree and argue, but in the end we are still brothers and sisters in Christ each trying to uplift the other. Yes, I know there are exceptions to this rule and some conversations end rather quickly, but I hope all of you here on the board know how much you have helped me in my spiritual and intellectual growth.

No one said anything about embarrassing someone- that would be utterly ridiculous. But if your goal was not to defeat error and prove the truth of the Gospel then your motive was incomplete, wasn't it?

We seek the triumph of truth as ministers of the Gospel.

BTW, I like your signature!:thumbsup:

 

[sag38]

I've had to pubically eat my foot on the Baptist Board!

 

[Steven2006]

This thread made me immediately think of one person that If I may I would like to compliment. I have noticed over the years that tinytim has consistently show class and grace, freely admitting so when he felt convicted that he had misspoke about something. I have long admired his spirit for doing so.

 

[Luke2427]

This thread made me immediately think of one person that If I may I would like to compliment. I have noticed over the years that tinytim has consistently show class and grace, freely admitting so when he felt convicted that he had misspoke about something. I have long admired his spirit for doing so.

Excellent post. Very appropriate for this thread.:thumbs:

 

[quantumfaith]

I usually don't partner with someone in a debate when I am not settled about a matter in the first place.
Although it has happened - e.g. - the details of "The Day of The Lord".

However, I usually like to add the term "IMO" to my statements especially if a subject is a matter of preference
and not conviction or as in the case above, a matter of which I have an undecided position/positions.

Recently I did enter into a debate with the preterists here on the BB.

Subsequently, my conviction as a futurist is stronger now than before.

However, I did learn a lot about the hermeneutic of preterism.
I came to a better understanding of the logistics and credibility of their position and I told them so.

Personally I am not so interested in "winning" a debate but understanding the myriad positions of my brethren on a given topic.

To be honest, there have only been a few rare occasions in which I have even considered a change of opinion
and have never had a change of conviction (e.g. preterism vs. futurism) concerning a debate here at the BB.

I have definitely learned, but not only that, have come to appreciate the sincere desire of all to know the truth.

No one I know of has ever said, "well, today I think I want to become a heretic or immerse myself in error, let's see, what shall it be?".

HankD

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[Earth Wind and Fire]

I usually don't partner with someone in a debate when I am not settled about a matter in the first place.
Although it has happened - e.g. - the details of "The Day of The Lord".

However, I usually like to add the term "IMO" to my statements especially if a subject is a matter of preference
and not conviction or as in the case above, a matter of which I have an undecided position/positions.

Recently I did enter into a debate with the preterists here on the BB.

Subsequently, my conviction as a futurist is stronger now than before.

However, I did learn a lot about the hermeneutic of preterism.
I came to a better understanding of the logistics and credibility of their position and I told them so.

Personally I am not so interested in "winning" a debate but understanding the myriad positions of my brethren on a given topic.

To be honest, there have only been a few rare occasions in which I have even considered a change of opinion
and have never had a change of conviction (e.g. preterism vs. futurism) concerning a debate here at the BB.

I have definitely learned, but not only that, have come to appreciate the sincere desire of all to know the truth.

No one I know of has ever said, "well, today I think I want to become a heretic or immerse myself in error, let's see, what shall it be?".

HankD

Hank, let me complement you in that you have always been wise in your postings & prospectives concerning others paths to God providing they understand Jesus is Lord & claim Him as such. Whats more, you have not been in the pack of deliberate haters you sometimes see here & you have been very even handed & fair in dealing with all. Thank you for that level of maturity.

 

[quantumfaith]

I would absolutely admit it if I were wrong about something.

However, much of what we debate theologically is more nuanced. Most, if not all, of us wouldn't argue Jesus' divinity/humanity or the virgin birth or bodily resurrection. Many of us would debate a cohesive description of atonement or justification or regeneration. And that is good. When we discuss these things, it sharpens us, reaffirms our belief or causes us to reexamine and adjust.

What is particularly baffling is the number of people on here who are unwilling to accept other points of view graciously, without judging, drawing lines in the sand, essentially (or sometimes literally) telling people, "Nope, you're wrong" or even worse, "You're not arguing with me, you're arguing with Scripture."

When we hold such interpretations with a closed fist, they are no longer living, breathing understandings that are open to the Spirit's leading, they become stagnant, suffocated credos that we are unwilling to examine.

So, next time someone questions you on the nuances of women in ministry, mode of church governance, issues of Christian freedom or clear uncertainties, keep your views open in your palms, graciously engaging other committed Christians, instead of separating yourself.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[quantumfaith]

I very much enjoy reading the debate that goes on on the board. Although I am new to the board, you all have taught me a great deal. The discussions that take place have caused me to read scripture closer and deeper.

This discussion brings to mind what Paul wrote:
I Corinthians 14:26 How is it then, brethren? when ye come together, every one of you hath a psalm, hath a doctrine, hath a tongue, hath a revelation, hath an interpretation. Let all things be done unto edifying.

With that said let all of our discussion and debate be done unto edifying the one that hung on the cross and set us free from sin and death.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[quantumfaith]

Hank, let me complement you in that you have always been wise in your postings & prospectives concerning others paths to God providing they understand Jesus is Lord & claim Him as such. Whats more, you have not been in the pack of deliberate haters you sometimes see here & you have been very even handed & fair in dealing with all. Thank you for that level of maturity.

:thumbsup::thumbsup::thumbsup:

 

[HankD]

Hank, let me complement you in that you have always been wise in your postings & prospectives concerning others paths to God providing they understand Jesus is Lord & claim Him as such. Whats more, you have not been in the pack of deliberate haters you sometimes see here & you have been very even handed & fair in dealing with all. Thank you for that level of maturity.

Thanks EWF. To be honest, I've had a few posts which, at the last minute, I did not submit which were not so even handed and fair.

Yes, the person of Christ should be the place of agreement, fellowship and peace among brethren.

HankD