Random Ramblings

The Folly of Debating Your Faith

September 22, 2009 at 8:15 PM (Theology)

Nothing feeds my ego so much as winning a debate with another intelligent person.  It is the nature of my pride.  The moment in the debate where the other person realizes that there is no logical response to my argument is priceless.  Once they succumb to a nonsensical response such as “Well you’re just a pompous jerk,” then I know I’ve truly triumphed.

But how does debate translate to matters of faith?  Does logic, rhetoric and the art of debate have a place in the spiritual arena?

Debating With Non-Believers

I used to be pretty big into apologetics.  I deal well with logic and rationality.  Works such as C.S. Lewis’ “Mere Christianity” and Lee Stroble’s “The Case For Christ” were huge influences in solidifying my faith.  The arguments for why “it makes sense” (for lack of a better term) to believe in Christ, seemed so logical to me.  Why wouldn’t you choose to believe in an all-powerful God as absolute truth as opposed to subscribing to dualism, pantheism, humanism and every other “ism” out there?

I always thought that if you could just catch an atheist in a corner with your “aha” moment, they would have no choice but to make the logical choice and submit to the prevailing argument.  But Paul tells a very different story in 1 Corinthians 1:17-19:

17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect. 18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written: “I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and bring to nothing the understanding of the prudent.”

No amount of logic will cause a non-believer to comprehend the excellencies of Christ.  It’s foolishness, that’s the way God designed it.  This purpose is two-fold: 1) For the messenger to realize that he cannot bring someone to saving faith in his own efforts 2) So that the believer cannot boast in his salvation as an achievement, for is a gift of God, not of works (Eph. 2:8-9).

Now that’s not to say that the message cannot be relevant, even Paul’s message was relevant to his audience.  We see him using a philospher’s rhetoric while preaching on Mars Hill to the Greeks and we see him appealing to his apprenticeship at the feet of the well-known rabbi Gamaliel as he preached to the Jews.  He knew how to connect to his audience.  However, he never preached a popular message for the sake of acceptance.  Even in the midst of identifying with his audience, he was still a stumbling block and caused offense to those that were hard of heart…his message was foolishness.

We have one part to play in preaching the gospel; preaching Christ and him crucified.  We are told that faith comes by hearing the Word of God (Romans 10:17).   Jesus said “No one can come to Me unless the Father who sent Me draws him” (Jn 6:44).  We don’t draw people, we only speak the Word of God.  We have to trust that the Holy Spirit will do the rest.

You cannot argue logic to the spirit of a man.  No amount of logic or wordly wisdom will provide the capacity to comprehend the deep things of God. See 1 Corinthians 2:11-14:

11 For what man knows the things of a man except the spirit of the man which is in him? Even so no one knows the things of God except the Spirit of God. 12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit who is from God, that we might know the things that have been freely given to us by God. 13 These things we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Holy Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual things with spiritual. 14 But the natural man does not receive the things of the Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him; nor can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Again, we’re back to the foolishness.  What makes us think that we can convince a non-believer with our logic?  Our pride becomes more of a stumbling block than the actual argument we are presenting.  How much more effective would we be if we simply preached Christ and demonstrated His love and mercy which has transformed us?

Debating Non-Essentials With Those Weaker In The Faith

Black and white.  Deep inside, that is what we long for.  Just tell me what I can and cannot do.  Gray areas make everything so much more complicated.  If I can have someone determine what I can and cannot do, my life would be much simpler.  The problem is, not everyone can agree on things that are not specifically spelled out in Scripture.  You can sum up the many different denominations as different groups with different definitions of black and white.  For example, in regards to communion, the Catholics believe in transubstantiation, where the wine and bread become the literal body of Christ.  The Lutherans believe in consubstantiation, where the “substance” of Christ is present alongside the elements.  The Presbyterians believe in the “Real Presence” of Christ but that we are not literally eating his body and blood.  If you have no idea what I’m talking about, I’m quite happy about that.

Martin Luther had already broken away from the Catholic church and had a mutual respect for fellow reformer John Calvin.  However, they later divided over a doctrinal dispute of the “Eucharist” or what we commonly refer to as communion.  The Lutheran church and the Presbyterian church formed separately based on the teachings of these two great reformers.  Unfortunately, it was a single doctrinal issue that broke the unity between them.

Now I’m not talking about the divinity of Christ, the Trinity or any other essential doctrine of God.  I’m talking about a dispute over what is actually going into your mouth when you follow Jesus’ command to “do this in remembrance of Me”.  How Jesus must grieve over the disunity on something He wanted us to do to remember what He has done for us.

The Internet has been a monumental vehicle in the dissemination of information and opinions from the most well-respected sources to the average individual.  On the web, we are all on equal footing.  Everyone is can be an expert.

Many Christians have gravitated to the Internet since it is such a powerful platform to get their message to a large number of people to which they wouldn’t otherwise have contact with.  This has been both a gift and a curse.  The Information Age has provided us with the ability to reach so many more people with the Good News of Christ.  On the other hand, its given so much more opportunity for dissension between people who have never met face to face.

The anonymity of the Internet has the ability to transform a mild mannered individual in person, to a vociferous debater behind a pseudonym on a message board or comment thread.

I’ve participated in many of these debates and some I just witnessed as a watchful observer.  What begins as a respectful debate, soon turns into a war of arrogance, then finally deteriorates into a barrage of insults.  Everyone walks away more determined to believe their viewpoint and angry that someone else had the nerve to present such a baseless argument.

These debates range from every topic of theology you can imagine from Arminianism vs Calvinism, Cessationism vs Continuationism, Inerrancy of Scripture, all streams of Eschatology, our freedoms in Christ, the list goes on and on.

I would even assert that there is a “spirit of debate” that is not from the Lord.  The core of this spirit is pride.  Debate can stir up anger, frustration and ultimately division.  There is nothing positive I can see that could come from a debate with a brother or sister in Christ.  Much less one that is done anonymously behind the screen of a computer.

Is There A Right Way To Debate?

For the sake of unity, should I swallow my pride and just agree with everything that my brother or sister in Christ says?  What if they are wrong?

This may seem like semantics, but I would propose that we transform our debate into a conversation.  Before doing this, consider the following:

1. Our Relationship: First and foremost before discussing issues of faith with another, I should have a relationship with the person.  That will ensure that there is a mutual respect.  It is much easier to come to a point where I “agree to disagree” with someone that I have a relationship with.  Debating on the Internet with someone you’ve never met (or even that you have met) will rarely lead to anything that is truly edifying and pleasing to Christ.  A face to face discussion is always ideal.
2. Maturity in Christ: Gage the maturity level of the person with whom you will be holding the conversation.  If they are a new Christian, it may not be the best idea to find out whether they subscribe to Pre-trib/Mid-trib/Post-trib rapture and why.  Find out where the other person stands on the foundational issues before delving into the gray areas.
3. Love, Unity & Peace: No, Paul wasn’t a hippie but he does exhort us in Ephesians 4:2-3 to walk “with all lowliness and gentleness, with longsuffering, bearing with one another in love, endeavoring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace“.  Before getting into a discussion of faith, let us be sure to keep these 3 things at the forefront.

All that said, I do believe that discussing issues of faith is healthy and edifying…even necessary.  Our perspective is limited to our experience and we have so much to learn from others who have gone through different experiences.  Let us explore our faith and challenge each other with our ideas.  But in the end, the Word of the Lord will be lifted up and we should be found standing together in unity.