Speaking in tongues.

[Presbyterian Continuist]

This whole argument and to-ing and fro-ing about the definition of discussion and debate is just useless and it is obvious that after many posts, all that is achieved is two people going around in diminishing circles until one of them disappears up his own backside.

While it is true that I have some strong opinions in some areas, and that I like to say things to see how the "sharks" bite, probably part of the unsanctified area of my nature, I really do think that discussion and debate is a very effective learning tool.

Entering into a debate makes me think deeply about what I believe and why. Fielding the contrary opinions of others tests my own beliefs, and, believe it or not, I really do consider carefully what others say. If I read an opinion that I don't at this moment believe in, but have no supporting material, I will go and research it, and be prepared to stand corrected if it is proved that my particular opinion is flawed.

There have been many times that I have exchanged views with others in a good debate and ended up yielding to the other person because what they have said has convinced me of the correctness of their position.

Other times, we have ended up in a stalemate, and we have had to agree to disagree, but we have still respected each other as brothers in Christ notwithstanding that we have doctrinal differences.

I have good Christian friends who do not believe in the Charismatic side of things. We do not debate and argue over such things because we have agreed to concentrate on what things we do have in common. I enjoy the fellowship I have with them because they have many good qualities that have added good things to my life.

I believe that the person who is confident of where he or she stands before the Lord, and who is prepared to be teachable, is not threatened by debate and discussion on doctrinal or theological issues. A person like that is prepared to be proved wrong, and it doesn't upset their faith or their relationship with God.

The people who are threatened by debate, and who resort to personal attacks on those who disagree with them, are insecure in their own standing with God. They are not sure whether they are right or not, and anyone debating with them tends to rock their faith and increase their insecurity. Therefore, to "save face" they have to attack and try to neutralise the person debating with them, instead of addressing the issues fairly and be prepared to change their doctrinal position if the opinions from the other person are seen as having virtue.

Frankly, I enjoy the cut and thrust of a good debate. It stimulates me, causes me to discuss the issues with the Lord, and study them more closely than I otherwise would. I think that debate has its place, as long as it is conducted fairly, and with respect to those we debate with.

I know that there are those who have strongly divergent and cessationist views than I have on Charismatic issues, and believe it or not, I respect that these people have those views; but that will not stop me having discussions and debates with them.

But I will not resort to peevish and pride-motivated behaviour by reporting their posts and conducting personal attacks on them just because I disagree with their views.

When I look back on the different discussions and debates on the different forums that I have been on, I know that my views about many Charismatic issues have changed markedly from what they were, mainly because some of the people who have debated with me have brought up valid points which have been proved right when I have researched and checked up on them.

In summary: Debate is not necessarily wrong, and will not necessarily ruin threads on any forum. It is the way the debate is conducted is the real issue, and if a debate is conduct with the fruit of the Spirit in mind, then it can be very meaningful, productive and fruitful for all who participate.

 

[shuntmama]

I am not debating,

But simply adding Oil to the wheels.


To each his own, is my motto,


But none the less, I wish all Peace and happiness,

Traditional Irish Blessing

May the road rise to meet you
May the wind be always at your back
The sun shine warm upon your face
The rains fall soft upon your fields
And until we meet again,
May God hold you in the hollow of his hand.​

​

Love in Christ, sarah

 

[razzelflabben]

This whole argument and to-ing and fro-ing about the definition of discussion and debate is just useless and it is obvious that after many posts, all that is achieved is two people going around in diminishing circles until one of them disappears up his own backside.

While it is true that I have some strong opinions in some areas, and that I like to say things to see how the "sharks" bite, probably part of the unsanctified area of my nature, I really do think that discussion and debate is a very effective learning tool.

Entering into a debate makes me think deeply about what I believe and why. Fielding the contrary opinions of others tests my own beliefs, and, believe it or not, I really do consider carefully what others say. If I read an opinion that I don't at this moment believe in, but have no supporting material, I will go and research it, and be prepared to stand corrected if it is proved that my particular opinion is flawed.

There have been many times that I have exchanged views with others in a good debate and ended up yielding to the other person because what they have said has convinced me of the correctness of their position.

Other times, we have ended up in a stalemate, and we have had to agree to disagree, but we have still respected each other as brothers in Christ notwithstanding that we have doctrinal differences.

I have good Christian friends who do not believe in the Charismatic side of things. We do not debate and argue over such things because we have agreed to concentrate on what things we do have in common. I enjoy the fellowship I have with them because they have many good qualities that have added good things to my life.

I believe that the person who is confident of where he or she stands before the Lord, and who is prepared to be teachable, is not threatened by debate and discussion on doctrinal or theological issues. A person like that is prepared to be proved wrong, and it doesn't upset their faith or their relationship with God.

The people who are threatened by debate, and who resort to personal attacks on those who disagree with them, are insecure in their own standing with God. They are not sure whether they are right or not, and anyone debating with them tends to rock their faith and increase their insecurity. Therefore, to "save face" they have to attack and try to neutralise the person debating with them, instead of addressing the issues fairly and be prepared to change their doctrinal position if the opinions from the other person are seen as having virtue.

Frankly, I enjoy the cut and thrust of a good debate. It stimulates me, causes me to discuss the issues with the Lord, and study them more closely than I otherwise would. I think that debate has its place, as long as it is conducted fairly, and with respect to those we debate with.

I know that there are those who have strongly divergent and cessationist views than I have on Charismatic issues, and believe it or not, I respect that these people have those views; but that will not stop me having discussions and debates with them.

But I will not resort to peevish and pride-motivated behaviour by reporting their posts and conducting personal attacks on them just because I disagree with their views.

When I look back on the different discussions and debates on the different forums that I have been on, I know that my views about many Charismatic issues have changed markedly from what they were, mainly because some of the people who have debated with me have brought up valid points which have been proved right when I have researched and checked up on them.

In summary: Debate is not necessarily wrong, and will not necessarily ruin threads on any forum. It is the way the debate is conducted is the real issue, and if a debate is conduct with the fruit of the Spirit in mind, then it can be very meaningful, productive and fruitful for all who participate.

The only thing here I would disagree with is that debate as defined in websters only allows for opposing sides, therefore, it is only the extremes that are debated over. I think that often there is as much or more to learn in the middle grounds.

Consider Christ's teachings on many things, His extremes were primarily things like no sinning, loving, only serving one master. Other teachings like money and slavery had middle grounds where both sides were protected but neither were allowed to dominate the other into oppression. The biggest problem I have with debate is that it does not allow for a middle ground. In the case of tongues, debate forbids me from saying that some tongues are of the devil and tries to force me to choose between all or none. Neither extreme is consistant with the biblical teaching and so why would I choose one of the extremes? Why can't I take a middle ground and simply discuss why I hold to that middle ground, Christ did.

 

[FreeinChrist]

Closing this thread at OP request