discussing scripture is such a blessing - there are so many treasures in the bible and people see things differently which makes for an opportunity to expand our understanding of God's messages to us
i wonder what makes people turn a discussion on a topic into a discussion of the person we disagree with
it seems like when someone dislikes what another person says the next comments are about the person
why do we do that?
is it because we dislike anyone that disagrees with us?
is it because when someone disagrees with us we get hurt somehow and now want to hurt the person back?
what should we do when someone starts getting personal rather than continuing to discuss a topic?
what i do is try to talk to the person privately - and try to find out what i did that caused the person to start being unfriendly toward me and what i can do that would make things right between us -
Romans 12:18 -
Romans 14:19
almost every time trying to reconcile changes things for the better -
1 Peter 3:8 -
Ephesians 4:32
i think we all know when someone is not being friendly to us - we can feel the tension
i think we all need to learn to love each other while we discuss topics
i think we all need to examine ourselves when we start disliking someone for disagreeing with us
Galatians 5:15 -
2 Timothy 2:23 -
2 Timothy 2:14 - says that when we start devouring one another rather than having a friendly discussion of scripture we risk tearing others down and ruining anyone that is listening to the ungodly attacking exchanges
i love you all and love hearing other pov's - i just wish we could be friendly in our discussions so that we look like people who love God and our fellow man - otherwise we are just clanging cymbals and noisy gongs -
1 Corinthians 13:1
for those that want to deal with what they consider false doctrine - it can still be done with a friendly discussion - getting angry and unkind in a discussion produces nothing good - people dig in their heels when offended - they stop listening to what you have to say because your delivery/tone was unscriptural - lacking the reconciliation goal - when people are treated as enemies they become irreconcilable - they lock into defending themselves - so the discussion of truth is buried beneath a fight for personal safety when under attack
imo theological discussions have 2 goals:
1. get a better understanding of what God is saying to us - expand our understanding of scripture
2. an opportunity to hone our skills at speaking the truth in love - iow continuing to genuinely love someone we disagree with - learning to keep loving people we disagree with helps us become more Christlike
praying for a more Godly approach to theological discussions
discussing scripture is such a blessing - there are so many treasures in the bible and people see things differently which makes for an opportunity to expand our understanding of God's messages to us
Avoiding vain arguments is good, avoiding disputes in the Scripture is not.
The key is knowing what vain argument is, and avoiding it, so as to avoid the wrath of man that works not the righteousness of God:
First of all, Scripture commends disputing the Scriptures with knowledge of the truth:
Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market daily with them that met with him.
And a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures, came to Ephesus.
And so, when does good dispute of Scripture become vain argument?
Where is the wise? where is the scribe? where is the disputer of this world? hath not God made foolish the wisdom of this world?
Vain argument begins with trying to argue the things of God
with our own opinions and philosophy of man, rather than strictly by the Scriptures as written.
Everyone has an opinion, but they are nonstarters for doctrine of Christ.
Example:
Well, I think God...
And the contention was so sharp between them, that they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark, and sailed unto Cyprus.
Honest disputes in the Scriptures become vain, when a disagreement on a certain point is irreconcilable. To go on is to only argue and talk over one another, slinging Scriptures at one another like so many darts.
Better to go to separate corners, than to try and draw blood.
When we each reject what the other is saying, when we have both clearly had our say, then there is no further 'discussion', only wrath.
I also include unfair debate: not fairly responding to the other's point, but only talking over them with our own mantra. I'm not a sounding board for those who only care what they read from Scripture, and have no interest in being corrected, even for their own good.
A man that is an heretick after the first and second admonition reject.
This admonition goes both ways: it is for our own good, so as not to begin to browbeat, and it is for the other's good not to be browbeaten.
If we believe another is rejecting Scripture as plainly written, then it is best for us to cut off any more debate, lest our righteous indignation becomes wrathful frustration at some thick-headed heathen, that can't even read and acknowledge what is plainly written, that any idiot child with half a brain can understand!!!!
Oops. Sorry. This, of course, is the one I have to keep working on.
I.e. we love someone, that we have a sharp dispute with, by no more disputing with that someone, even if they want to.
Silence can be the gold coin of compelling someone to rethink themselves.
And so, the simplicity of avoiding spiritual sin over fair disputes, is to have rule over our spirit by obeying the Scriptural guidelines between good disagreement that edifies, and bad argument over no disagreement at all.
I.e. hard-headedness is good, and iron sharpens iron, but only brute wild sheep butt heads to conquer the other.
I used to like those nature wildlife clips before movies way back when.
And I saw, and behold a white horse: and he that sat on him had a bow; and a crown was given unto him: and he went forth conquering, and to conquer.
Nay, in all these things we are more than conquerors through him that loved us.
We are to be better than simple brute conquerors of the faith, which leads only to wrath of man, and not righteousness indignation of God.
Even Jesus knew to leave it alone, when He saw He wasn't getting anywhere with others:
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
Especially when they want to kill you for it:
After these things Jesus walked in Galilee: for he would not walk in Jewry, because the Jews sought to kill him.
Now, this Marquis de Queensbury rule does not necessarily apply, when defending the truth of the gospel against the lies of men, for the sake of other souls being decieved and drawn away from Jesus as Christ of God:
I would they were even cut off which trouble you.
