A Christian should be judgmental, forceful, demanding, and threatening when sharing the message of salvation in Jesus Christ
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
I claim this is an incorrect approach which should never be used. To begin, I would humbly ask the PRO to justify this approach in the face of:
but in your hearts honor Christ the Lord as holy, always being prepared to make a defense to anyone who asks you for a reason for the hope that is in you; yet do it with gentleness and respect,
1 Peter 3:15 ESV
- of, relating to, or involving judgment
- characterized by a tendency to judge harshly
- possessing or filled with force: EFFECTIVE
- requiring much time, effort, or attention
- to call for something in an authoritative way : to make a demand
- expressing or suggesting a threat of harm, danger, etc.
- indicating or suggesting the approach of possible trouble or danger
"Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”
"If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand" (Ezekiel 3:18).
It seems that your intention was to argue against a Westboro Baptist type approach to evangelism in this debate. I do not approve of that particular approach either. However, I specifically accepted this debate because of the terms you used in the topic sentence: judgmental, forceful, demanding, and threatening. While there are negative connotations often associated with these, the words themselves are completely legitimate in describing a biblical approach to evangelism. I will provide definitions from Merriam-Webster but I am not tied to those specific wordings. I will then explain how these terms are biblically acceptable, then end with a brief interaction with 1 Peter 3:15. My goal here is not to nitpick in semantics. I just hope to show that using words such as these in a limited way can create a negative view of biblical evangelism by equating it with groups like Westboro Baptists. I hope this doesn't vary too far from your intention for this debate, and I hope it is a fruitful discussion for both parties.
The second definition of this word is somewhat imprecise since it is only referring one particular type of judgment - harsh ones - as opposed to speaking of judgments in general as the first definition states. Biblically speaking, Jesus actually calls us to "judge with righteous judgment" (John 7:24 ESV).
It is unjust judgments that are condemned here. But making judgments about a person, when done honestly and justly, is both acceptable and necessary. Evangelism requires judgment. We must determine whether a person is a follower of Christ or not. We discern this through verbal profession and examining one's fruit (hence the name "fruit inspector"). If we are going to call sinners to repentance, we must judge if we are speaking with an unrepentant sinner.
The negative connotation carries the picture of a crass individual shouting religious slogans at people. That is only a limited use of the word though. The general use of the word does not require it to be negative. Other definitions include words like vigorous or assertive. These are the words I would use to describe the preaching in the book of Acts. I would not hesitate to say that the preaching of Peter and Paul was forceful. The message of the Apostles was delivered with force and power from Jerusalem to the rest of the world.
The definition of “demand” seemed more appropriate with what I assume was your intention, but I included both. Again, the negative connotation seems to allude to a person carrying a "Turn or Burn!" sign through the streets. While I think the motivation behind this type of behavior is misguided and I would discourage this particular activity, the fact remains that the gospel is a call to repent and be saved from eternal punishment (Acts 2:38-40). Jesus issued a call to discipleship in Luke 14:25-35 that was perhaps more demanding than any other call. "Whoever does not bear his own cross and come after me cannot be my disciple" (Luke 14:27). If we convey a gospel that is less demanding than the one Christ proclaimed, it becomes a gospel of our own making.
I could be wrong, but I do not think even Westboro Baptists make personal threats of harm or violence against others. There are perhaps few Christians, even nominal ones, who would do so today. However, we are to indicate the approach of possible danger to unsaved people. Jesus warned of the threat of impending doom for the unrighteous in Matthew 13:40-42:"Just as the weeds are gathered and burned with fire, so will it be at the end of the age. The Son of Man will send his angels, and they will gather out of his kingdom all causes of sin and all law-breakers, and throw them into the fiery furnace. In that place there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.”There is even punishment for the one who refuses to warn others when God has pronounced judgment:"If I say to the wicked, ‘You shall surely die,’ and you give him no warning, nor speak to warn the wicked from his wicked way, in order to save his life, that wicked person shall die for his iniquity, but his blood I will require at your hand" (Ezekiel 3:18).If we are going to give people a message that they can be saved through faith in Christ, we must also tell them what they are being saved from. Now we cannot know the hearts of individuals. However, we can say with divine authority that if a person does not repent of their sin and place their faith in Christ, they will go to a place of eternal torment for their wickedness. That was Jesus’ message. I can’t think of anything more threatening than that.
1 Peter 3:15I will only briefly address this verse here to emphasize my point that evangelism can and should be done in the definitional sense of the aforementioned terms. We can discuss it more fully in later rounds, but the key word in this passage for our context is “gentleness.” It is actually the same word translated “meekness.” This is important because it does not simply mean to be nice or inoffensive. The gospel is an offensive message and will be opposed and rejected by many. “If the world hates you, know that it has hated me before it hated you” (John 15:18). Thus, our methods of evangelism cannot be derived from how well people receive our message. Our methods come from Scripture.Our gentleness - or meekness - is based on the fact that we have no authority over the individual, nor can we change the message we are to preach. We have no selfish motives in evangelizing. We are not trying to exalt ourselves or our own wisdom; we are exalting Christ. We have no room to boast because we are in need of the same grace and salvation. We are simply ambassadors who are under the full authority of Christ to bring His message. But this message has power, so we deliver it forcefully. The grace of God is free, yet He demands of us everything. We are to make righteous judgments about the individuals around us, as well as their actions for the purpose of calling them to repentance. And for those who are living in unrepentant sin, we lovingly warn them of the threat that faces their soul.
"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."
"If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church. And if he refuses to listen even to the church, let him be to you as a Gentile and a tax collector."
"Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light." Matthew 11:28-30
The Lord is my shepherd, I shall not want. He makes me lie down in green pastures. He leads me beside still waters. He restores my soul. He leads me in paths of righteousness for his name’s sake. Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil, for you are with me; your rod and your staff, they comfort me. You prepare a table before me in the presence of my enemies; you anoint my head with oil; my cup overflows. Surely goodness and mercy shall follow me all the days of my life, and I shall dwell in the house of the LORD forever.Psalm 23
I will preface by saying, despite being an agnostic, I was raised Southern Baptist and can tell you quite a bit about theology... but that has little bearing on my judgement here.
As I have found to be typical in UpholdingTheFaith's debates, conduct was admirable on both sides, with the "debate" being more of a discussion than anything. Alas, there must be a winner, though, and I found that PRO did a very good job highlighting how Christians must indeed be "judgmental, forceful, demanding, and threatening when sharing the message of salvation in Jesus Christ."
PRO outlined each word, and how the Christian should be each according to its definition, and supported with quotes from the scriptures.
CON was actually convinced to agree with everything except the word judgmental, where he argued it is God's place to judge alone. However, I think PRO's suggestion to leave final judgements to God, but to use human judgement to make wise choices in the meantime wins this point over. Plus, semantically speaking, CON's argument is impracticable.
Really, though, I feel that both parties were winners here. Cheers!
Yes and thank you. Also, the vote review was helpful, I appreciate it!
On a further note, I hope someone had redirected you to here: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346-about-dart-resources-for-new-members
You will find a list of debate jargon that can really help you figure out what's going on.
Then, there's the official debate guide: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1CJQT_PS9k82QkgrsyTQMKaQ90uY9yubVT0KPMR9XFcc/edit
Ragnar has made a really good guide for formatting debates: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1wgEoU2M4k7PvJZzvbwrjw8nOomkYqnBpDaLR4igvMe0/edit#heading=h.4gchlr7uwv2c
All of these resources will really help you become more competitive
I'm very glad you figured out how to use the quote format tool, it makes your debates a lot better on the eyes
Agreed. I'm new here. Still confined to my phone for now and have a lot to learn.
The patience of those like my opponent has allowed for me to already learn quite a bit about style and format and flow, but continues to allow these discussions to iterate these things against my ideas.
I'm throughly enjoying these discussions. Taking follow up points. Becoming a better communicator. Generally, just learning.
Again props to my opponent and others who do the same. It's so very appreciated!
Yeah, I'm actually reading the guide now.
I appreciate those words since I always find it hard to follow arguments that are poorly formatted. I should also give some credit to the DebateArt guide for listing some good ideas (I believe Ragnar provided this).
As an atheist this debate shouldn't interest me, but the way that PRO argues is immaculate. Great respect to you Fruit_Inspector, I am solidly on your side (as far as the context as this debate goes), and will be adding this to my list of great ways to format a debate.
BrotherDThomas doesn't do these debates because for all his ranting and raving, his logic doesn't hold up. His only method is to insult people with a surface-level, biased view of the Bible. He left DDO (under the name "21stCenturyIconoclast") after I showed how ridiculous he was so he came here to spew the same old garbage. He blocked me here after I called him out too. It's a sorry life to live with that much animosity towards other people just because of their beliefs.
Well i hope the two of you can work out a resolve sometime.
.
MisterChris, Sum1hugme,
I rarely do this type of debate in basically a closed setting with limitations. The deck is stacked, where even if I show the pseudo-christian in how biblically ignorant and hypocritical they are, their fellow pseudo-christians will vote for this Bible ignorant Christian nonetheless which turns into partisanship extraordinaire! Jesus and I would rather take it to the forums where it is free range in Bible Slapping Silly®️ the pseudo-christian, praise!
As is blatantly shown at DEBATEART, my biblical backing in not pussy-footing the pseudo-christian in discussion is within the TRUE inspired words of Jesus in this passage: "Preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, and exhort, with complete patience and teaching." (2 Timothy 4:2)
reprove: reprimand or censure someone.
rebuke: express sharp disapproval or criticism of someone because of their behavior or actions.
exhort: strongly encourage or urge someone to do something.
Unfortunately, this verse above contradicts the pseudo-christian "UpholdingTheFaith," but what's new?
I am proud to act in the same "no holds barred, in your face" manner as Jesus did in the Temple scenario with the money-changers: "In the temple courts He found men selling cattle, sheep, and doves, and money changers seated at their tables. SO HE MADE A WHIP OUT OF CORDS and drove all from the temple courts, both sheep and cattle. He poured out the coins of themoney changers and overturned their tables. To those selling doves He said, “Get these out of here! How dare you turn My Father’s house into a marketplace!” (John 2:14-16). ........ Jesus in this passage is a man's man by whipping the ungodly in the Temple, and shouting at them to leave, and at times pseudo-christians take offense in the way I act when preaching Jesus' TRUE words? NOT! Jesus set the example of a "Take no prisoners" action in this revealing passage, and in turn, I do the same in His name, praise Jesus!
.
While I don't believe cruelness or hostility should be used in evangelism, every word in the topic statement is actually part of sharing the gospel when using the actual definition of the words. We also don't use those attitudes only, but they are all biblical. I am treating this as a disagreement between two Christians' methodology.
Really? Instigator is CON!
This one is right up your alley
yea
Yes, except I think you mean *CON
Pro will win easily. Then big brother will throw a big tantrum that will make everyone know that Christianity isn’t any better than murder.
Do what you do best
I've pissed people off by pointing out the definition of terrorism, and how it relates to claims of eternal torture.