For many Christians, it seems a reasonable question to ask whether it is at all profitable for us to participate in public debates. Who has ever changed their mind because of some public debate? Why argue about anything? Logomachies only cause headaches.
In contrast to this, I want to argue that such a quietist position is not only incompatible with the teaching of Scripture, but runs directly counter to it. We are called to speak to unbelievers in the public square, and we must do so in a way that includes responding to their objections. We are called to prevail in debates of this kind (in a particular way). When we do this well, what happens is public debate, the kind of debate that can be very helpful.
But before we make the case for this, it must first be said that those who want to avoid “shows unseemly for Jesus” have a point in their favor. There are some debates that serve no purpose, and the Bible expressly tells us to avoid them. But when Scripture tells us not to lose our battles in a particular way, we must not infer from this an imaginary duty not to fight those battles at all.
That said, I would like to begin by pointing out a few places where Christians are told not to engage in verbal bickering. While we are not to avoid all debates, we do need to avoid some debates.
“Speak evil of no one, not quarrelsome, but gentle, showing all gentleness to all men. For we ourselves were once foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving various lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful and hating one another.” (Titus 3:2-3)
We must not be “troublemakers.”
“But put away foolish and senseless controversies, knowing that they breed strife. For the Lord’s servant must not be contentious but kind to all, apt to teach, patient, in gentleness correcting those who oppose themselves, in the hope that God may grant them repentance leading to a knowledge of the truth and that they may escape from the snare of the devil, by whom they are held captive at his will.” (2 Timothy 2:23-26)
We are told to stay out of stupid, fruitless debates, where the issue being discussed is guaranteed to spiral downward into meaningless shouting. The servant of the Lord is not to be contentious. But even in this case, note that the servant of the Lord is to “instruct those who oppose.” In other words, Paul’s rule here is “not this kind of debate,” and not, “do not debate.”
We must assess the situation, and read the crowd. There are times when we must not stoop to their level (Prov. 26:4). But, since wisdom is not optional, there are times when we must step into their world in order to execute the reductio (Prov. 26:5).
So with these caveats in mind, why should we debate? Well, to start where every Christian should always start, let’s look at the life of Jesus. Asking whether it is legitimate to debate is like asking whether it is permissible to speak in parables. Jesus spoke in parables constantly, and he also engaged in constant public pointing and objecting.
Jesus deftly answered a question about his authority with a question about John the Baptist (Matt. 21:27). Jesus silenced the Sadducees in a debate about the resurrection (Matt. 22:29). Jesus debated the highly charged issue of taxes (Mark 12:17). Jesus debated the devil (Luke 4:4). Jesus debated the issue of Sabbath healing (Luke 5:22). And Jesus takes on his opponents on the issue of his own identity (John 8:14). There are many other examples. In fact, there are so many examples of polemical exchanges in the gospels that questions about the appropriateness of polemical exchanges can only arise if people are ignorant of the gospels, or if they come to the gospels with a strong, preconceived idea about Jesus that they learned elsewhere.
This is strange, but not surprising, because there is a strong non-biblical tradition that labels Jesus as the original hippie, teaching us all to make peace. This goes directly against all the teachings the Lord made about hellfire, and he won the numerous debates with established theologians, and, as Sayers or Chesterton once said, we must not forget the time he threw the furniture down the temple steps. A gentle, meek, humble Jesus, no.
That said, it is not surprising that we find instructions that reveal how public shock is actually a pastoral duty.
“Hold fast the faithful word as taught, that ye may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince those that contradict. For there are many unruly, empty talkers, and deceivers, especially they of the circumcision; whose mouths must be stopped.” ( Titus 1:9-11 ).
This not only requires pastors to debate false teachers, it requires them to win those debates.
“And when he was minded to pass into Achaia, the brethren encouraged him, and wrote to the disciples to receive him. And when he came there, he greatly helped those who through grace had believed, for he vehemently refuted the Jews publicly, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.” (Acts 18:27-28)
Putting this all together, we see the biblical reasons for debate. We see them both in the example of Jesus, and in the instructions given to pastors in the first century. The point of debating is to silence the stubborn, talkative, and overthinking. When this happens, it is sometimes not obvious to the false teacher that he has been silenced – even though it is obvious to everyone else. This is the valuable service that Apollos offered – he was a help to believers in the way he refuted the Jews’ question of whether Jesus was the Messiah. Translated into a modern setting, if a believer effectively refuted someone arguing for gay marriage, or an atheist denying God, the debate on stage might not be resolved at all. However, there are many believers in the audience who have heard those same arguments in numerous classrooms, and we now know that these arguments can be effectively countered. Apollos was a great help to believers.
In godly debate, you are trying to win men and not arguments, and you have to remember that many of those who are trying to win are in the audience. In the great public issues of the day, there are a great many people on the fence. Debates can have an enormous impact on “the swing segment.” I would like to say that when we observe how ineffective our debates are, we would do much better to heed the scriptures and lament how ineffective our debaters are. This is an activity that should be encouraged, honored, and praised, and we should provide the necessary training for those who are called to it. And training programs should reject those bellicose types who only want to join a “who you gonna call?” Cultbusters .
In conclusion, I would like to say a few things about one of the great arenas for demonstrating excellent debating skills, and that would be the classrooms of secular universities. To what extent should Christians just keep their heads down? And if they do speak up, how should they speak up?
I would suggest three things to students in that position. The first is that if you want to challenge a teacher, you should do so with an established ethic. By this, I mean don’t be a struggling student who only does half the reading, then walks up to the teacher with the safety on, and then when you’re shut down, runs away crying. Earn your right to speak, and do so by being at the top of the class – or at the top of the class before you decide to open your mouth. If your grades slip after that, that’s up to the teacher.
Second, let most of your opportunities come to you. If you challenge everything you could possibly challenge (depending on the class) you’re going to do it every ten minutes. If you’re in a target-rich environment, then you’re likely to attack one every 25. You’ll sufficiently and effectively prove your point, and in this scenario – trust me – a little goes a long way.
And finally, as a student, you are not a professor. That means you should not preach, or try to hijack the lecture. There is a place for gospel declaration, but this is not it. That being said, it is not out of place for a student to ask questions. That is not inappropriate – that is a student’s calling and vocation. And if you ask the right questions for which the professor does not have answers, then you do not have to jump to conclusions. You can do that in conversations with other students after class. Keep discussions (in this context) in the interrogative.
If you learn to do this well, it may be an indication that you are called to an apologetic ministry after graduation. If this happens, you will have more tools available than as a humble student.
Original Blog: http://bit.ly/2Pdmj3b
Translated by Jairo Izquierdo Hernandez