by John T. Lewis
Alexander Campbell once said,
This is, we are convinced, one of the best means of propagating the
truth and of exposing error in doctrine or practice ... and we are
fully persuaded that [a] week’s debating is worth a year’s
preaching, such as we generally have, for the purpose of
disseminating truth and putting error out of countenance.
(Richerdson, Memoroirs of Alexander Campbell, Vol. 2, p. 90).
Alexander Campbell is known to have had debates with Presbyterians,
skeptics, Catholics, and many others. And one will find this among
all of the great restoration men. Almost every denomination engaged
in debates on many different subjects as well. I posses public
debates which have been printed with the Baptists, Methodists,
Presbyterians, Catholics, Seventh-Day Adventists, Worldwide Church
of God, United Pentecostal Church, Church of God, and many others.
The spirit of debate was highly effective until the early 1960’s when
the favor of debate began to fall.
The purpose of this article is four-fold: (1) To discover what
debating is not; (2) To understand what debating is; (3) To ask whether
the Bible authorizes debating; and (4) To explain the procedures of
debate.
WHAT DEBATING IS NOT
For some reason, the word “debate” has become a very negative
word in religious circles these days. Those who “debate” are
considered unloving and contentious by many people. All of this, I
believe, comes from a misunderstanding of what debate is. Let’s look
at what debating is not:
First, debating is not what Paul condemns in Romans 1:29 of
the King James Version. Here the King James condemns “debate.” Some
have pointed to this verse as evidence against debating. We should
realize, however, that newer versions have the word “strife” instead
of debate. Strife refers to contention or discord. So what Paul is
condemning is NOT public discussion with rules of conduct agreed upon.
Instead, a contentious, wrangling spirit over issues which don’t
really matter is what Paul condemns.
This brings us to the next point. Debating is also not mere
arguing or wrangling. “Arguments” are laid out which the debater
believes sustains his view. But debaters don’t debate simply to argue,
fuss and fight. In Jude 3 the Word tells us to “contend” for the
faith. But it NEVER tells us to be “contentious.” Obviously, then,
to “contend” is far different than being “contentious.” 2 Timothy
2:23-25 provides an excellent example showing the difference between
debating and wrangling. Paul says, “But foolish and unlearned
questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.” This refers
to wrangling. But then he goes on to say, “In meekness instructing
those that oppose themselves.” So on the one hand, we are not to be
strifeful in our Christianity. But at the same time we are to correct
those in opposition. So obviously “strife” and “correction” (through
the means of debating) are not one in the same.
Thirdly, debating is not the opportunity to “win” arguments.
In most debates there are no judges except the audience. No one
officially wins by a group of people who vote for one or the other.
Therefore, it should never be the intention of debaters to debate
merely to win an argument. A debater is not to debate simply to
make himself look good and the other debater look bad. Yes, the
debater is trying to show the doctrine of his opponent to be false.
But he is never to do it to damage the person himself.
WHAT DEBATING IS
Now that we have looked at what debating is not, let’s
discover what debating is. Webster defines debating as: “To discuss
or examine a question by presenting and considering arguments on both
sides.” This is a good definition. Maybe if we started advertising
debates as “public discussions” instead of “public debates” we would
have more success in persuading people to accept them.
In the first place, debating is merely one way among many to
preach the gospel. We have been given the command (Mk. 16:15; Mt.
28:19-20). Christians must find different methods of preaching the
gospel. Public discussions (debates) are one way this can be done.
Think about the benefits of debate. How many opportunities would
you have to preach to those of an opposing view this year if you
didn’t engage in public debate? I had an opportunity to debate the
Pentecostals in 1995. Several of them were present at the debate.
It would have taken me MANY years to preach on the subject of
miracles to that many Pentecostals. You see, one of the great things
about debate is that it is much easier to get people of opposing views
to come and listen. People of opposing views will attend because
they know that someone of their belief will be present.
In the second place, debating is an opportunity to strengthen
a Christian’s faith. Hebrews 11:1 indicates that faith is to be built
upon “conviction” or “assurance.” Debating, of course, helps the
Christian to see both sides of the issue. When a Christian attends a
debate and sees that their position is able to withstand the test,
this can greatly strengthen them! The Christian will be even more
persuaded that what they believe is actually what the Bible teaches.
Does the Bible authorize Debate?
Obviously I believe the Bible authorizes debating. However,
let us look at a few examples which establish the fact that debating
is Scriptural.
First, we truly are engaged in a war with the enemy. (Eph.
6:11-17).
Second, Jesus Himself was a debater. In Matthew 21:23 the
chief priests confronted Jesus about His teachings. They asked Him,
“by what authority are you doing these things? and who gave you this
authority?” We find that Jesus engaged them by presenting an
argument in defense of Himself (V24). What did He do? He presented
an argument that they simply could not answer! In Matthew 22 Jesus
contended on three other occasions. In verse 15-22 they thought they
could present an argument He couldn't answer. They asked Him if it
was lawful to pay taxes to Caesar or not. In verse 23-33 the
Sadducees thought they could trip Him up concerning the resurrection.
Verse 34-46 tells us that the Scribes thought they could stick it to
Him by asking Him about the greatest commandment. You will notice that
in each of these situations Jesus engaged in a PUBLIC exchange of
words. He defended the truth in a public way. True, it may not have
been a debate with signed propositions and rules; but nevertheless,
Jesus confronted them publicly, and He silenced their invalid
arguments (22:34).
Consider also that Paul was a debater. Every time Paul went
into a city to start a church, where was the first place he would go?
Into the synagogue. And what did he do there? He debated! We find
that the Jews “opposed the things spoken by Paul” (Ac. 14:45). In
Acts 17:2 it says that Paul went into the synagogue to “reason with
them from the Scriptures.” He was “reasoning and persuading the
things of the kingdom of God.” (Ac. 19:8). What is the difference
between Paul going into the synagogue and reasoning with the Jews
and having public discussions where both sides of the issue are
examined?
Lastly, we turn to Apollos. Acts 18:28 says, “For he
vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing them from the
Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.” You will notice that Apollos
refuted the Jews and that he did it in a PUBLIC manner. This is
certainly authorization for people to get together for public debate.
The Procedures of Debate
The procedures of debate are simple. First, the debaters must
agree upon a “proposition.” The proposition is a statement, usually
no more than one sentence in length, which one debater “affirms”
meaning that he affirms or believes the proposition to be true. The
other debater “denies” this proposition meaning that he denies the
truth of it. By way of example, suppose that two men disagree on the
subject of baptism. One believes that baptism is absolutely necessary
to receive forgiveness; the other says that people need not baptism to
be forgiven. A proposition as follows might be agreed upon:
“RESOLVED, the Scriptures teach that baptism is absolutely necessary
in order to receive the forgiveness of past sins.” One debater
affirms this proposition as true; the other denies it.
Many times two or more propositions will be signed for debate.
Often in debates between the church of Christ and the Baptist Church,
propositions will be signed on the subjects of baptism, faith only,
and falling from grace. Usually at least one day is devoted to each
proposition.
The “affirmative speaker” of the proposition under discussion
always leads off in the debate. He should always begin his first
speech by reading the proposition and clearly defining the terms of
his proposition. Defining the proposition enables the audience to
clearly understand what the affirmative speaker is trying to affirm.
After defining the proposition, the debater is to present
arguments which he believes proves his proposition to be true. For
example, if a debater affirmed that the first day of the week was the
day on which Christians should worship, he might present 1
Corinthians 16:1-2 as an argument. Merely quoting the passage,
however, is not an argument. The debater should carefully exegete
the passage and clearly show how the argument supports his
proposition.
After the affirmative speaker finishes his first speech, the
debater in the “negative” is to rise for his first speech. The job of
the negative speaker is to attempt to “negate” the arguments presented
by the affirmative speaker. He is to specifically address each and
every argument the affirmative speaker presented in his first speech.
Only after this should the negative speaker introduce negative
material which he believes further shows the affirmative speaker’s proposition to
be false.
Each day of debating is usually limited to just one
proposition. Each day usually consists of two hours of actual
debating time. Usually this time is divided up into three twenty
minute speakers by each speaker with the affirmative speaker leading
followed by the negative speaker. This order continues through the
rest of the speeches.
In addition to the the signed propositions, rules are usually
signed by both debaters. These rules usually include such things as
the order of the debate, date, time, location, etc. Debaters will
also agree upon any oral or written questions which may be asked
during the debate. Most debates consist of written questions where
the debaters agree that they will exchange questions about thirty
minutes before the scheduled start time of the debate and return them
no later than fifteen minutes before the start time of the debate.
These questions, of course, can be used by either debater during the
course of the debate.
Usually each debater will have at least one moderator. His
moderator will help him in preparation of the debate and sit with him
throughout the debate. The moderator usually keeps time and sometimes handles any charts his debater might
want to present.
Conclusion
This is only a brief overview of debating. Debating can
be very effective and beneficial to both sides if handled properly.
Both debaters must realize that they aren’t there just to win an
argument or score points. If this is realized, debates can be very
successful in causing people to study more and better understand
the all inspired Word of God.
Back to Research Page
Comments? Please E-mail me at: jlewis@brightok.net
