Witnessing and Debating?

[Garland-Green]

Can I have your perspective? When does it become pointless to debate someone who doesn't believe? When have you walked that extra mile? Do you consider debating to be the same as witnessing? I know we are told to preach the word to every creature, but what if that creature did heard the Gospel already? Should we bother considering they already are familiar with the word? They have heard it, and rejected it is there any point in attempting to reason with such a person, if the Word of God could not reach him, considering that faith is the work of God, not human rhetoric? The reason I am asking is because I often encounter people who want to debate, and I get the sense they want to debate to have other people read their replies, and that debating Christians is something they enjoy, something they do for entertainments sake, or win arguments and perhaps at the same time ridicule you.

1 Peter 3:15-16
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, having a good conscience, so that, when you are slandered, those who revile your good behavior in Christ may be put to shame.

Colossians 2:1-23
For I want you to know how great a struggle I have for you and for those at Laodicea and for all who have not seen me face to face, that their hearts may be encouraged, being knit together in love, to reach all the riches of full assurance of understanding and the knowledge of God's mystery, which is Christ, in whom are hidden all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge. I say this in order that no one may delude you with plausible arguments. For though I am absent in body, yet I am with you in spirit, rejoicing to see your good order and the firmness of your faith in Christ.

Acts 19:9 ESV
the Way before the congregation, he withdrew from them and took the disciples with him, reasoning daily in the hall of Tyrannus.

Philippians 3:18-19
For many, of whom I have often told you and now tell you even with tears, walk as enemies of the cross of Christ. Their end is destruction, their god is their belly, and they glory in their shame, with minds set on earthly things.

1 Thessalonians 2:13
And we also thank God constantly for this, that when you received the word of God, which you heard from us, you accepted it not as the word of men but as what it really is, the word of God, which is at work in you believers.

Acts 18:28
For he vigorously refuted the Jews in public debate, proving from the Scriptures that Jesus was the Christ.

Note that Paul debated someone who believed God to exist, and believed in the Scriptures though they may not have understood them.

Acts 19:8-10
And he went into the synagogue and spoke boldly for three months, reasoning and persuading concerning the things of the kingdom of God.
But when some were hardened and did not believe, but spoke evil of the Way before the multitude, he departed from them and withdrew the disciples, reasoning daily in the school of Tyrannus.
And this continued for two years, so that all who dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

International Standard Bible Encyclopedia
TYRANNUS
ti-ran'-us (Turannos): When the Jews of Ephesus opposed Paul's teaching in the synagogue, he withdrew, and, separating his followers, reasoned daily in the school of Tyrannus. "This continued for the space of two years" (Acts 19:9, 10). D Syriac (Western text) adds after Tyrannus (Acts 19:9), "from the 5th hour unto the 10th." Schole is the lecture-hall or teaching-room of a philosopher or orator, and such were to be found m every Greek city. Tyrannus may have been

(1) a Greek rhetorician or

(2) a Jewish rabbi.

(1) This is the common opinion, and many identify him with a certain Tyrannus, a sophist, mentioned by Suidas. Paul would thus appear to be one of the traveling rhetors of the time, who had hired such a hall to proclaim his own peculiar philosophy (Ramsay, Paul the Traveler, 246, 271).

(2) Meyer thinks that as the apostle had not passed wholly to the Gentiles, and Jews still flocked to hear him, and also that as Tyrannus is not spoken of as a proselyte (sebomenos ton Theon), this schole is the beth Midrash of a Jewish rabbi. "Paul with his Christians withdrew from the public synagogue to the private synagogue of Tyrannus, where he and his doctrine were more secure from public annoyance" (Meyer in the place cited.).

Proverbs 26:4-14
4 When arguing with fools, don't answer their foolish arguments, or you will become as foolish as they are. 5 When arguing with fools, be sure to answer their foolish arguments, or they will become wise in their own estimation. 6 Trusting a fool to convey a message is as foolish as cutting off one's feet or drinking poison! 7 In the mouth of a fool, a proverb becomes as limp as a paralyzed leg. 8 Honoring a fool is as foolish as tying a stone to a slingshot. 9 A proverb in a fool's mouth is as dangerous as a thornbush brandished by a drunkard. 10 An employer who hires a fool or a bystander is like an archer who shoots recklessly. 11 As a dog returns to its vomit, so a fool repeats his folly. 12 There is more hope for fools than for people who think they are wise.

Ephesians 4:17
So I tell you this, and insist on it in the Lord, that you must no longer live as the Gentiles do, in the futility of their thinking.

2 Peter 2:18
For, uttering great swelling words of vanity, they entice in the lusts of the flesh, by lasciviousness, those who are just escaping from them that live in error;  

[Spirit Reborn]

Garland-Green

Quote:

When does it become pointless to debate someone who doesn't believe?

Okay, so this is my perspective:
I think that it becomes pointless to debate someone, who doesn't believe, when they clearly display indifference/disinterest and/or all they do is just retort with their own 'wisdom'/theories and not take anything/the majority of what was said into consideration after politely reasoning with them for each question they may pose/comment they have and clearly seeing no improvement in their replies that displays their willingness to consider the truth of His Word. Although personally.. I don't like to debate. I don't see it as trying to win the argument or to prove that I am right. I try to reason with them by various ways. One of which, that I've found to be quite helpful in them even listening to me in the first place, is to simply be polite and to genuinely love them [agape type love]. And they'll totally see that through your replies. When it's not about you winning and, instead, is all about them coming to the knowledge and understanding of God, sin, the fall, repentance, His Son, His love, mercy, grace, His sacrifice, His death, His resurrection, His ascension, His ways/commandments/teachings, His return..etc., then you somehow find that your approach is a lot more compassionate and empathizing. Because we've been in their shoes before. We know what it's like to hear from other believers when we, too, were dead in our sins. When I was an unbeliever, I personally thought they were crazy. I thought they were too serious and boring. My 'old man' was still alive and thriving. It did not understand His Word or anything outside of the flesh. So when I talk to unbelievers, as a believer, I try to relate my past self with them..because there's always something that I can relate to. And once that common ground is known, then I try to go from there to show them that.."hey, I know what it's like to experience such and such and guess what? I survived that. I am a living example of someone who overcame that through Christ. This is HIS testimony through my life.. [insert my testimony here]". And then it's like.. you're sharing a part of yourself with them..showing them that you trust them enough to share something real like that and showing them a way out of what you have experienced- Which is by God's grace through Jesus Christ

Quote:

When have you walked that extra mile?

What extra mile, exactly? sweatdrop

Quote:

Do you consider debating to be the same was witnessing?

Personally, no. Debating, for me, is like arguing my side and trying to win that argument in favor of..myself. Witnessing, for me, is having to relate to them on some level [past sinful experiences that have been repented of and healed/etc] and displaying compassion towards them which they can clearly detect from how I type my replies and it shows that you are willing to humble yourself to help them understand in a loving way. Because if I were to debate His truth? They would be on an automatic defensive- which is a natural reaction, I've found. When the tone of the debate is argumentative with no compassion/love shown through it..then it's not going to reach their hearts; only their ears/eyes. It's not going to impact them or move them in a good way. It's going to leave a bad impression- and this is from experience. Ultimately though, no matter how it turns out- whether from debating or witnessing, [I think one can witness through debating but again.. I feel like the other person will go straight on the defensive instead of considering what we have to say]. But anyway, no matter how it turns out, God and the Holy Spirit will work those seeds planted in their hearts. It's up to them how they will respond to it in the future, God willing.

Quote:

I know we are told to preach the word to every creature, but what if that creature did heard the Gospel already? Should we bother considering they already are familiar with the word?

I personally did hear the gospel before I accepted Christ into my life as Lord and Savior. I didn't fully understand it though.. I kind of just thought of the gospel as some nice sounding fairy tale. Like it didn't apply to me. I would say that yes, absolutely preach the Gospel again to them. I didn't truly know ANYTHING about the Gospel until ..a few months-a year after accepting Jesus into my life. I was hungry for the Word and wanted to learn more about Him..and through various medias..I came to grasp the concept..but when I dove into the Word myself instead of listening to other people teaching about it..He honestly gave me the wisdom, through His Holy Spirit, to interpret His Word, through prayer [and still is, praise God]
In short, I think we can hear the Gospel a few times and yet..not have it fully sink in especially if they haven't received the Holy Spirit yet. So yes, definitely repeat the Word, even if they say that they've already heard about it but [through their continued, intentional, sinful lifestyle], they may not actually get it. But then again..when I did understand the gospel, there were times before when I'd intentionally keep sinning.. so it really depends. I would lean on the Holy Spirit and if I feel convicted to share with them, despite them already saying that they have heard it before..then I'd go ahead and share it.

Quote:

They have heard it, and rejected it is there any point in attempting to reason with such a person, if the Word of God could not reach him, considering that faith is the work of God, not human rhetoric?

Yes, I think it'd be good to reason with them as the disciples have tried to reason with others as well. If, after that point, they still reject it, we would need to pray over that person for God to break their hearts of stone and to help them to consider and understand the Truth and for Him to have mercy on them.. [sometimes I find myself comparing them to the lost sheep. They've lost their way as they continue on in their own ways and have let sin harden their hearts to God, His Son, and His Word..]

The reason I am asking is because I often encounter people who want to debate, and I get the sense they want to debate to have other people read their replies, and that debating Christians is something they enjoy, something they do for entertainments sake, or win arguments and perhaps at the same time ridicule you.

Sometimes those that have come with the intention of ridiculing a Christian from the get-go, can have their hearts softened and changed by God. 3nodding
I've heard a few testimonies like that before. It's a beautiful turn-around  

[Garland-Green]

@ Spirit Reborn. With extra mile I was referring to this verse:

Matthew 5:41
If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles.

Thank you for taking time to explain your perspective. ^^  

[Garland-Green]

The majority isn't always trustworthy. The majority of the world doesn't believe Jesus is the way the truth and the life. =P The reason I asked this is because I had a visitor in one of my threads. She was very articulate and wanted to come of as though-through and intelligent. She knew the Bible in and out. I think she said she had read it several times. Came from a Christian family, and claimed to be open minded though the way she phrased her sentences proved she was not, and that on a fundamental level unwilling to consider it as true. She asked to be presented with evidence outside of the Bible for the Bible's claims. Things that can't be verified, such as the miracles of Jesus. She wanted secular sources to affirm that Jesus did miracles (speak positively about it), and that he was the son of God (speak in favor of Him). Unwilling to trust eyewitness accounts because she sees them as biased since those eye-witnesses went on to be called Christians, unwilling to trust Christians quoting historians (it could be that the Christians are making it up according to her, because we have an agenda). When I attempted giving her evidence of historians mentioning Jesus, she said there are scholars who don't believe that these historians exist, she is only willing to accept these scholars opinions. I tried to point out that there are scholars that don't agree with these scholars. She refused to listen to archaeology affirming that the Bible is a source to be trusted, and wanted every single account attested for, not willing to give in the benefit of doubt on one account where the archaeological record has not yielded evidence yet. Held to that the Bible contradicts itself, but isn't willing to read verses in context. Quote; "If one sentence says something that contradicts another, it is a contradiction." Willing to accept that the Bible was historically accurate as to persons, places, and cultures, but not willing to accept any supernatural claims, anything about Jesus or God the Bible says. She set such high standards of evidence that proving anything even in our daily life would be an impossibility. Is it ok, when you realize that there is nothing you can present a person with that will convince them to cut the discussion short?
Is it possible for us to reason with someone who is unreasonable? When you can almost say that for this persons denial, and rejection has become a mindset, and a philosophy of life?  

[Angelus1987]

The Bible makes a reference about witnessing like a farmer planting seeds. Sometimes we need to plant multiple seeds to grow anything and then there are times you only need to plant one seed. Why should we expect witnessing to be any different than planting a garden or plants? Sometimes it will take multiple witnesses to make anything click in the mind of even one person.  

[Angelus1987]

There is however a time when we are not to throw our pearls before swine. Generally speaking that time is when we are to turn them over to God and not make an effort and wind up wasting our time while we could have been witnessing to someone else.