Christians arguing with other Christians

[Starise]

9 minutes ago, Justin Adams said:

Been sniffing the Falcon exhaust too much...

Never considered that one. I could swear there were notes of lavender and hibiscus in there.

[Tristen]

1 hour ago, Whyme said:

Paul didn't seem interested in debating dietary laws in Romans 14. In the 13 and 14 Paul talks about love.

Yep - if we are mindful of love, we will be ideally less inclined to let a disagreement become personal and emotive.

[Whyme]

1 hour ago, popsthebuilder said:

I suppose this isn't the thread for it... But even though the Christ of GOD is One with GOD through HIS Spirit, it is still GOD who's Spirit it is and GOD who gives it...is it not?

I love discussion and can argue at times. I can only hope that standing up against unsound doctrine is never frowned upon. And that reason is never hindered due to lack of logic or fear or pride.

Sorry

 

peace

I love discussion too but I'm glad to be around wise people on this site. To be wise one must be around wisdom. Psalms 1 

Blessed is the one(A)
    who does not walk(B) in step with the wicked(C)
or stand in the way(D) that sinners take(E)
    or sit(F) in the company of mockers,(G)
2 but whose delight(H) is in the law of the Lord,(I)
    and who meditates(J) on his law day and night.
3 That person is like a tree(K) planted by streams(L) of water,(M)
    which yields its fruit(N) in season
and whose leaf(O) does not wither—
    whatever they do prospers.(P)

4 Not so the wicked!
    They are like chaff(Q)
    that the wind blows away.
5 Therefore the wicked will not stand(R) in the judgment,(S)
    nor sinners in the assembly(T) of the righteous.

[leah777]

54 minutes ago, Josheb said:

I'd like you to pay attention to the first three posts. 

You, Regenerated-Adult posted an op on Christians arguing among themselves and Riverwalker's made note of the distinction between discussion and arguing (with the implicit context of the op's topic: arguing). Marathon began with statements of validation and made note of the fact some lack knowledge others possess. OneLight highlighted the importance of being able to properly communicate. 

In other words, while each poster was in some wat affirming of the op...... each implicitly disagreed because implicit within the distinctions between discussion and arguing, some lacking knowledge, and proper communication is the premise arguments do and will happen and that is why the things the first three posters cited were cited. 

As I read through the thread I also find something curious happened. Of all the many validations and additionally valid points being added to the discussion 1) you, Regenerated-Adult chose a post that has nothing to do with the op! and 2)no one has added what scripture actually states on the matter of arguing among Christians, and 3) this is all the more curious because the topic of Christians arguing and being divided has been broached more than once in the last six months. We should all know the correct (scriptural) responses to your op, R-A. 

 

One of the most glaring realities of the New Testament epistolary is the disagreements with which the NT writers had to engage. The NT ekklesia were a messy bunch of people. Given the witness of the epistolary we should be asking ourselves why there isn't more arguing and praising God with gratitude there isn't more arguing. 

The reason there's not more arguing is because the forum has terms of use and moderates what we don't self-moderate. 

So what does scripture say? Well, it says many things but let's start with two I think most salient for Christian internet discussion forums.

1 Corinthians 11:17-19
"But in giving this instruction, I do not praise you, because you come together not for the better but for the worse.  For, in the first place, when you come together as a church, I hear that divisions exist among you; and in part I believe it.  For there must also be factions among you, so that those who are approved may become evident among you." 

Galatians 5:19-21 (excerpted)
"Now the deeds of the flesh are evident, which are: .....enmities, strife, jealousy, outbursts of anger, disputes, dissensions, factions, ......and things like these, of which I forewarn you, just as I have forewarned you, that those who practice such things will not inherit the kingdom of God."

So we see in one context Paul says disagreements are good things and in another context he decries them. 

How about we restart the conversation and start it with God's word as the measure? 
How about we start the restart with these two texts and then in the due course of time look at the heart issues that beget the kind of arguing about which the op expresses concern because not all arguing is bad, unChristian, unChristlike, ungodly, or unscriptural and it is paradoxically ungodly to think in such an overgeneralization. 

 

I have a client waiting so I have to go but I'll comment further later.

Ahem, I posted scripture.

[Regenerated-Adult]

5 minutes ago, Josheb said:

Fail.

It is the poster who posts ad hominem that is the troll. 

Each and every single one of us agreed to certain standards when we became Christians. We have agreed to submit ourselves to God's standards as articulated in His written word and that written word commands us to let nothing unwholesome come out of our mouth (of finger tips) except that which is edify to the other. Posters who post ad hominem are acting in disobedience.

Each and every single one of us agreed to certain standards when we became members of the forum and the forum prohibits personal attacks (ad hominem). Therefore every single poster posting any ad hominem is breaking their covenant with the forum, every other member with whom they have covenanted, and the individual they've just abused with a personal attack. 

Logically, ad hominem is well-established as a logical fallacy so any poster who posts any ad hominem has acted irrationally. 

Functionally, ad hominem is never an argument for or against anything; it is always a fruitless endeavor that does nothing more than undermine the character of the one posting the ad hominem. Furthermore, the typical effect of ad hominem is to place the recipient in either a defensive or an adversarial stance and two posters both posting from defensive or adversarial stances do not solve anything. Ad hominem is a very dysfunctional practice. 

Spiritually, scripture is quite clear: it is out of the abundance of the heart the mouth speaks. So the ad hominem comes from a heart that attacks brothers and sisters in the body of Christ, those in whom the Spirit of Christ dwells; those loved by God. 

There are a host of problems inherent with ad hominems. Alternatively, there is nothing inherently wrong with noting the error of ad hominem and asking for Godly change. The request for correction may not be effective; it may on any given occasion be just as fruitless practically speaking as the ad hominem because of the unwillingness of the ad hominem poster to self-correct but there is nothing inherently wrong with noting ad hominem has occurred. 

It is the one posting ad hominem that is the troll. It serves no other purpose but to provoke and emotional response.

 

Argue this with me if you like, Regenerated-Adult, but f you do that you'll undermine your own op AND I will gladly prove that dissent wrong. Because that statement calling the recipient of the ad hominem a troll (blaming the victim of abuse) is so demonstrably false your best play is to acknowledge the mistake and prove if we were actually saints, we probably wouldn't engage in such crass and gross behaviour with other people who claim to be 'born again'. 

I don't, as a rule, read too far into your posts that are full of writing (it seems in excess) when you get it wrong the first few times.  I simply just don't want to read more of "I am wrong" in your rants and diatribes against me.  

You did say that arguing is a good thing.  Don't try to backtrack and claim that isn't verbatim what you said.  It doesn't work like that.

You are the perfect example of a Christian arguing with another Christian.

 

Keep it up.

[Marathoner]

7 hours ago, Justin Adams said:

Yes o hairy one: thou doest speak words of wisdom. Been to a barber lately?

Snip-snip sayeth the shears, but nary a strand of hair was to be found. 

[Alive]

Another thread locked until time can be taken to read through it see where it went so wrong---again.

There have been direct and caustic insults made here.

[Alive]

Wow! LOL--I read through the whole thread. Y'all are keeping this believer busy lately.

May I make a suggestion? Thank you.

To ones who are arguing--;-) take a few minutes after a few long breaths and read through the entire thread again while attempting to leave any personal feelings in a sack in the corner over there. I am leaving all posts just as they are.

There is something to be learned. May the Lord help us as we endeavor to seek what pleases Him.

BTW--there is some great humor to be enjoyed in this OP--if you are willing.

[Hopefully]

On 2/24/2021 at 1:32 PM, Regenerated-Adult said:

Yet it continues to happen, and there is seemingly no end in sight

I have thought about how to stop arguing too. The solution I have come up with is:

I will not start off in a thread by quoting someone to disagree because it appears to put a personal attachment to it. I will disagree by just answering the original post with my thoughts and people will still see what I have to say.

 I will not answer someone who quotes me just to disagree if it appears to be done in a manner I feel will lead to an argument. I will just leave it there.

I can find out if I’m wrong by reading what others have to say and I may still come to the conclusion that I’m not, and I don’t need to restate how I’m not wrong because people have already seen what I have to say. 

I will accept this warning to stop arguing and the things I have just stated is what I will put into action to achieve this goal.

[LadyKay]

21 hours ago, Regenerated-Adult said:

When non Christians view this website and these forums, do they see Christians being nasty to other Christians who are arguing back and forth?  If so, does this make them want to be a Christian themselves?  Obviously NOT.

One needs to consider how they argue and choose their words carefully. We as Christians can argue as the world argues. Or we can argue like Christians. Meaning we do not try to make the other person feel stupid and demeaning. Christians are not perfect. We are still human. We need to say we are sorry when sorry is due. Is the reason for our arguing ment to help someone who has lost their way? Or is it just away to show off ourselves? We all should ask ourselves this.