Jesus on circumcision

[Christ_is_Risen]

I’ve never been in a debate where the two parties agree upon everything from the start. It is precisely because of the differences in beliefs that the debate is taking place.

1. The presumption is that the debaters are seeking the truth in good faith.

There is a saying in Scripture:
Proverbs 27:17
Iron sharpeneth iron; so a man sharpeneth the countenance of his friend.

So it is through debate that people learn from each other.

1. Even if they are not seeking truth in good faith, there will be plenty of people reading their exchange who will be and who potentially will learn from what each of them has to say. Whether it is about how to defend their own faith or whether they begin to understand the other.

I don’t argue for arguing’s sake. When I first started, I was not the type of person that could sit down and read the Bible or the Catechism or the Ecumenical Councils. But debating on the internet has given me a good reason to study my faith. And I’ve researched all those things for the purpose of finding the answers I need in my discussions.

So, I debate in order to learn about my faith.

An unexpected result is that I would discuss my debates with my wife and my children would overhear. And without realizing it, I was giving them an education in the faith. I didn’t realize that my children were paying attention when my wife and I would talk.

**So, don’t be afraid to debate. ** Even if you don’t convert your opponent, you will learn a great deal about your faith.

Sincerely,

De Maria

No worries about that one! My debating skill is a point of personal pride; I have the hardware to prove my ability. I am seeking to humble myself and trying NOT engage in pointless arguments. If I sense a dialog is heading down the path, I politely remove myself from the conversation or seek middle ground. I come here for fellowship, discussion, and learning, not to polish up my sword. Trust me, it is sharp enough and too many have felt its sting.

That being said, from a objective stand point, the conversation is “bad money” for the Christian. Why? He has allowed his Muslim opponent to focus on attacking Paul, not discussing Christ. The argument needs to be redirected to its focus, discussing whether or not Jesus is the Son of God who died for our sins and is risen. If you skip over that point and go right into dissecting Paul’s authority, you play into the opponent’s hand. Paul’s teachings only have legitimacy if Christ does. Deny Christ, and Paul’s theology has no merit. If I were a Muslim, I would try and skirt over Christ and attack Paul too, low hanging fruit. The skilled debater never allows his opponent to pick the talking points.

 

[De_Maria]

No worries about that one! My debating skill is a point of personal pride; I have the hardware to prove my ability. I am seeking to humble myself and trying NOT engage in pointless arguments. If I sense a dialog is heading down the path, I politely remove myself from the conversation or seek middle ground. I come here for fellowship, discussion, and learning, not to polish up my sword. Trust me, it is sharp enough and too many have felt its sting.

Wonderful!

That being said, from a objective stand point, the conversation is “bad money” for the Christian. Why? He has allowed his Muslim opponent to focus on attacking Paul, not discussing Christ. The argument needs to be redirected to its focus, discussing whether or not Jesus is the Son of God who died for our sins and is risen. If you skip over that point and go right into dissecting Paul’s authority, you play into the opponent’s hand. Paul’s teachings only have legitimacy if Christ does. Deny Christ, and Paul’s theology has no merit. If I were a Muslim, I would try and skirt over Christ and attack Paul too, low hanging fruit. The skilled debater never allows his opponent to pick the talking points.

I rather think he (i.e. FFH) is in the process of redirecting his opponent. There is a point in an informal discussion where one has the opportunity to instruct the opponent about Catholicism. It has been my experience that most Muslims presume that all Christians believe in “Scripture alone”. When I say “most Muslims”, I say that assuming that there must be a Muslim somewhere who knows better. But I’ve never met one.

Even those Muslims which I have met who came from Catholic backgrounds. Those which converted from the Catholic Church to Islam, don’t seem to remember that we follow Tradition and Scripture according to the instruction of the Church. Not Scripture alone.

Once it sinks into his Muslim psyche that FFH is telling him that St. Paul is merely a part of the Magisterium of the Church, that we don’t simply read the Bible and make independent interpretations the way he is doing, I fully expect the Muslim to withdraw. Before he does so, he will scream, “foul!” and condemn the Catholic Church for usurping authority which he doesn’t believe the Church can command. Because, Muslims, like Protestants, are people of the book.

Anyway, good talking to you. We obviously have different styles of debate. I don’t think FFH has anything to lose in continuing the debate. If he does well, he can thank God. If he doesn’t do well, then he need but look at the Cross of Jesus Christ and realize that God brings success out of failure. All we do is plant seeds. God does the rest.

Sincerely,

De Maria