Jump to content

The Christian Protestant Community Forums

Sincerely inquiring about the Protestant faith? Welcome to Christforums the Christian Protestant community forums. You'll first need to register in order to join our community. Create or respond to threads on your favorite topics and subjects. Registration takes less than a minute, it's simple, fast, and free! Enjoy the fellowship! God bless, Christforums' Staff
Register now

Community Fellowship

John Calvin puts forward a very simple reason why love is the greatest gift: “Because faith and hope are our own: love is diffused among others.” In other words, faith and hope benefit the possessor, but love always benefits another. In John 13:34–35 Jesus says, “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.” Love always requires an “other” as an object; love cannot remain within itself, and that is part of what makes love the greatest gift.
William

Are you skilled in debate?

Recommended Posts

Staff

Which describes your skills in debate? How skillful are your points made and where are the shot(s) you fired meant to target? Who is your opponent?
 

Some say in debate the person we're debating is actually not our opponent. We are contending for the truth and attempting to bring everyone in or witnessing the debate closer to the objective which is truth. Therefore, no actual physical opponent exists but only falsehood. Is your objective to only win the debate against another person, or bring everyone closer to the truth?
 

So, which best describes your skill in any of the below theories?

692976585_Skilledindebate.jpg.a8d3bf5f89e84a55079780ae016d951f.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Moderator

It's easy to forget the goal and let other things get in the way.

 

Im not sure which is which, so I choose the rifleman because it sounds cool. Lol.

 

  • Love 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff

I am not skilled in debate.  not even close. 

  • Love 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff

Not even claiming that I am a skilled debater.

 

Lemme try to define two of these.

 

Sniper theory: When someone in Scriptural debate attempts to use a particular verse that is out of context or misinterpreted etc the Sniper refuses to move on from a single shot. The sniper sees through the scope in the broad context and zooms in and focuses through the immediate context, then the cross hairs which are set upon an objective to bring the opponent to light. The Sniper refuses any more shots, not moving from the place where the first shot was fired in an attempt to compel the opponent to hand the verse over. The outcome of the Sniper's tactic removes the opponent's credibility but also brings them to acknowledge fault. The second reason Snipers attempt a single shot is to bring an order to the "machine gunner" which fires off so many verses at once, for it is very tedious to exegete one of those verses at a time. If the machine gunner doesn't want to take the time to approach each verse one by one then again, they lose credibility in front of others and it exposes a fatal flaw in how careful they are not and an unwillingness to obtain the truth.

Now me personally, when I'm feeling lazy there's nothing like a machine gunner theory by loading a belt or copy and paste list of verses to fire off rapidly in order to overwhelm and suppress the enemy camp. However, taking out the lead opponent by a head shot in such a tedious way usually has psychological effects on everyone else following the opponent in said camp. No doubt, there are various tactics in order to bring about fire discipline to a hot zone.

 

:classic_ninja:

 

Someone feel free to define the Rifleman theory!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I enjoy written debates if I am interested in the topic. A public debate would be difficult to verify what the the person said at the moment especially if several sources were listed including the quotes, the word, the page, the author, etc.

 

 2 Corinthians 10:5

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
8 minutes ago, Faber said:

I enjoy written debates if I am interested in the topic. A public debate would be difficult to verify what the the person said at the moment especially if several sources were listed including the quotes, the word, the page, the author, etc.

 

 2 Corinthians 10:5

Yes, I suppose if a verbal debate was to occur having sources (as admissible evidence before a court) quoted by each side before hand could be beneficial for a type of cross examination.

I'm not a good verbal speaker, as often when scouting I run out of breath running to and from the ammo dump when calling out targets for the sniper. :classic_ninja: (my rifleman face)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
1 hour ago, Hitch said:

I need a BB Gun  category.

I had a BB Gun (air rifle) as a child that could go through both sides of a galvanized trash can from about 15-20 yards. They can be quite deadly. Graduated to a .22 long rifle with scope around age 8. I could shoot them there groundhogs while running across a field. At around 100 yards the little groundhogs while on a run were like shooting a person at 400+ meters. I am convinced this target practice while growing up was why I received the highest score in my squadron in military service. Who would of ever of guessed that the gesture of a local Farmer protecting his crops would of paid in mad skills? The Farmer's gift blew my mind as a kid. What kid wouldn't like a .22 long rifle with scope?

  • Like 2
  • Toast 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, William said:

Not even claiming that I am a skilled debater.

 

Lemme try to define two of these.

 

Sniper theory: When someone in Scriptural debate attempts to use a particular verse that is out of context or misinterpreted etc the Sniper refuses to move on from a single shot. The sniper sees through the scope in the broad context and zooms in and focuses through the immediate context, then the cross hairs which are set upon an objective to bring the opponent to light. The Sniper refuses any more shots, not moving from the place where the first shot was fired in an attempt to compel the opponent to hand the verse over. The outcome of the Sniper's tactic removes the opponent's credibility but also brings them to acknowledge fault. The second reason Snipers attempt a single shot is to bring an order to the "machine gunner" which fires off so many verses at once, for it is very tedious to exegete one of those verses at a time. If the machine gunner doesn't want to take the time to approach each verse one by one then again, they lose credibility in front of others and it exposes a fatal flaw in how careful they are not and an unwillingness to obtain the truth.

Now me personally, when I'm feeling lazy there's nothing like a machine gunner theory by loading a belt or copy and paste list of verses to fire off rapidly in order to overwhelm and suppress the enemy camp. However, taking out the lead opponent by a head shot in such a tedious way usually has psychological effects on everyone else following the opponent in said camp. No doubt, there are various tactics in order to bring about fire discipline to a hot zone.

 

:classic_ninja:

 

Someone feel free to define the Rifleman theory!

I can't, in my Trophy Shadow Box with Camouflage Background hangs the reason I can't... I qualified Expert as an Arial Machine Gunner.  My M1 Grand and the M1 Carbine gave me, respectively, a Sharps Shoter badge and a Marksman Badge but the Garand only fired eight rounds and the sounded off with a loud "Zing" that alerted the enemy that I was out of Ammo and had to reload.

 

With my M60 I bore in on a position and make them stop that.  But i also demand no shotgun blasts and just like my Military Days... I try to work from one point to the other, slowly and thoughtfully.  It makes folks mad.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no skill in debate.  I don't even try.  Seems most debates are more an exercise in two men taking their egos for a walk rather than examining an issue.  I have a big enough ego as it is and don't need to give it opportunity to show itself off more than it already does.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2018 at 4:18 PM, William said:

Which describes your skills in debate? How skillful are your points made and where are the shot(s) you fired meant to target? Who is your opponent?
 

Some say in debate the person we're debating is actually not our opponent. We are contending for the truth and attempting to bring everyone in or witnessing the debate closer to the objective which is truth. Therefore, no actual physical opponent exists but only falsehood. Is your objective to only win the debate against another person, or bring everyone closer to the truth?
 

So, which best describes your skill in any of the below theories?

692976585_Skilledindebate.jpg.a8d3bf5f89e84a55079780ae016d951f.jpg

There is no debate. I'm always right.

  • Like 1
  • Toast 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
15 hours ago, davidtaylorjr said:

There is no debate. I'm always right.

As we say here in California, Dude!

 

2026847725_RighteousDude.jpg.ffab8b5b436421b7eb47c8b1000480f7.jpg

 

 

  • Best Answer 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎9‎/‎28‎/‎2018 at 5:58 PM, William said:

Not even claiming that I am a skilled debater.

 

Lemme try to define two of these.

 

Sniper theory: When someone in Scriptural debate attempts to use a particular verse that is out of context or misinterpreted etc the Sniper refuses to move on from a single shot. The sniper sees through the scope in the broad context and zooms in and focuses through the immediate context, then the cross hairs which are set upon an objective to bring the opponent to light. The Sniper refuses any more shots, not moving from the place where the first shot was fired in an attempt to compel the opponent to hand the verse over. The outcome of the Sniper's tactic removes the opponent's credibility but also brings them to acknowledge fault. The second reason Snipers attempt a single shot is to bring an order to the "machine gunner" which fires off so many verses at once, for it is very tedious to exegete one of those verses at a time. If the machine gunner doesn't want to take the time to approach each verse one by one then again, they lose credibility in front of others and it exposes a fatal flaw in how careful they are not and an unwillingness to obtain the truth.

Now me personally, when I'm feeling lazy there's nothing like a machine gunner theory by loading a belt or copy and paste list of verses to fire off rapidly in order to overwhelm and suppress the enemy camp. However, taking out the lead opponent by a head shot in such a tedious way usually has psychological effects on everyone else following the opponent in said camp. No doubt, there are various tactics in order to bring about fire discipline to a hot zone.

 

:classic_ninja:

 

Someone feel free to define the Rifleman theory!

I would never consider debating someone unless I knew for certain that what ever subject I would be debating about I knew exactly what I was talking about. And there is the other person to consider too . Are they ready and prepared to challenge someone on facts,,,,,or something that turns out to be a fallacy ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/28/2018 at 5:58 PM, William said:

Not even claiming that I am a skilled debater.

 

Lemme try to define two of these.

 

Sniper theory: When someone in Scriptural debate attempts to use a particular verse that is out of context or misinterpreted etc the Sniper refuses to move on from a single shot. The sniper sees through the scope in the broad context and zooms in and focuses through the immediate context, then the cross hairs which are set upon an objective to bring the opponent to light. The Sniper refuses any more shots, not moving from the place where the first shot was fired in an attempt to compel the opponent to hand the verse over. The outcome of the Sniper's tactic removes the opponent's credibility but also brings them to acknowledge fault. The second reason Snipers attempt a single shot is to bring an order to the "machine gunner" which fires off so many verses at once, for it is very tedious to exegete one of those verses at a time. If the machine gunner doesn't want to take the time to approach each verse one by one then again, they lose credibility in front of others and it exposes a fatal flaw in how careful they are not and an unwillingness to obtain the truth.

Now me personally, when I'm feeling lazy there's nothing like a machine gunner theory by loading a belt or copy and paste list of verses to fire off rapidly in order to overwhelm and suppress the enemy camp. However, taking out the lead opponent by a head shot in such a tedious way usually has psychological effects on everyone else following the opponent in said camp. No doubt, there are various tactics in order to bring about fire discipline to a hot zone.

 

:classic_ninja:

 

Someone feel free to define the Rifleman theory!

 

I know the rifleman's theory is that you try a easier body shot or two, and if your man is still up then take that critical headshot. How that applies to scripture: Well, maybe have a couple of related scriptures that are not so definitive. Testing the depth of your opponent. If he gets wounded and gives up you have won without much expended effort. Saving that custom loaded cartridge (scripture) for last. :RpS_thumbsup:

  • Wow 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
32 minutes ago, deade said:

 

I know the rifleman's theory is that you try a easier body shot or two, and if your man is still up then take that critical headshot. How that applies to scripture: Well, maybe have a couple of related scriptures that are not so definitive. Testing the depth of your opponent. If he gets wounded and gives up you have won without much expended effort. Saving that custom loaded cartridge (scripture) for last. :RpS_thumbsup:

Right with you!

 

If memory serves right, the M-16 has a 3 round burst, beside the options of single shot and fully automatic.

 

When performing scout/spotter duty for a sniper in a two man team the objective is not only to guard over the sniper's six o'clock position but to assess and scan the battlefield for a shot to be preformed by the sniper. Lemme repeat, the scout/spotter should keep a sniper quite busy. It is exhausting calling out the next target's position and the range of depth of said position. The verbal communication between a scout/spotter and sniper is very important, they must have a good relationship and dialogue while working together. The scout/spotter exhausts himself "running to and fro the ammo dump".  For example, the rectangular building next to the square building <pause> 20 yards south. Sniper: setting the alarm clock. Scout/Spotter: rise and shine. This whole process of communication going back and forth between the scout/spotter and sniper can be very exhausting (running out of breath or life) in the process of "to and from the ammo dump". 

 

Actual picture of running out of breath to and from the ammo dump:

 

1372688202_Ejectingtheammodump.jpg.2ef1ba88a8e64b3f620b04bbf4c6f235.jpg

 

:classic_ninja:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I admire Apollos.

 

Acts 18:28

He refuted the Jews with powerful arguments in public debate. Using the Scriptures, he explained to them that Jesus was the Messiah. (New Living Translation)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
3 minutes ago, Faber said:

I admire Apollos.

 

Acts 18:28

He refuted the Jews with powerful arguments in public debate. Using the Scriptures, he explained to them that Jesus was the Messiah. (New Living Translation)

And Paul for going into the heart of debate at Mars Hill where he appealed to the philosophers:

 

Acts 17:16-21: “Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was provoked within him when he saw that the city was given over to idols. 17 Therefore he reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and with the Gentile worshipers, and in the marketplace daily with those who happened to be there. 18 Then certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers encountered him. And some said, “What does this babbler want to say?” Others said, “He seems to be a proclaimer of foreign gods, “ because he preached to them Jesus and the resurrection. 19 And they took him and brought him to the Areopagus, saying, “May we know what this new doctrine is of which you speak? 20 For you are bringing some strange things to our ears. Therefore we want to know what these things mean.” 21 For all the Athenians and the foreigners who were there spent their time in nothing else but either to tell or to hear some new thing.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

v. 23 records that he told them about whom they worship in "ignorance."

 I wonder what they thought when they heard that?

  • ouch 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Staff
3 minutes ago, Faber said:

v. 23 records that he told them about whom they worship in "ignorance."

 I wonder what they thought when they heard that?

Wonder how many spectators cried out, "ad hominem"?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...