...the internet is killing us...

James White

Alongside working through final papers, I have listened extensively to James White in some of his youtube debates with Catholics, Muslims and Mormons. It has been both refreshing and shocking, the former because it is good to be strengthened by sound and consistent argumentation, the latter because of how poorly everyone else seems to do this. God has certainly gifted White, and I desire to imitate his humility, courage, and rigour.

Scholarship?

In pondering some of the shocking argumentation (or lack of it) presented by many of White's opponents, two things dawned on me:

1. Cross examination is a helpful way of discussing and debating.

-It allows people to fully articulate a point without being interrupted.

-It allows for direct questions (yes/no), which helps to uncover the structure of a person's argument. Direct answers to these questions are frequently avoided, and I used to think that this was because the system of questioning was stupid, and people simply did not want to be misrepresented. However, I realize now that this is simply false: you can answer yes or no. If you watch some of White's debates it is interesting to note that during Cross-Examination he first quotes something, and then uses a branding phrase like "is it your position that..."

-It forces people to examine their own statements, and thus is helpful in reshaping the way we speak (which is often like shooting from the hip).

-I have had the great joy of being involved with a community of people who come over to my place every week to study Timothy. There is no question in my mind that God speaks to us through his word. Much of what we do when interacting with the text is this sort of examination - studying the text, making assertions, defending those assertions, and applying them.

2. Scholarship and Discipline

-You are more likely to be quoted than read.

-Many people are amazing at linking and alluding, but poor at knowing. Knowing requires one to engage with material beyond the catch phrase and the outline.

-Who cares about research anymore? We have wikipedia!

Be willing to engage with the best arguments the other side provides. I am surprised by how often people misunderstand and misquote one another. Whatever happened to listening carefully? When you seek to help your opponent find and articulate the best argument they possibly can you have won the debate.

If you are able to do this you have revealed that your intentions are not wrapped up in the debate itself, but in the person you are speaking with. Furthermore, if you can articulate the opponents argument so that they exclaim "that's exactly what I mean" you are 3/4 of the way toward answering that person's objections: they will listen to you now!

Finally, if you are able to understand their argument to the extent that they exclaim in this way, you already know how to deal with it. For you wouldn't understand their perspective with that kind of clarity and still hold to your position without having a reason for doing so. The trick is, you have to go out on a limb and really understand what your opponent is saying - not just the words - but the reason they are asking the questions they ask. And that takes faith - faith that God is who he says he is, and his words are trustworthy. So study hard!

-al'Ander


ps. 1 more paper to go!