Debate

I generally see very little evangelistic value in theological debates. Seldom do they change minds or soften hearts, and it seems to me that the outcome of a debate has more to do with the strength of the debator's skills than with the truth of his position.

If people come to the Orthodox Faith, it will not be because someone debated them into it. It will be because the Holy Spirit led them. One cannot be argued into the body of Christ. We would do better praying for those outside of the Faith rather than arguing with them. That's because the Christian Faith is not merely a collection of theological propositions. It is an actual partaking of the Divine Nature. 

Yesterday, we remembered the great saint Gregory Palamas who defended the belief that our Faith is not only a mental exercise, but is experiential. That is, it is not something merely to be contemplated, analyzed, debated; it is to be lived.

That is why one doesn't generally see many Orthodox apologists and debaters, which is something that came as a bit of a surprise to me after having looked closely at the Roman Catholic Church, in which apologists abound. It is also--I suspect--why the Orthodox Church hasn't come up with an official "catechism" the way the Roman Catholic Church has: for fear of giving people the incorrect idea that our Faith can be reduced to words on a page.

That is also why infants are permitted to participate in the sacraments without being required to "understand" or articulate what is going on. In the Orthodox Church, it's often about doing first and then understanding: "A good understanding have all they that do his commandments."

Debates, I think, tend to support the "western" notion that understanding should come first.

But, darn it, they are entertaining!

Around the middle of October, I started following a debate between two bloggers, one Protestant, one Orthodox, on the issue of Sola Scriptura. The Protestant, Rhology from the Rhoblogy blog, naturally took the pro-Sola Scriptura position, while David, the Orthodox proprietor of the blog Pious Fabrications, took the opposite position. I have provided links below to all of the debate entries. Both debaters made some good, interesting points, but, in the end, I am still not persuaded that Sola Scriptura is a valid doctrine.
Sorry Rhology.

1a) Rhology's opening and position statement
1b) David's opening and position statement

2a) Rhology's 1st rebuttal
2b) David's 1st rebuttal

3a) Rhology's 2nd rebuttal
3b) David's 2nd rebuttal

Cross-Examination
4a) Rhology's question for David
4b) David's answer

5a) David's question for Rhology
5b) Rhology's answer

6a) Rhology's second question for David
6b) David's answer

7a) David's second question for Rhology
7b) Rhology's answer

8a) Rhology's third question for David
8b) David's answer

9a) David's third question for Rhology
9b) Rhology's answer

Closing Statements
10a) Rhology's
10b) David's
 
Here is a link to comment section.