The following verses seem to say ‘yes and no’ to that question!
So is there a contradiction??
Actually, there’s no contradiction. The Bible has plenty to say about good and bad arguments. But the Proverb verses quoted below point out there is a kind of argument to avoid and a kind of argument to use when answering fools
Proverbs 26:4-14
4 Don’t answer the foolish arguments of fools, or you will become as foolish as they are. 5 Be sure to answer the foolish arguments of fools, or they will become wise in their own estimation
I’ll explain more by providing an example of bad or foolish argumentation followed by a good example.
Over the years I’ve had several friends weighing in on the topic of argument. Perhaps the form their argument takes looks like this: “All arguing in a waste of time and is useless.”
Does anyone see the problem in my friend’s argument???
Well, this “argument” argues against itself!! It is therefore a self-defeating argument against argument!!!
In other words, the arguer, who claims all arguments are useless, has apparently found argument useful!! Because, the minute he proceeds to argue against arguing he inadvertently undercuts the validity of his own argument!!
The moral of the story—define your terms before you state your case!
For example, if you claim the Bible says not to argue then make your case by appealing to those specific scriptures that define and explain your point. Then, to balance your claim, you might want to cite Bible verses for the proper application of valid or useful argument.
If this approach is applied correctly, your argument will be consistent within itself and be free of term contradiction.
I think sometimes people change when we approach them kindly or they are more likely to at least hear us out. I believe we must still be honest with our approach, but I would rather make a friend than a foe. Even if they don't agree with me at first, I still haven't destroyed my witness to them, and they may listen to me eventually. It's all about planting seeds.
The truth is, I don't feel good when there's an argument anyway. I would rather feel like I legitimately was able to connect with someone. Also, I'm fine in most cases with the idea of "agreeing to disagree." You can still be a friend, even if the conclusion on a matter is different.
TOTH, ever since you first introduced the the subject you continue to offer up only succeeding notions of ambiguity on the subject of “argument”. You will not or cannot explain what it means to “argue”. All you’ve come up with is (my paraphrase)—it’s bad so just quit it!!
I’ve tried to help by showing to you different types of argument with a very concise summation of each. I was hoping that might help you narrow your focus.
In addition to that, you have yet to explain the purpose of the content for your post.
So let’s try this again.
First, the legitimacy of some forms of argument.
Some forms of argument are clearly legitimate forms of argument. These legitimate forms might take place on discussion forums among participants or in courthouses as lawyers prepare arguments. Other forms of argument might take place in theological settings like those Paul and Jesus engaged. Still other legitimate forms of argumentation take place on high school and college campuses at debate competitions. Certainly there are many forms of useful and legitimate forms of argumentation.
So, clearly, there is absolutely nothing wrong with preparing relevant arguments and rebuttals to arguments if carried out in a responsible manner.
Nevertheless, there are forms of argument that are NOT legitimate. This might include bitter back and forth bickering and quarrelsome emotional exchanges. Obviously these kinds of arguments are useless because they’re not intended to settle disagreements.
TOTH, l didn’t start this conversation with you. You willing weighed in with your thoughts and I welcome that. But all I’m asking for is clarity and up to this point you haven’t provided that.
I think if you truly believe your point of view is earnest then please take the time to explain it.
I think it's "arguing" when you're blatantly trying to best someone or bring them down to push your own idea or agenda, especially when the individual you're conversing with is striking back the same way.
If you're simply discussing what is better, the mountains or the beach, then I see it more as constructive discussion. Both can make valid points why they prefer a certain vacation spot without insisting this has to be "It' for everybody.
This makes me think of the scripture:
Prov 27:15 A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.
The rain doesn't care what you think. It will just keep doing what it's doing until it's done, no matter how much you are annoyed.
If you're in your home and there is a leak with rain dripping through, the next worst thing is a second leak. That is how I see arguing. A wise person will see that first leak, patch it, and move on. That is how I believe our relationships with people should be. We see a gap, we patch it, and move forward.
TOTH, I’m still trying to guess the purpose of your post.
Are you trying to communicate a theory you have about argument?
Are you trying to tell me something I’m doing that you don’t like. It would be great if you gave me an example.
I also don’t believe in “blatantly trying to best someone or bring them down to push your own idea or agenda...”.
You said, “If you're simply discussing what is better, the mountains or the beach, then I see it more as constructive discussion. Both can make valid points why they prefer a certain vacation spot without insisting this has to be "It' for everybody.”
I usually don’t discuss frivolous things like other people’s choices where they wanna live. As far as I’m concerned people can live anywhere they want just so they don’t call me sinner if I don’t want to live in the same place.
As for the verse from Proverbs, you didn’t provide any sort of transition from your theory about argument to the verse and your interpretation of it that l quoted for you below.
I’m just left wondering what relationship between the two you’re trying to connect? Prov 27:15 A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike.
The rain doesn't care what you think. It will just keep doing what it's doing until it's done, no matter how much you are annoyed.
???
If you're in your home and there is a leak with rain dripping through, the next worst thing is a second leak. That is how I see arguing. A wise person will see that first leak, patch it, and move on. That is how I believe our relationships with people should be. We see a gap, we patch it, and move forward.
May I create an example here. I don’t know if this example will help.
I call attention to your interpretation of Prov 27:15 “A continual dropping in a very rainy day and a contentious woman are alike“.
TOTH INTERPRETATION QUOTE:The rain doesn't care what you think. It will just keep doing what it's doing until it's done, no matter how much you are annoyed. If you're in your home and there is a leak with rain dripping through, the next worst thing is a second leak. That is how I see arguing. A wise person will see that first leak, patch it, and move on. That is how I believe our relationships with people should be. We see a gap, we patch it, and move forward.END TOTH QUOTE
The context of the verse is about a contentious woman who is likened to continually dropping rain.
The verse says nothing about fixing a leak in your home.
But if your interpretation is followed to its logical conclusion, it would mean patching up the woman’s mouth and moving forward.
I know you might content my evaluation of your argument is absurd but please examine the verse again for yourself. I’m trying not to be contentious here but you have yet to state your objective.
I keep stating the troubles associated with overlooking biblical contexts. We must strive to understand the >>authors<< original intent.
We must also stop reading things into scripture that aren’t there.
My first hope would be that you are well. I don't know that I've attempted to single you out or direct you in any certain fashion. A lot of what is said here is conversational and sometimes that involves sharing personal beliefs and convictions. If you disagree with something I say, then I'm not upset, and I'm not trying to force you to change your perspective.
I’m glad we’re sharing and I hope I’ve been respectful. I’m open to further discussion on this or any topic.
Please don’t feel you’re being disrespectful if you have something you want to disagree about.
In fact, if I post anywhere on this forum, you’re welcome to hold me accountable for anything I write. Anything is fair game. I think it’s right to hold another accountable. So giving an answer to a “why did you say that” question should be a healthy and welcome part of discussion.
I don’t mind being accountable to you, in fact I would welcome that very much. Sometimes I don’t realize I’m being disrespectful but receiving a perspective from you or anyone else might give me pause to reconsider.
An experience, I remember once having a smudge on my face but since I didn’t have access to a mirror, I needed someone to point it out to me. The same goes for things I post. Maybe, on occasion (I hope even less than that) l haven’t always chosen the right words or I wrote without thinking or whatever—l have to confess some of that has already happened—wish I could delete certain stuff but can’t on this forum. Some forums allow that, wish this one did.
Anyway, Thanks TOTH, if I haven’t adequately addressed the issues you’ve raised please keep responding.
Another thing, I’m not a very good writer. Seems I always need to re-edit and rephrase. There’s several ladies on here who write soooo crystal clear and it makes me just envious!! But Praise God he’s given them that talent—in the meantime, I need a writing clinic
.