Is it ok to debate God in from a Christian viewpoint (Christian to Christian)

You know its really quite a shame you couldn’t just invite these two people who I guess are probably your pastors to come on this site and defend there opinions themselves rather than defend and wear there opinions yourself. I’d be more than happy to take either or both of them on sometime. As a source though for you to quote for yourself, you might as well of just you made up the arguments yourself because I nor do I suspect anyone else cares who these little known Pastors are. Now if you were quoting a major famous pastor that are renowned enough that people actually take seriously on a national if not global scale, like Adam Hamilton or Kent Hovind or Mike Huckabee or Charles Stanley, that would be different. And there is a reason I suspect these pastors you reference are small enough in who they influence. More people are never going to start listening to a Pastor that says something as stupid (forgive me for needing to be derogatory about this one thing please) as “the world is made of 2 people debtors and listener”. Those are not even opposites. Or describe things that could in anyway be envisioned as mutually exclusive. The world is not full of people who are “debtors or something other than that” because everyone without exception is a debtor. The bible says “all have fallen short of the glory of God” and so we have all ‘trespassed’ or ‘debted’ or ‘sinned’. By all means invite your Pastor Jim Bennett to this sight if you think I’m not serious in saying this and I will debate him on the resolution “saying the world is divided into debtors and listeners is stupid” me being PRO to that resolution. Anyway I need to give one more note before returning to the matters of the debate, grammatical errors of any kind cannot be taken as acts of disrespect. If I could just remove my errors you would quite seeing me make them all together in all my debates but alas struggle so much with any such thing that errors of all kinds remain in near all of my debates regardless of the topic, this is not going to change any particular word at any one time, if it could I’d stop it all times for all words not just the word God. On to the debate…… The Definition of Debate: It seems I have reached an impasse with you personally since you are so brainwarped into always hearing a very negative default meaning when you hear the term ‘debate’ or ‘argue’ probably because as you have grown up you have only been exposed to foolish old people who used to go to churches that would preach “thank God for my ignorance” treat the term debate in such a negative way that when I say ‘Jesus debated with….” I might as well of said “Jesus sinned….’ to you. Meanwhile I have been exposed in my life to the works of C.S. Lewis who write up the evil demons like screwtape speaking of arguments as a failing tactic to win souls to Hell, and where debating and “presenting a case” and “showing your process of reasoning against another’s to teach them there errors” are synonymous concepts. You are so brainwarped that you considered it a legit rebuttal to my sources of online dictionary definitions “Do these points not say to argue which is not only an action but it is and action brought out of wanting to make yourself better”. As if the lone inclusion of the word ‘argue’ altered the definition of debate altogether from what posted. No Argue does not mean any of that. Debate or Arguments is like Money and Bricks. They are all A-moral, they are not evil or good but they can be used for either. With a brick a can bash your skull in, or I could build a hospital with it, the brick does not care. To further make my case on this (and this is for my opponents benefit alone, this new argument cannot be considered an aid to me in my side of the resolution, I feel I have already succeeded at that anyway) I consider the possibility you consider the ‘debate’ and ‘argue’ to be a kind of sin because maybe you have read verses in the bible where the term ‘quarrel’ is used in some translations of the bible in context like its describing sin (I think I remember reading some passages that do but I cant recall any of them, but for discussion sake lets just say it is in there like that). If that’s your reason for thinking debate in any situation a sin, let me ask you about another sin then, do you consider it a sin when Adam lusted for his wife Eve? (he definitely lusted or they never would have reproduced). Or was David breaking any commandment when he Murdered Goliath? David and Adam did not sin in those instances though (they did in others of course) because the Lust for ones wife if the Godley thing spoken of in the Song of Solomen, not the sinful act God commands us to not do. The killing of an enemy soldier on the battlefield is not the same as the sinful act god commanded us to not do. And the well reasoned refutation of another’s arguments against God or for false depictions of him is not the same a sinful kind of quarrelling that’s only purpose is to be difficult and promote oneself against the truth. If you Lust for your wife, its not a sin but it is still called Lust (for simplicity sake I guess) If you Murder your assassin in self defense, its not a sin but it could still be referred to as Murder And If you have Argued with your accuser so you can promote the Truth, its not a sin but it is still called Arguing, or Debating, or even Quarreling. Sometimes in these debates on this site, to help our discussions not go off course and make sure our opponents are having the same discussion as we are, we clarify the different meaning by arbitrarily assigning them to the term and assign there other interpretations to there synonyms. Like perhaps dividing us Murder into the terms Slaying, Killing, and Murder. Or Debate into Debating and Arguing and Quarreling. We never set out those distinctions at the start of this debate so they are all still interchangeable in it. Debate is not a term that by default denotes anger, it can be done without anger It is not a term that denotes pride by default, it can be done without pride Jesus did it without anger or pride Does this mean I’m saying no ever debates in anger or pride? No sometimes they debate with bad motives just like sometimes a brick is used to build Nazi concentration camp, or a twenty is used to bribe someone. I really have nothing left to say, the meaning of the term ‘debate’ has really been the only issue we have deferred on this entire debate. I hope one day you gain the wisdom to see Jesus entered into holy and righteous debate with the pharoses making theologically epic status quo changing arguments. I also hope for your own sake you quite going to Pastor Bergen & Bennett’s church if you have represented them accurately. And even if you have misrepresented there good names by taking there statements out of context leaving would still help you since you have a tendency to do that to there statements. The fact that you have an account on this site though I think shows you know something is inherently wrong with there negative view of debating and you yourself feel a calling to debate so much you have to test your boundaries with what kind of ‘debate’ is okay. If you are called to debate though then DEBATE ON my friend and DEBATE FOR GOD!!!