For the sake of brevity I’m not going to address my opponents relationship with his father or son, all the pointed perjoratives, and ad hom. and try and make this concise.
1- At the easiest and outlying most reasoning, my opponent chooses to ignore the appropriate definition of the word fear. I clearly cited “: to have a reverential awe of <fear God>” as the appropriate definition. If my opponent chooses a definition that supports his bias, that’s fine. I’ll even allow for this moving of the goalposts, because I’m sure the majority of viewers also share the perspective that if God existed he would be malevolent.
2- I’ll ignore the fact that my opponents blatant cherry picking is disgustingly obvious. The center verse (which I apparently spent too little time on because it was cherry picked) to my opponent’s argument convieniently left off “because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.“ in the same verse he only half quoted. If I change the definition of fear to suit my opponent’s bias then I’d completely agree that abject fear or fear of punishment in no way fosters a healthy type of love. What this verse, or common sense, doesn’t say is that they are impossible to feel together. In fact it implies that they are felt simultaneously and one lessens the other.
3- The usefulness, or good and bad, of what an emotion’s value is based on the object of that emotion. I understand my opponents religious beliefs (or lack therof) necessitate that the object is evil for his argument to even come close to being logical. Despite the fact that his favorite verse in context with the previous 2 verses defines that object :
“And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the Day of Judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.”
4- I’ll ignore the statement from my opponent that says “Are there positive forms of fear? No.” I clearly cited where there were examples of that. I think thrill seekers around the world would have no hobbies without fear of the thing they love to do. Despite that my opponent acquiesce the point all together later in the conversation. By admitting that a child can love and abusive parent he fears this alone would end the debate.
5- Then my opponent wants to create this false dichotomy between love and fear by stating “Love and Fear are opposites and they are not compatible.” I hate to inform my opponent, but any emotion’s opposite is apathy. The opposite of feeling an emotion such as lust is apathy; one such as joy’s opposite is also apathy. I’ll let you guess what the opposite of fear is, apathy. What about love? Apathy. If my opponent had another rebuttal round I’m sure he’d move the goal posts on this as well, so I’ll go ahead and acquiesce this as well and we’ll just talk about within the emotion realm.
6- Anyone who does a simple google search of Contrasting and categorization of emotions or has an objective look at emotions knows that the opposite emotion of love is hate (not fear) and the opposite emotion of fear is hope. Even at this basest level if I allow all of the other problems with his arguments, my opponent’s false dichotomy of “Love and Fear are opposites and they are not compatible” fails miserably.
Final words: If you can experience any two emotions nothing precludes you from experiencing them together, as many do on a daily basis. This debate isn’t about whether it’s healthy or unhealthy to love what you fear. If we are ignoring definitions, then it’s about whether they’re mutually exclusive which I felt I clearly showed they weren’t on many levels.
I’d like to thank my opponent for his time and graciousness in this debate. I think we are both winners in that we have contributed to this community by healthy debate. As far as which side won, that’s for the audience to decide. I would hope that it’s less about wining and more about learning about other’s perspectives. I’ve enjoyed this debate once again thank all of you for taking the time to read this far down the thread!
-Dave Tackett
1- At the easiest and outlying most reasoning, my opponent chooses to ignore the appropriate definition of the word fear. I clearly cited “: to have a reverential awe of <fear God>” as the appropriate definition. If my opponent chooses a definition that supports his bias, that’s fine. I’ll even allow for this moving of the goalposts, because I’m sure the majority of viewers also share the perspective that if God existed he would be malevolent.
2- I’ll ignore the fact that my opponents blatant cherry picking is disgustingly obvious. The center verse (which I apparently spent too little time on because it was cherry picked) to my opponent’s argument convieniently left off “because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love.“ in the same verse he only half quoted. If I change the definition of fear to suit my opponent’s bias then I’d completely agree that abject fear or fear of punishment in no way fosters a healthy type of love. What this verse, or common sense, doesn’t say is that they are impossible to feel together. In fact it implies that they are felt simultaneously and one lessens the other.
3- The usefulness, or good and bad, of what an emotion’s value is based on the object of that emotion. I understand my opponents religious beliefs (or lack therof) necessitate that the object is evil for his argument to even come close to being logical. Despite the fact that his favorite verse in context with the previous 2 verses defines that object :
“And so we know and rely on the love God has for us. God is love. Whoever lives in love lives in God, and God in them. 17 This is how love is made complete among us so that we will have confidence on the Day of Judgment: In this world we are like Jesus.”
4- I’ll ignore the statement from my opponent that says “Are there positive forms of fear? No.” I clearly cited where there were examples of that. I think thrill seekers around the world would have no hobbies without fear of the thing they love to do. Despite that my opponent acquiesce the point all together later in the conversation. By admitting that a child can love and abusive parent he fears this alone would end the debate.
5- Then my opponent wants to create this false dichotomy between love and fear by stating “Love and Fear are opposites and they are not compatible.” I hate to inform my opponent, but any emotion’s opposite is apathy. The opposite of feeling an emotion such as lust is apathy; one such as joy’s opposite is also apathy. I’ll let you guess what the opposite of fear is, apathy. What about love? Apathy. If my opponent had another rebuttal round I’m sure he’d move the goal posts on this as well, so I’ll go ahead and acquiesce this as well and we’ll just talk about within the emotion realm.
6- Anyone who does a simple google search of Contrasting and categorization of emotions or has an objective look at emotions knows that the opposite emotion of love is hate (not fear) and the opposite emotion of fear is hope. Even at this basest level if I allow all of the other problems with his arguments, my opponent’s false dichotomy of “Love and Fear are opposites and they are not compatible” fails miserably.
Final words: If you can experience any two emotions nothing precludes you from experiencing them together, as many do on a daily basis. This debate isn’t about whether it’s healthy or unhealthy to love what you fear. If we are ignoring definitions, then it’s about whether they’re mutually exclusive which I felt I clearly showed they weren’t on many levels.
I’d like to thank my opponent for his time and graciousness in this debate. I think we are both winners in that we have contributed to this community by healthy debate. As far as which side won, that’s for the audience to decide. I would hope that it’s less about wining and more about learning about other’s perspectives. I’ve enjoyed this debate once again thank all of you for taking the time to read this far down the thread!
-Dave Tackett
"There ought to be a term that would designate those who actually follow the teachings of Jesus, since the word 'Christian' has been largely divorced from those teachings, and so polluted by fundamentalists that it has come to connote their polar opposite: intolerance, vindictive hatred, and bigotry." -- Philip Stater, Huffington Post
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
always working on cleaning my windows- me regarding Johari
