Theocratic Aid To Kingdom Publishers
ARGUMENTATION
"Argumentation" is the act of bringing together evidence on a given proposition, and from the array of factual evidence and principles certain logical conclusions are drawn. It is a process of reasoning, of making inductions and deductions, and applying them to the case under discussion. Hence it is seen that argumentation is far different from the bickerings and contentious word battles that Kingdom publishers are admonished to shun. Indeed, the gospel-preacher trained in argumentation will not stoop to strifes of words, but will abide by the high principle set forth by Jehovah: "Come now, and let us reason together."
Lesson 51
PRELIMINARIES IN ARGUMENTATION
The apostle Paul wrote the following counsel to Timothy: "Foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes. And the servant of the Lord must not strive." (2 Timothy 2: 23, 24) Was Paul here advising Timothy not to argue the things concerning the Kingdom, that most controversial subject? No; for it is written of Paul himself that while he was in Athens "his spirit was stirred in him, when he saw the city wholly given to idolatry. Therefore disputed he in the synagogue with the Jews, and with the devout persons, and in the market [places] daily with them that met with him". (Acts 17:16,17) Paul was an imitator of Christ Jesus, and Christ was the greatest exponent of argumentation ever on this earth. So effective were His arguments and refutations that His enemies, the scribes and Pharisees, feared to dispute with Him on the Scriptures. Throughout the Bible are found the finest examples of argumentation, voiced by the servants of Almighty God. They were God's mouth-
pieces, moved to speak by the spirit of Jehovah. Hence it may be said that Jehovah God was the Author of such flawless argument.
Certainly, then, Paul was not advising the young minister, Timothy, to evade controversial issues arising between Christianity and religion and permit blasphemous lies to stand unchallenged in order to preserve the peace and good-neighborliness of a religious community. What Paul did mean in his counsel to Timothy was that quarrelings and contentions and profane and vain babblings, by which nothing is ever settled but rather increases unto more ungodliness, should be shunned. When faced by those of goatlike disposition, give heed to Jesus' counsel: "Let them alone." (Matt. 15:14) This does not argue that the minister presenting the gospel will "let alone" all those whom he meets who hold opinions differing from his own; nor does it follow that strife will result between the contending ones.
To keep the discussion on the high plane of reason and logical argument it is valuable to know the causes for clashes in opinion. There are three reasons: The contending persons have had different experiences; they have had the same experiences but have drawn different inferences from them; they look to a different authority or source for the information forming their opinions. It may be that all three of these causes of disagreement are involved in a single difference of opinion.
Take, by way of illustration, the controversy that raged over Jesus when he was on the earth as to whether he was the Messiah. The common people heard him gladly; the scribes and Pharisees bitterly opposed him. Why was this so?
First, the two classes had had different experiences with Jesus. Read Matthew 9:35-38; 23:13-15,25,33; John 8:41-45. Therein Jesus was not being a respecter of classes of society, but gauged his words according to the merits of the case. The multitudes heard him willingly, meekly; and he pitied them because they were as scattered sheep
without a shepherd. He healed their sick, cured their diseases, and had compassion on them. He preached the good news of the Kingdom to them, and sent others to likewise minister unto them. Their experiences with him were pleasant, and they recognized him as Jehovah's Good Shepherd. The Pharisees, on the other hand, were not so dealt with, because they were evildoers, meriting condemnation according to God's Word. They wished to be praised and glorified, and to see their nation, with them in prominent positions, exalted. Instead they experienced scathing denunciations from the tongue of Jesus. Moved by selfishness and stung by Jesus' plain-spokenness, they allowed such trying experiences to turn them against the Messiah rather than being edified unto repentance.
Second, the two classes drew different inferences from the same experiences. For an instance of this consider the account at Matthew 9:32-34: "As they went out, behold, they brought to him a dumb man possessed with a devil. And when the devil was cast out, the dumb spake: and the multitudes marvelled, saying, It was never so seen in Israel. But the Pharisees said, He casteth out devils through the prince of the devils." This miraculous demonstration of God's power manifested through his Son was witnessed by both Pharisees and people. But what different inferences they drew! The "multitudes marvelled" and praised God, whereas the envious, religious Pharisees exclaimed, "He casteth out devils through the prince of the devils."
The third cause of disagreement, the looking to a different authority or source for the forming of opinion, is also involved in this question of Jesus' being the Messiah. Matthew 7:28, 29 reads: "It came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine: for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes." Jesus' doctrine was not his own, but was from God. He quoted God's Word. (John 7:16; Luke 4:17-21) For this reason the common people, who accepted God's Word as the expression of truth, believed Jesus and
looked upon him as "one having authority, and not as the scribes". Why "not as the scribes"? Because they vainly babbled over the sophistries of men and relied upon the traditions of men as their "authority". They were willing to make void God's Word that their tradition might stand as true. Jesus told them as much, and showed the difference of authorities adhered to by his disciples and the scribes and Pharisees. (Matt. 15:1-3) The two authorities are incompatible.
To argue reasonably and profitably, therefore, it would be advisable to ascertain the basic causes for the entertaining of different opinions. So doing at the outset, the minister of the gospel can strike at the very root of the controversy.
Three things should next be done, before the forming of the argument proper, with its details of proof. First, see that the proposition is correctly phrased. It should present a definite issue, to which affirmative and negative sides can be taken. Second, define the terms in the proposition, if need be. Thus remove vagueness, and make sure that everyone clearly understands the matter up for discussion. Third, locate the special issues involved. This can be done only by a careful analysis. If one does this he can concentrate on these vital issues and always be hitting on the main kernel of the proposition. He will waste no time on irrelevancies.
Having dispatched with all the preliminaries as outlined in this lesson, the one building an argument is ready to tackle the big job of producing his evidence.
REVIEW: 1. How can one harmonize the study of argumentation with the Scriptural injunctions against strife of words? 2. What are the causes of arguments? 3. (a) How is the first cause illustrated in this lesson? (b) Give an illustration of your own. 4. (a) How is the second cause illustrated? (b) How would you illustrate it? 5. (a) How does the lesson illustrate the third cause? (b) Give an example of your own. 6. (a) What three additional preliminary steps should be taken before launching into the argument proper? (b) Illustrate by giving examples.
