Attack That Scarecrow!

Nothing gets my blood pumping like a straw man argument against my position. According to Wikipedia: "A straw man is a component of an argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To 'attack a straw man' is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by substituting it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the 'straw man'), and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position." This sort of tactic happens all to often in theological discussions and any serious friendly or brotherly discussion should avoid this cheap debate trick. Yet, it seems that some folks just can't help themselves. They detest a certain position so much that they start their argument off by going into the bag of tricks and pulling out that scarecrow they then attack without having actually dealt with the substantial, scriptural argument they are attempting to refute!

When dealing with an opponents position we have an obligation to read what they have written or listen to what they have spoken on concerning the topic at hand. Simply saying their position is "un-scriptural" or "un-biblical" while yours is "biblical" and "I believe the Bible" is not fair. Not only is it not fair, it is arrogant and childish. Both sides hold the Bible (I'm speaking here of those that do but disagree on certain doctrines) to be inerrant, completely sufficient and authoritative, so that is not the issue. It is your job to demonstrate how your opponents view(s) is not in line with the Word of God. Simply throwing out silly assertions and attacking straw men does not count. What is does require is the proper use of hermeneutics and an exegesis and explanation of verses that are often cited in the discussion.

This requires diligence and much study, something many fail to do because of the prevalent "me, my Bible and the Holy Spirit and nothing else" attitude that dominates the American church. I cannot recall how many discussions that I've had with individuals on certain matters and they have no idea what others, that do not hold their view, believe on certain theological topics like ecclesiology, soteriology, eschatology, pneumatology e.t.c. They haven't taken the time to study. It's sheer laziness thus ignorance is another reason for straw men arguments. Some people haven't a clue to what they are arguing against. All they know is someone disagrees with them and they go on the attack. Study, study, study, study!

Now I'm aware that there are those people that do hold erroneous views and when they are exposed, exegetically and taken to there logical conclusions, people cry "you're straw man-ing me;" that's just a failure to admit defeat. I remember the first time this was done with me. I rejected the doctrine of election and was exposed to Dr. James White. His book "The Potter's Freedom"and "Debating Calvinism" (his written debate with Dave Hunt) were key to exposing my eisegesis and holes in my embarrassing theological stance. I was hoping Dave Hunt would come to the rescue but no sir, his handling of certain passages were nothing short of pathetic. I was left ashamed and angry. But what could I do but submit to the Word of God! I've since learned to study my opponents views from themselves and I'll tell you what, I've changed most of my theological view points. I went from a five point Arminian dispensationalist to a five point Calvinist amillennial covenant theologian or simply as a Reformed Baptist. I've learned my lesson. That's why I'm no fan of "just study the Bible." Sola Scriptura? Absolutely! But we all bring preconceived notions to the Bible. That's why the Lord graciously has given us teachers to help us understand what He has said; this includes poking holes in our preconceived notions which we probably would never have recognized apart from the theologians and teachers God has graciously raised up. By the way, what do you think believers are doing every Sunday listening to their pastor? Aren't they learning?


The use of straw men arguments is a sure sign that your position is weak or that you haven't any clue to what you are talking about. So you go right on ahead and attack that scarecrow but sooner or later you will have to actually deal with my actual position. Soli Deo Gloria!

For His Glory,

Fernando