By the end of this week, I will have engaged in two major debates, one in London at a university campus and the other livestreamed from here in the States. The London event was with a Muslim apologist, debating whether Muhammad was prophesied in the Bible. The online event will be with a "Hebrew Israelite" leader, debating who are the legitimate children of Israel. (If you're on our email list at AskDrBrown.org, you'll be notified about links where you can watch online.)

Certainly, these events stir a lot of interest and discussion. But, to repeat, are they actually fruitful? Do they do any real good? Are these debates more a matter of having polished rhetorical skills than convincing content? And don't they simply reinforce the beliefs of each opposing side?

Let me first emphasize that public, religious debates are biblical. In fact, Paul himself frequently engaged in them (this was along with his powerful ministry of preaching and healing).

Here's just one example out of several that Acts records: "Now when they had traveled through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came to Thessalonica, where there was a synagogue of the Jews. And according to Paul's custom, he went to them, and for three Sabbaths reasoned with them from the Scriptures, explaining and giving evidence that the Messiah had to suffer and rise again from the dead, and saying, 'This Jesus whom I am proclaiming to you is the Messiah.'" (Acts 17:1–3)

read more