There are many debates marking the theological landscapes of modern evangelicalism. Here’s one thing that you will find to be common in a large portion of those debates. A certain theological perspective is assumed apriori by debaters, and then Scriptural “prooftexts” are marshaled in its defense. Scripture passages contradicting a given perspective are commonly ignored altogether.
When a disagreeing party presents their collection of prooftexts, the response usually is not in trying to reconcile all the relevant texts in order to develop a perspective that would accommodate the fullest possible array of Scruptures dealing with the question. Instead, the most common response is to present one’s own prooftext collection, which at face value contradicts the one presented by the opponent. The fact of the second party’s collection’s superiority over that of the opponent is simply assumed, most commonly for no inherently objective reason. If the opposing party’s prooftexts are addressed, it’s usually done with the purpose of showing that the collection of the other party is somehow illegitimate.