- Realize that a dialogue should not be about you, the opponent, the turf, or the superiority but about making the right decision. Accept the fact that you just might be wrong and treat the opposition with respect.
- There are two parts to every argument: A position and a bunch of points that support it. Always separate them and be clear on them both. “I support solution A. The reasons for my recommendation are as follows…” On the flip side, learn to identify and separate these two parts in your opponent’s argument. If you can’t do so reliably, ask for clarification.
- Never accept an argument that you don’t understand. Ask for clarification.
- To each decision, there are objectives (what we want to achieve) and alternatives (how we can achieve it). Are you disagreeing on the objectives or on the alternatives? Make it clear and ask the opponent to clarify their position. This is very important as often there is a lengthy raging battle over easily reconcilable implementation preferences.
- Not to belabor this, but…choose the language both you and your opponent understand.
- When you make your point, nothing is as effective as the masterful command of the language and use of relevant examples and metaphors.
- Often, your opponent will pass his beliefs and opinions for an unquestionable truth. So, be on guard for and readily reject ad hominem attacks (when your opponent targets your persona and not your argument). For example: “I don’t see how this approach can ever work, coming from someone who can’t control his weight, let alone an initiative of this importance!”
- Watch out for arguments that say that something is right just because it is either new or old. These are known as ad novitam and ad antiquam arguments.
- Don’t fall for arguments that rely on wide acceptance and popularity. What’s right for many is not necessarily right for you, even if the others are in the same industry, market, or building.
- Beware of the straw man attacks, which happen when the opposition objects not to your position but to a similar but much weaker and sometimes ridiculous one. For instance, you say: “I am of the opinion that this application will not resolve the issue, because…” Your opponent retorts, ignoring your argument: “Julie, of all people, I wouldn’t expect to hear it from the CIO that high technology is not the way to go!”
- Red herring anyone? Watch for arguments with little to no connection to the issue at stake, which are introduced to misdirect the attention of you and the rest of the audience. This also often happens inadvertently.
- Sometimes you may lose on the basis of unobtainable perfection. Your way may be the best available but not perfect, while “perfect” is either out of the question or not viable, such as due to prohibitive costs. When you feel that the conversation has fallen into this rut, call a spade a spade, invite the other party to acknowledge that perfection is not possible, and talk about mitigation of the imperfections. You may still lose this battle, but you’ll know you have done your best.
- They mock religion, especially Christianity for not having evidence of a God and of swallowing everything by faith.
- The interesting thing about atheists is that they do EXACTLY the same thing! Why don't they know it?
- They accept the teachings of well-known atheists by faith. If these teachings are questioned you will most likely run into flak of one form or another. If they cannot answer your critique they resort to ....
- 1) Flaming emotional remarks I assume to throw you off balance.
- 2) Belittling your beliefs instead of answering the points you raised.
- 3) Giving their opinion and expecting YOU to take it by faith with no evidence.
- 4) Complicated discourse which is difficult to follow even if you have two degrees which I assume you are supposed to accept as the atheistic "papal" bull. There may be some truth in part of that.
- 5) The red herring technique. By this I mean they will throw emotional remarks about something not on the topic but seemingly designed to make you forget that they haven't answered your points.
- 6) Opinionated remarks such as "it is an accepted fact" or "everyone knows".
- 7) Emotional accusations such as
- -"you are probably so indoctrinated that you wouldn't be able to see the truth ...."
- -"There is little danger of sharia law being considered in North America. What I worry about is a Christian-run state." [This same individual was so worried that he toured the vatican while in Rome.]
- 8) If you DARE to question articles by "esteemed atheists" you may be kicked off their forums because you actually had an answer that made the author look ignorant which he was.
- For example, Mr. Ehrman has a lot of ridicule and flaming rhetoric towards the Bible. His "selected verses" which are taken totally out of context and try to represent Christianity as big brother from George Orwell. This of course displays ignorance of the Christian contributions to Western society that you can find elsewhere in this blog.
- I quoted verses to show that Mr. Ehrman was incorrect in the meaning of certain verses which he quoted to prove several of his points. I did not flame. I simply stated that Mr. Ehrman's ignorance of the Bible and Christianity was displayed by the selective way he took verses out of context.
- The next time I went back to RichardDawkins.net, all my answers had been erased even tho they were polite and to the point.
- 9) Angry outbursts and insults which have nothing to do with the issues raised. This often happens when you make a good point that cannot be answered by them. It is their way of trying to escape answering a valid question.
- 10) Atheists assume you are stupid if you are a believer. To them only atheists can be smart.
- 11) Atheists will claim that YOU are in denial when you do not agree with their ideas but at the same time, they display that they are in denial when they claim that Hitler for example was a Christian.
- My answer to that is that at one time he may have attended church. However just because you once played in a barn does not make you a cow.
- Hitler displayed the same type of behavior as atheists:
- - he made up his own set of beliefs.
- I do not see any of the characteristics of Jesus [Yeshua] or his teachings in Hitler.
- Yeshua never told people to go and kill a race of people. He said, "Pray for your enemies." So even if that race were your enemy, you as a Christian must pray for them. Somehow I cannot picture Hitler praying about how to kill Jews and undesirables. Something just does not click there.
- Yeshua never told his disciples to steal homes, take belongings, torture, starve and throw into cruel flea-ridden camps those that would not believe what he said.
- Instead he said to "Love your enemies and pray for those that despitefully use you."
- In my experience, atheists ask Christians for evidence of God but make statements with no evidence and expect you to simply accept their correctness by faith.
- Atheism is a religion. Religion is a set of beliefs that you hold to. Atheists hold to beliefs whether true or not.
- They mock you for believing in an unseen God but at the same time believe every word that their esteemed "supreme beings" otherwise known as the "Supreme Atheist" of the time utters.
- Atheism has real problems because there is no set of values, no absolutes except that they are absolutely sure they are correct, no leaders who one can look up to as an example of what an atheist should be, no morals since each individual can make up his own mind at any moment what he should do.
- Another atheist may agree or disagree with his actions. They have no leaders who have risen from the dead, no stone tablets with a code of conduct that they all ascribe to, no Mother Theresa's or Albert Schweitzers.
- Because they make up their values as they go along, we often see atheists like Hitler, Stalin, Mao Tse Tung, Pol Pot, Idi Amin and many others responsible for mass slaughters.
- However they do seem to all have a rage if you don't believe them as Peter Hitchens writes about his brother Christopher Hitchens.
- If you go to YouTube, and watch videos of Richard Dawkins, or Christopher Hitchens or Madelyn Murray O'hair [have not checked for Miss O'hair's videos but watched her lash out in vitriolic anger at people on Phil Donahue], you will see their condescending attitude to believers and often outright anger.
- I would much rather do my best to follow the example of Jesus Christ or Mother Theresa any day than hold these men in high esteem as the superior minds that they are believed to be.
- It is unfortunate that Christopher may be dying of cancer. We all wish him well. Just because we do not agree with his atheistic stance does not mean we have no concern for his life.
- Quite the contrary. I believe Christians pray for the life of Christopher, that he may be healed or recover.
- Another Comment from a Person's Experience with Atheists
Haters Of God
Text Size: Zoom In
April 28, 2011 — by Dennis Fisher
Read: 2 Timothy 2:23-26
God gave them over to a debased mind. —Romans 1:28
Bible in a year: 1 Kings 3-5; Luke 20:1-26
Recently, I listened to an audiobook by a militant advocate for atheism. As the author himself read his own work with spiteful sarcasm and contempt, it made me wonder why he was so angry.
The Bible tells us that a rejection of God can actually lead to a more hateful attitude toward Him: “Even as they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a debased mind . . . [to become] haters of God” (Rom. 1:28-30).
Turning one’s back on God does not lead to secular neutrality. Indeed, recent militant atheists have shown their desire to remove any reference to a Creator from culture.
When we hear about atheists trying to remove crosses or the Ten Commandments from society, it’s easy to respond to their hatred of God with our own hatred. But we’re exhorted to defend the truth with an attitude of love, “in humility correcting those who are in opposition, if God perhaps will grant them repentance, so that they may know the truth” (2 Tim. 2:25).
The next time you see the works or hear the words of a hater of God, do an attitude check. Then ask God for a spirit of humility and pray that the offender might come to the knowledge of the truth.
Lord, help us not respond in kind To those who hate and turn from You; Instead, help us to love and pray That someday they’ll accept what’s true. —Sper
- ========================================
- Good Advice For Discussion
You have probably noticed that in a number of points I advised you to “watch out” or “beware of” or to “be on guard” against various acts of chicanery. It goes without saying that you shouldn’t commit these transgressions either. The Golden Rule applies.
- by
Ilya Bogorad================================
- Is it possible that Brian [or anyone] has less than 10% of the world's knowledge? I am sure Brian would say, "Of course!"
- Is it possible that Brian has less than 5% of the world's knowledge? In which case, I can hear Brian saying, "Obviously! I probably have less than 1% of the world's knowledge!"
- Then I ask a simple question: "COULD GOD EXIST IN THE 99% OF THE WORLD'S KNOWLEDGE THAT YOU DO NOT HAVE?"
- I can say that "Platypuses do not exist! They are fictional! People have just been fooling with our brain by drawing a half-beaver-half-duck like animal! "
- Just because I have NEVER SEEN a platypus, does not prove the non-existence of one, does it?
- Just because I have never seen a coelacanth does not mean that they do not exist does it?
See here. The coelacanth was a fish thought to be extinct until 1938 when one was caught ALIVE! IT DOES EXIST! " "...astounding coelacanth ("see-la-kanth"), the fusion of life and time, that following a supposed extinction of 65 million years, head-lined into human consciousness with its discovery alive in 1938."
- So Brian and other atheists have NOT FOUND EVIDENCE FOR A LIVING GOD.
- SCIENTISTS had NOT FOUND evidence for a LIVING COELACANTH until they did!
- Why was one found in 1938 and not before?
- Could it be that people were LOOKING IN THE WRONG PLACES? Of course! They finally by accident found the RIGHT PLACE and also found a fish thought to be extinct but was still alive!!
- God is still alive even if you have looked in the wrong places! There are many intelligent famous people who like the scientists did NOT find God UNTIL they looked in THE RIGHT PLACE!
Atheists Who Found God
- See Why I Left Atheism by John N. Clayton
- See Antony Flew story, British philosopher and 60-year atheist!
- See Peter Hitchens, brother of Christopher Hitchens story called "How I Found God and Peace with my Atheist brother.
- Fay Weldon, 70 years an atheist found God because she looked in the RIGHT place!
- A good answer given by two individuals who thought they were atheists.
- How Marilyn Adamson found God
- Atheist author Terry Pratchett may have found God
- Has Science Discovered God?
- Debates between Atheists and Christians
- Lists of former atheists and agnostics who became Christians
No reflection on Brian's intelligence, just his belief system which he has been influenced to adopt by those that are his "superior beings." (:-)
