Ok, I can't even keep up with the replies. Sorry 
I'm on an iPod touch.
Ok. @doubtvsfaith, I haven't had time to reply to those, sorry. The Santa claus thing I (temporarily!) ignored because I have no idea what occam's scalpel is. Enlighten me
as for the logical thing, my point was (and remains) that diplomats tend to be able to see both sides (by definition). That requires cool logic, not heated emotion.
I come on here to expose myself to other beliefs, take them to heart (I don't discard atheists' arguments!), and realize that I come out of it as a stronger Christian. Its not all about living in a bubble. (I would quote, but it's hard on an iPod.) The whole "why not" thing is simple - without logic, it becomes a war of emotion - whoever gets the most angry feels the most justified. That's no way to have a religious convo that is moving forward. If you intend to break out of your own bubble, how do you intend to do that without realizing that others' beliefs have A value. Naturally, you won't value them as high as your own; that's fine. But if you don't accept that they have the slimmest bit of possibility to them whatsoever, the convo will benefit both sides drastically more than if either debater decides the opponent's beliefs are useless.
I'm on an iPod touch. Ok. @doubtvsfaith, I haven't had time to reply to those, sorry. The Santa claus thing I (temporarily!) ignored because I have no idea what occam's scalpel is. Enlighten me
as for the logical thing, my point was (and remains) that diplomats tend to be able to see both sides (by definition). That requires cool logic, not heated emotion.I come on here to expose myself to other beliefs, take them to heart (I don't discard atheists' arguments!), and realize that I come out of it as a stronger Christian. Its not all about living in a bubble. (I would quote, but it's hard on an iPod.) The whole "why not" thing is simple - without logic, it becomes a war of emotion - whoever gets the most angry feels the most justified. That's no way to have a religious convo that is moving forward. If you intend to break out of your own bubble, how do you intend to do that without realizing that others' beliefs have A value. Naturally, you won't value them as high as your own; that's fine. But if you don't accept that they have the slimmest bit of possibility to them whatsoever, the convo will benefit both sides drastically more than if either debater decides the opponent's beliefs are useless.
I'm the diplomat. I believe a lot of things. Here they are, for your reference:
-I'm a Roman Catholic Christian (yep, I 'admitted' that I'm Catholic)
-I don't believe that all atheists are lazy
-I do believe that these sites tend to get clogged with too much flaming
-I don't believe witty sayings/quotes help either side's case
-I don't believe in the 'proof' that fellow theists will think is cool; if God could be proved, besides what's in the Bible, He wouldn't be God
-If you take offense at something I said, reread it; I'm not going to try to insult anyone
-Your beliefs are separate from you. Don't take offense if I'm not an atheist. Likewise, i won't take offense for your not being Christian.
-Don't take the "Santa Claus" approach when debating with me. Constantly repeating that God isn't real is going to get nowhere.
-I'm a Roman Catholic Christian (yep, I 'admitted' that I'm Catholic)
-I don't believe that all atheists are lazy
-I do believe that these sites tend to get clogged with too much flaming
-I don't believe witty sayings/quotes help either side's case
-I don't believe in the 'proof' that fellow theists will think is cool; if God could be proved, besides what's in the Bible, He wouldn't be God
-If you take offense at something I said, reread it; I'm not going to try to insult anyone
-Your beliefs are separate from you. Don't take offense if I'm not an atheist. Likewise, i won't take offense for your not being Christian.
-Don't take the "Santa Claus" approach when debating with me. Constantly repeating that God isn't real is going to get nowhere.
