Why Richard Dawkins should debate Christians

[smax]

Statler,

Here are my final thoughts on our discussion:

This entire time I didn't realize I was dealing with a Calvanist. I just noticed that as your religious affiliation. When I was Christian, I, too, studied Reformed Theology. And, while I feel Reformed Theology is the most scripturally accurate, it's also the least logical from a world view. So it comes as no surprise to me that your strongest arguments are merely dogmatic references to scripture and basic Christian principles. With that, I must admit a high level of disappointment. At the beginning of our discussion, I thought we might actually engage in a meaningful and challenging debate about the validity of the Christian claims. But, as you point out, you are already uncontrollably swayed (although, I prefer the words "insanely deluded") about these matters, and you see scripture as the most valid point of reference. This dynamic makes any meaningful debate with you impossible, as I'm sure I'm not the first to find out.

Still, some part of your brain seems to understand the obvious contradictions that are at play with your perspective, which is why you deflect so much. When addressing other religions, to you it's "irrelevant". When addressing divisions and errors within your own religions, it's "irrelevant".

Ofcourse, you have maintained throughout the course of the conversation that you are not deflecting, but rather asking for greater clarification. But we both know that isn't true. Clarification has been provided, and did not satisy you. With regard to "magnificent claims", I intentionally made reference to a burning vehicle speeding through the neighborhood. With regard to verification, I gave the example of a dead sasquatch being given over to science for study.

After that failed to satisfy you, I realized that we would never tackle the subject matter. We would be stuck in an endless, and meaningless debate about what everything means.

I refused to engage, and decided, for no better reason than my own personal amusement, to focus more on your own personal struggle with menal illness. Like anyone with mental illness, you assume you do not have it. You rationalize the symptoms you display: having an imaginary friend, believing highly improbable and unreliable fictional tales, and delusions of grandeur.

Rationalization #1. Everyone's doing it!

Rationalization #2. You only think I'm crazy because you didn't get the special glasses!

Rationalization #3. I know I'm right because I feel it

Anyway, despite all your deflecting and loopy comments, I actually enjoyed this unexpected development in this thread. I only wish I had realized your specific religious angle earlier on in the conversation. It would have drastically changed my approach. There's always next time, and I'm quite sure now that there will be one.