A suggested way of viewing good dialogue in oder to counter religion.
Pascal said
"People are generally better persuaded by the reasons which they have themselves discovered than by those which have come into the mind of others"
Put simply, Pascal suggests that before disagreeing with someone, first point out the ways in which they’re right. And to effectively persuade someone to change their mind, lead them to discover a counter-point of their own accord. Arthur Markman, psychology professor at The University of Texas at Austin, says both these hold true.
“One of the first things you have to do to give someone permission to change their mind is to lower their defenses and prevent them from digging their heels in to the position they already staked out,” he says. “If I immediately start to tell you all the ways in which you’re wrong, there’s no incentive for you to co-operate. But if I start by saying, ‘Ah yeah, you made a couple of really good here, I think these are important issues,’ now you’re giving the other party a reason to want to co-operate as part of the exchange. And that gives you a chance to give voice your own concerns about their position in a way that allows co-operation.”
From what I have learned about this sort of topic has been a part of police academy verbal judo and skills for being a good listener.
However, I have reasons why I left christianity that this sort of method would not persuade some people highly educated and experienced in christianity.
Please feel free to post something of this sort in my discussion group. "Illogical atheists guide for ending Christianity "
"The best cure for Christianity is reading the Bible" SClemens