Debating people trained in Christian apologetics

[AlP]

One strategy would be to read what they're reading. There's an awful (yes a pun!) lot of this book available in its online preview, including the usual universal morality stuff.

Holman Quicksource Guide to Christian Apologetics

I just read it. It's pretty short. I'll refer to it next time I want to counter a regular theist argument that's covered.

Does anyone have links to better apologetics resources?

[LoneMateria]

I like the iron chariots wiki.

http://www.ironchariots.org

Just remember if you do debate a Christian apologetic they have spent a great deal of their time saying bullshit so don't be afraid to call them out on their unwarranted assertions.

[SSY]

I have to admit, I love apologetics, they make an art of finding the most tenuous, suppositional thread, thin and contorted enough to weave around and avoid the points in your argument, but too thin to hold up an argument of its own. It's as if the thought process goes "Well, if I say A, the atheist can refute it with X, but if I say B, the atheist can refute it with Y, so I will say C instead", it matters not that C is not the obvious interpretation, nor that there exists no precedent for reading the bible as C, the only motivation is that other dodges, weaves and evasions have been denied to them, so they must make increasing outlandish and desperate assumptions to maintain a shred of plausibility. It is a classic case of making observations fit a conclusion, instead of the other way round.

I think it is interesting that a religion needs a whole branch of theological study to massage and explain away the inconsistencies, contradictions and absurdities of its holy book. That is it's sole purpose, they have no interest in finding out anything new, but simply in preserving their own view of the world, seeking to discredit anything that would challenge it. For this reason I would rarely enter into such a debate, an apologist will go to any length to prove their point, throwing logic and reason away in order to arrive at the wanted conclusion, you can no more convince an apologist of your view, than you can convince Mien Kampf that the Jews are all right really. Arguments by their nature require logic, on both sides, there is not point in putting forth a logical argument if it has no place to go, it's as if no one is listening. Better to talk to people who are actually interested in learning and considering, once someone has opted to become an apologist, they have decided what the truth is, and they then go back to try and validate their decision.