If people on both sides (or all sides) have the wit, they can all use logic and a couple clobber-verses and invariably come to their own most comfortable conclusions; but the important thing is to examine the "different sets of assumptions," as you said. That's why these discussions we have at the FRRF go round and round so tediously and fruitlessly --- and then turn into snark, frustration and anger --- because we're not getting underneath and examining assumptions.
Having said all that --- I still am not in a position to get all into it today. Yesterday my mind was all occupied with Sam's burial; today I have other pressing tasks that I have to kick myself into doing. Do not think I am absenting myself from the volleys because I am daunted, or because I am disrespecting your discussion.
If don-o or somebody else wants to take it up, that's fine. I have to overcome my sloth. I have a sneaky sloth: I do stuff I don't have to do (joust with people on FR) and avoid things I really do have to do, which are the obligations of my state in life.
Don-o knows that! ;op
See you later. Carry on.
I think one of the MAJOR reasons for the endless, tedious, repetitive and fruitless go-rounds we see here in the RF is not so much that some want to "clobber" an adversary or only seek "comfortable" conclusions - though I don't deny that may very well be the motivation of a few - but that, when ones argument is proved untrue, instead of acknowledging the correction, the faulty view is grasped stubbornly closer. It then gets repeated in another thread as if no correction had ever been made. Can you help me understand why that continues to go on?
Examining assumptions is a worthwhile pursuit but what good is it when the assumption is based on the conviction that one cannot ever be wrong? Over the nearly ten years I've been a member, I am still surprised to read threads that make assumptions and assert things that I know have been countered dozens of times on the SAME forum. It's as if saying something is true makes it true. Perhaps in the interest of truly advancing the educational benefits of having an open Religion Forum, we should try to reign in those kinds of threads that are repetitive and which we know ahead of time will cause snark, anger and frustration - because they already have every time?