An Ongoing Dialogue Series, initiated by Kyle J. Gerkin and JP Holding   

As most people are aware, Christians and Skeptics have very different ideas about the claims made by the Bible. This has resulted in an epic conflict over the answers to some of the most profound questions we humans ask about the nature and meaning of life and the universe. Throughout history, these two irreconcilable world views have collided in a titanic struggle that has played, and continues to play, no mean role in determining human destiny. In recent times, this vital debate has entered a new and unparalleled arena: the internet. From their world wide platforms, Christians and Skeptics have inundated cyberspace with their arguments. This has provided a generation of men and women with heretofore unmatched opportunities to research and contribute to the issues in this debate. 

And yet, all is not well. So many times, in so many circumstances, this debate has turned -- nasty. Rather than focusing on the issues, discussions devolve into endless bouts of ad hominem, and snide sound bites. Thus, a siege mentality develops and it becomes us (the rational researchers) against them (the ignorant idiots). The "enemy" can't possibly possess an ounce of intelligence, or else how could they reach such ludicrous conclusions? Human nature allows for such a position to be easily realized. However, a moment's reflection reveals the absurdity of such thoughts. Clearly, there are well- educated, highly intelligent, successful people on both sides of the debate. Thus, both sets of conclusions must be reasonable--given a particular set of premises. The key then, is to discover and discuss the underlying axioms in order to find out why they differ. This recognition of our similarities despite our differences is at the heart of diplomacy. And the most productive course in diplomacy is an honest yet respectful and (ideally) amicable dialogue. 

And there is a further reason to curb the tide of animosity that can so rapidly rise in this debate. Those who participate in the debate are representing a particular world view. As representatives of that world view, they have a duty to cast it in a favorable light in order to aid in its proliferation. How tragic is it, then, that those who most need to understand their opponents' position are so often pushed away? Although we may ultimately disagree, at the end of the day we are all humans in pursuit of truth. The fact that Christians & Skeptics are opponents needn't make them enemies. 

Therefore, the goal of this series is to explore the key areas of disagreement between Christians and Skeptics, and foster a respectful understanding of those differences. The two main participants in this dialogue are not entirely innocent of contributing to the siege mentality described above. But they are willing to start tearing down the wall of antipathy that too often divides Christians and Skeptics, so that both sides can let down their guard and carefully consider the best arguments of their opponents. The results of this communication should be growth in knowledge and understanding, in addition to the strengthened conviction that one's position can stand up under the tightest scrutiny. And in the end, somebody may be one step closer to the light of truth

The following is a list of items in the Scholarly Diplomacy Series. This list will be updated regularly as new items are completed. 

01.24.2003 -- Playing Against Type -- JP and Kyle whimsically discuss the various types of Christians & Skeptics they encounter. Also serves as an introduction to the Scholarly Diplomacy Series. 

01.28.2003 -- A Dialogue Regarding What Skeptics Are Doing Wrong -- Kyle and Tekton guest writer Jason Rennie discuss the latter's editorial recommending that Skeptics focus on the resurrection if they want to discredit Christianity. 

03.05.2003 -- Improbable? Yes. Impossible? No. -- Kyle's piece written in response to JP's cornerstone paper The Impossible Faith. Kyle argues that Christianity could conceivably arise in the absence of a supernatural resurrection.

04.25.2003 -- Debating The Impossible Faith -- JP and Kyle engage in a moderated, ten round debate on the proposition, "The social world of the NT provides indications that only a bona fide, supernatural resurrection can explain the emergence and growth of Christianity."

06.16.2003 -- Debating The Impossible Faith: Part II -- JP and Kyle engage in a moderated, five round debate on the proposition, "The '15 Factors' listed by JPH in The Impossible Faith constitute decisive evidence in favor of the resurrection being a true event."

01.13.2006 -- Beyond Born Again, Again: Has Robert Price Been Answered? -- JP welcomes a new dialogue partner, Matthew J. Green, to discuss JP's article addressing Robert Price's book Beyond Born Again.

06.16.2003 -- The Burial Battle: Does Peter Kirby Have a Case? -- JP and Matthew discuss the arguments of Peter Kirby which were first posted on infidels.org and more recently have appeared, in an edited form, in the book The Empty Tomb.