Some Advice on Arguing Online

Here are a few things I've learned in my admittedly short time arguing with skeptics on the Internet.

Know when to start a conversation. Not every individual is worth engaging. Generally, I would advise against debating trolls, "Internet atheists", or anyone else who's clearly not interested in truth. While there are exceptions to this rule, it is generally a waste of time as you will make no progress and learn little from your interlocutor. On the other hand, if someone seems sincere in making their objections or is willing to thoughtfully consider your arguments, it is often worth engaging.

Know when to end a conversation. It's important to be able to recognize when a conversation is no longer fruitful. Sometimes a conversation will start out promising but quickly unravel after a few replies; or, you'll find that your interlocutor is uninterested in taking your arguments seriously. If you find this to be the case, give them a warning that you'll leave the conversation if they don't stop their undesirable behavior. If they ignore the warning, briefly explain your reasons for leaving the conversation, tell them they can have the last word, and move on.

Be courteous and respectful. Your interlocutor and many others reading the conversation will likely be watching how you conduct yourself as a Christian. Don't let the thrill of debate and the desire to humiliate your opponent hijack your messages and fill them with unbridled snark and arrogance. 1 Peter 3.15-16 says "but sanctify Christ as Lord in your hearts, always being ready to make a defense to everyone who asks you to give an account for the hope that is in you, but with gentleness and respect; and keep a good conscience so that in the thing in which you are slandered, those who disparage your good behavior in Christ will be put to shame." Aside from teaching a divine Christology, these verses instruct Christians to maintain good conduct in all evangelical or apologetic engagements. When I engage in a snarky conversation, my opponent and I end up antagonizing each other and leave on poor terms. On the other hand, when I start out respectfully, my interlocutor generally follows my cue, and we have a great conversation, leaving as friends.

It's not always wrong to be blunt. While you should never be mean, it's sometimes okay to be blunt. This is especially true when debating a troll who isn't genuinely engaging you. Jesus was blunt when rebuking the Pharisees (see Matthew 23.33, 27.23). However, you should always err on the side of caution if you're not sure whether it's permissible to be blunt. This is also true if you're not sure how your words will come across—if you think someone might interpret you as angry or antagonistic, reword your reply.

Read through your response before sending it. While intuitive, much more ground would be covered in online debates if everyone applied this principle. As you read through your response, ensure 1) you have the desired tone—imagine if someone had worded their response to you in this way. How would you interpret it?, 2) covered all the relevant issues your opponent raised, or clarifies why you only want to focus on some of them (see below), 3) is worded clearly and concisely, effectively making your points.

Don't write essays—address issues one at a time. A single-issue conversation can quickly escalate to one concerning several issues. To respond to all of these issues, you might need to write an essay-length response. However, this makes it harder to focus on individual issues and make progress in your conversation. I've found it helpful to take issues one at a time. Take the first point your interlocutor raised, explain that you only want to focus on that point for now, and address just that. When you've stopped making progress on that point, move on to the next one. I've found it helpful to label the points with numerals for ease of reference.

Stay in your subject matter. If you find the conversation veering off into an area you haven't studied very much, don't try to wing it. Instead, point your interlocutor to resources that engage that subject at a high level. For example, my focus is on New Testament issues, so I generally avoid conversations on metaphysics or other religions. But even in the field of New Testament studies, there are a ton of issues I haven't studied very much. So instead of arguing on issues I haven't researched, I only engage in conversations that cover familiar subject matter. It's also okay to admit your ignorance when your interlocutor raises a concern you haven't studied. This is a sign of intellectual humility and can leave a good impression.

Try to learn from your interlocutor. It's natural to want to convince your interlocutor that you are right. While this is often the goal of conversation and isn't necessarily wrong, you'll rarely convince an informed opponent of anything other than a minor point. Thus, view your conversation as an opportunity to learn from your opponent. He is best positioned to discover flaws in your arguments, allowing you to strengthen your arguments in the future.

Manage your time well. Debating online can be addicting, but constantly planning and writing response posts fills a huge amount of time. You won't make much progress in your ability to argue for or against certain positions unless you're consistently reading scholarly literature on the subject. Get off of YouTube and read a paper. Extract your highlights into an app like Obsidian for future reference. My maxim is that for every one conversation in which you engage, you should read at least one academic paper.

You don't know who will be reading your conversation. If you're debating online in a public sphere such as the comments section of a blog or YouTube video, the conversation will be online for everyone to see many years into the future. I have often found myself reading debates from over a decade ago, seeing what I can learn from them. Keep that in mind when you're debating—you never know who will read this conversation. Perhaps an intellectually honest atheist is looking for a Christian who exemplifies a good Christian witness, and will judge your conversation accordingly. Perhaps a new Christian is wrestling with intellectual doubts and wants to see someone engage skeptical arguments at a high level. Keep these scenarios in mind and debate accordingly.