When addressing non-believers

[TheOneTrueFred]

When I argue a point with people I have no doctrinal common ground with - say atheists, for example - I tend to use rhetorical detachment and objective terms, like “if one assumes the existence of God, then…” or “hypothetically, should a soul exist…”

Is making hypothetical arguments like this regarding core Catholic beliefs straying too far? I hate to do it and always second guess whether I should be using this kind of phrasing when addressing a topic that *isn’t *hypothetical to me. Thoughts, advice?

 

[Lazerlike42]

When I argue a point with people I have no doctrinal common ground with - say atheists, for example - I tend to use rhetorical detachment and objective terms, like “if one assumes the existence of God, then…” or “hypothetically, should a soul exist…”

Is making hypothetical arguments like this regarding core Catholic beliefs straying too far? I hate to do it and always second guess whether I should be using this kind of phrasing when addressing a topic that *isn’t *hypothetical to me. Thoughts, advice?

There’s nothing wrong with that. Provided that the argument you’re making isn’t bad p) and will actually help the fellow to understand something, then it’s a good thing.

You’re not denying the existence of God. You’re dealing with someone who doesn’t accept what you believe, and you’re trying to show him something and so you are saying from his perspective, if he assumes God exists, etc.