Three rules of religious debate

Before we get started, please read my previous article, here; The curious case of the Texas proxy marriage, my latest on Locals; Coffee and Christianity: Episode 92: Healing, and if you want to help me out, go here; Help with medical bills

So, I wanted to write about forgiveness, but, I'm just not up to task. One of my dogs died Sunday, and I just don't feel like it.
So, I was brainstorming ideas of how to do with religious debates. Keep in mind, I have discussed this on my Locals, The pros and cons of appealing to scripture in religious debates.
While I am still going to use scripture, I want to take about what you HAVE to do when you have a debate.
1) Agree where there can be agreement. Muslims and Jews both hold, along with Christians (and yes, Muslims and Christians worship the same God, contra Sam Shamoun, who, given his own heritage, should know better, Allah is just the Arabic word for God, Muslims have the wrong UNDERSTANDING of God), "THE CATECHISM OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH."
2) Find out the other side's understanding. You'd be surprised how many disagreements don't actually exist between Catholics and Protestants simply because one side didn't do their research.
3) Ask for evidence of why they hold that position, and how exactly it makes sense.
Okay, so, let's start with the first one, well, first, a Christian could appeal to a couple of verses to agree with their interlocutor in each of those instances.
For the first one, I think I'd go to Deuteronomy 6:4-5, the Jewish interlocutor rightly considers this scripture, and the Muslim most likely wouldn't object to it.
“Hear O Israel: The LORD our God is one. You shall love the LORD your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might”.
Just about every devout Jew knows this, and I couldn't see a reason why a Muslim would reject it.
2) A good example of this is how Catholics and Protestants might see the word “faith” Protestants might say, “the Bible says we're saved by faith”, and a Catholic might retort, “The Bible also says, faith without works is dead”!
So, how do we solve this? Well, we got to The Bible, “For we hold that one is justified by faith apart from the works of the law” (Romans 3:28). As a Catholic, I see nothing about that verse a Catholic couldn't agree to. The deeper problem is with the term “faith alone”, which the Bible does indeed warn against. Faith without works (and good on Crossway, the publisher of the Bible I'm using, to use the heading, “Faith Without Works Is Dead”).
“For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead”. (James 2:26). I think the problem may be potentially how we understand the word faith. When I use it, I think the implication should be there that I'm referring to the “obedience of faith” as it refers to in Romans 1:5, or “faith working through love”, as in Galatians 5:6. I also think my Protestant interlocutor should read ALL of Romans in context. Luther's problem was isolating the verse out of the broader context.
Not to mention, a Catholic, could, theoretically, affirm faith alone, depending on what you mean by it,Justification “By Faith Alone”
3) And, this is a big one, especially when you do apologetics with Muslims online.
Let me explain. There are some Muslims that think Paul made up the crucifixion and resurrection.
First of all, what sense would it make for a Roman citizen of Jewish religion and ethnicity to worship a crucified messiah unless there was a reason to do so, and, also, would benefit would that be to Paul? Mostly, people make up new religions for money, sex, or power. Paul was executed, How did Saint Paul die?.
You don't make up a religion, generally speaking, that you know will get you killed. It's actually a good counter to Islam. Mohamed became a warlord after people rejected his “revelations”, so, keep that in mind (now, this doesn't prove or disprove Islam, but, it should teach Muslims to learn to be a little less dismissive).
But also, keep this in mind, “But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. And Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is in vain and your faith is is in vain” (1 Corinthians 15:13-14). Again, I ask the Muslim, what benefit would Paul gain by lying about that?
As I don't want to get too deep into it (I have other things to do), please, go read 1 Corinthians on your own, especially chapter 15.
So, what have we learned? We need to 1) Start with an agreement 2)Learn what the other side actually believes, and, 3) Ask tough questions.
With all of this, remember, these people are your fellow man, created in the image and likeness of God, give them the same dignity you would want from them.