RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
October 25, 2011 at 9:17 pm
(This post was last modified: October 25, 2011 at 9:17 pm by Epimethean.)
While we wait for that, is it fair to think of god as a thing with multiple personalities? I mean, if we are going to continue the ring round the rosie of there being no evidence beyond an allegorical text that has issues with time and factuality, can we at least try to look at this fractured being as something we can understand in some rational way? If the answer is no to this, why do you bother to continue on this tack, Stat? Saying things that defy logic (which this trinity does), for which there is no evidence, and which ultimately requires either a leap of faith or a dismissal with the old, "god is not to be understood by the mind of man) leads nowhere unless you are simply here for the redundancy of the disconnect atheists will continue to feel between nonsense and sensibility.
Oh dear. That was not an answer that is likely to be accepted up there, Stat.
Oh dear. That was not an answer that is likely to be accepted up there, Stat.
Trying to update my sig ...
