(January 24, 2016 at 12:24 pm)Esquilax Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 10:14 am)athrock Wrote: He's far better than most here want to give him credit for, and I suspect the vitriol directed at him is the direct result of their unspoken recognition of his knowledge and skill as a Christian apologist.

So is this just what you're reduced to now? Just empowering yourself to dictate to others what their positions are so that we all secretly agree with you? That's the low you've sunk to?

I didn't start the thread. Just offering my opinion and making observations.

Quote:I can debunk any single WLC argument you happen to like. Frankly, I'm kind of quizzical that this is the guy you're holding up, the one whose belief just rests on a presupposition ("Inner witness of the holy spirit"    ) that he's right. That's a skilled apologist, to you? Sye Ten Bruggencate if he wasn't a hobgoblin?  

Of course you can, ExLax. That's why you're a tenured professor of philosophy, an author of so many books and peer-reviewed papers, and traveling the world speaking on and debating about these subjects. And, of course, that's why WLC has refused to debate you...turned down all the challenges you've issued to him. Clearly, he knows you would expose him, and he's scared.

Cause you're JUST. THAT. GOOD.




Seriously...can you take LeBron one on one, too?

(January 24, 2016 at 10:14 am)athrock Wrote: He's far better than most here want to give him credit for, and I suspect the vitriol directed at him is the direct result of their unspoken recognition of his knowledge and skill as a Christian apologist.

No he isn't, it's fallacy after fallacy and constant obfuscation.

@ athrock

Oh fuck no please don't turn into Drich: That last post of yours was a nightmare of irrationality. You should be laughing at yourself.

I think he's brainwashed and has cognitive dissonance, so I choose the second option.

I think he's a fraud. He's smart enough to know he's full of shit and making fallacies. He does it on purpose to fool people not smart enough to realize how fallacious he is.

(January 24, 2016 at 1:41 pm)dyresand Wrote: Let's be honest here WLC doesn't win any arguments at all.
When he is questioned on one of his arguments he uses his tactics of asking several other fallacious questions
to the person he debating. That is what he does to make himself look like he wins a debate. The thing is
you can answer 1 question when he asks several he is only prolonging the debate.

Moreover, to this brand of apologist the fact that you only answered one or two question of the dozens they ask means that you didn't answer them all, thus they can conclude that you failed to answer their questions.

He actually seems smart in some regards, but his arguments are dumb.

Hey, I can at least give him props for trying to logically argue for his faith, even if his arguments are flawed, he's still better than 90% of other religious peoples who will just assert their belief as accurate with no logic required.

On the topic of change, I think he would avidly profess his willingness to change beliefs if they are untrue, but in actuality isn't willing to change though he'd never admit it.

(January 24, 2016 at 3:30 pm)Heat Wrote: He actually seems smart in some regards, but his arguments are dumb.

Exactly. He knows they're dumb and he hopes others get fooled by this.

(January 24, 2016 at 3:31 pm)Evie Wrote:

(January 24, 2016 at 3:30 pm)Heat Wrote: He actually seems smart in some regards, but his arguments are dumb.

Exactly. He knows they're dumb and he hopes others get fooled by this.

I don't think he's intentionally deluding his followers, otherwise he's much smarter than I thought.

If you see the debate between him and Sam Harris, I think you can tell he's smart, it's like he deliberately misrepresents SH.