RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
September 7, 2011 at 11:49 am
(This post was last modified: September 7, 2011 at 11:52 am by DeistPaladin.)
(September 7, 2011 at 11:27 am)Captain Scarlet Wrote: From your understanding is there some reason why a different or all religion/s cannot adopt this approach and thus demonstrate that all gods must exist and are responsible for logic etc? What's unique about the xtian trinity?
That is, in fact, a counter argument often put forward. Christian apologists dismiss that by discussing all the flaws with the other religion's source of revelation. Christians can pick apart problems with Islam, Hinduism, etc as well as any atheist. They just can't see the problems with their own.
In fairness, what Christianity does claim that sets it apart from some of the other major religions is that their god allegedly walked the earth with "multiple attestations" and "reliable eye-witness accounts" being included in their holy scriptures. Proving that their god did walk the earth or that their "reliable eye witnesses accounts" are either reliable or from eye-witnesses is another matter but they seem to take it as a given.
Atheist Forums Hall of Shame:
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
"The trinity can be equated to having your cake and eating it too."
... -Lucent, trying to defend the Trinity concept
"(Yahweh's) actions are good because (Yahweh) is the ultimate standard of goodness. That’s not begging the question"
... -Statler Waldorf, Christian apologist
