RE: Van Tillian/Clarkian Presuppositional Apologetics.
October 27, 2011 at 8:41 pm
(This post was last modified: October 27, 2011 at 9:15 pm by DeistPaladin.)
OK, that was weird. My last post ended up blank with all the content deleted. Let's see if this one goes through.
Quote:Demonstrate how.You claimed that because I couldn't disprove your assertion that the assertion must be true. That's appeal to ignorance.
Quote:Assertion, back it up.You didn't back up your claim. I've already explained how you failed ad neuseum.
Quote:That’s not enough, just because it works for you does not justify your apparent belief that others should also adhere to it.I never said others should. You certainly don't.
Quote:Then I don’t have to give account for knowing God exists, fair is fair.Never said you did. Keep your beliefs the hell out of my life and out of the government and we'll get along just fine.
Quote:Nice try, calling an attempt at a bad analogy parody only after you realized the analogy would fail horribly is pretty lame.What are you talking about?
Quote:Please point to the exact post and passage where this was done rather than making a baseless assertion it was done. Thanks.Re read this thread for yourself.
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
