I agree with what CD said about the proposal for a subforum. I think doing this would be off-putting for many Christians and theists who come here.
Also, I think most of you already know that we theists won't be able to come up with any "new" arguments. Telling them "We've heard it all" or "Bring something new to the table" won't really make any difference because it's still going to be the same arguments over and over again whether there is a Canned Apologetic Arguments subforum or not.
DP himself explained the reason for that very concisely in a different post:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-13805-po...#pid311153
Also, I think most of you already know that we theists won't be able to come up with any "new" arguments. Telling them "We've heard it all" or "Bring something new to the table" won't really make any difference because it's still going to be the same arguments over and over again whether there is a Canned Apologetic Arguments subforum or not.
DP himself explained the reason for that very concisely in a different post:
http://atheistforums.org/thread-13805-po...#pid311153
(July 16, 2012 at 8:17 pm)DeistPaladin Wrote: In science, there is always new information to consider. In history, there are some old ruins or parchments discovered that sheds light on what wasn't known before. There are always new developments in art. Philosophy also updates itself according to new information.
What would be the basis for a new theological argument? There is no new information that can be uncovered. There are no new tests that can be run. Theology can admit no changes to itself. All existing arguments have already been thought through as the established Church spared no expense, employing the greatest minds it could, for two thousand years.
Pity the apologist. They can't come up with anything new. It's all been bullshitted before.
