RE: Matt Dillahunty v. Sye Ten Bruggencate
June 4, 2014 at 10:27 am
(This post was last modified: June 4, 2014 at 10:27 am by FreeTony.)
To save you 2 hours you won't get back:
Sye's argument was:
1. God exists and Sye could not possibly be wrong.
2. Matt says that Matt could possibly be wrong about things.
3. Therefore God exists and is the Christian God of the bible (but this part was hardly mentioned, just assumed)
The debate was mostly about point 2, with lots of stupid wordplay and trying to define the word "know".
The quote mining was a bit weird.
Sye's argument was:
1. God exists and Sye could not possibly be wrong.
2. Matt says that Matt could possibly be wrong about things.
3. Therefore God exists and is the Christian God of the bible (but this part was hardly mentioned, just assumed)
The debate was mostly about point 2, with lots of stupid wordplay and trying to define the word "know".
The quote mining was a bit weird.