Atheism

[RoadRunner79]

When is enough evidence enough?
J. Warner Wallace

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVWrZfcPAc&autoplay=1

[Succubus]

When is enough evidence enough?
J. Warner Wallace

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVWrZfcPAc&autoplay=1

This is why I didn't bother to click that link.

James "Jim" Warner Wallace is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California.

AKA; liar for Jeebus.

[RoadRunner79]

When is enough evidence enough?
J. Warner Wallace

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVWrZfcPAc&autoplay=1

This is why I didn't bother to click that link.

James "Jim" Warner Wallace is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California.

AKA; liar for Jeebus.

Translation: la la la la.... I can’t hear you in my echo chamber.

If you don’t want to be reasonable, or listen to others views, that’s one thing. But attacking someone’s character for no reason only weakens your position.

[Crossless2.0]

When is enough evidence enough?
J. Warner Wallace

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVWrZfcPAc&autoplay=1

This is why I didn't bother to click that link.

James "Jim" Warner Wallace is an American homicide detective and Christian apologist. Wallace is a Senior Fellow at the Colson Center for Christian Worldview and an Adjunct Professor of Apologetics at Biola University in La Mirada, California.

AKA; liar for Jeebus.

I watched it. You didn't miss anything. He makes a distinction between 'reasonable doubt' and 'possible doubt' as it pertains to court cases and then just asserts that doubts about the Gospel claims fall into the latter category, not the former, when one really understands. 

It's like listening to SteveII, without the Alvin Plantinga crib sheet.

[Succubus]

This is why I didn't bother to click that link.


AKA; liar for Jeebus.

Translation:  la la la la.... I can’t hear you in my echo chamber.

If you don’t want to be reasonable, or listen to others views, that’s one thing. But attacking someone’s character for no reason only weakens your position.

I've been listening to your views for sixty fucking years!

And in all those years I've nothing new. Nothing!*

*Edit. Crossless just made that point for me.

[I_am_not_mafia]

I watched it. You didn't miss anything. He makes a distinction between 'reasonable doubt' and 'possible doubt' as it pertains to court cases and then just asserts that doubts about the Gospel claims fall into the latter category, not the former, when one really understands. 

It's like listening to SteveII, without the Alvin Plantinga crib sheet.

He died of boredom so we didn't have to. Well done!

[Crossless2.0]

I watched it. You didn't miss anything. He makes a distinction between 'reasonable doubt' and 'possible doubt' as it pertains to court cases and then just asserts that doubts about the Gospel claims fall into the latter category, not the former, when one really understands. 

It's like listening to SteveII, without the Alvin Plantinga crib sheet.

He died of boredom so we didn't have to. Well done!

. . . because I love you all so much!

[RoadRunner79]

When is enough evidence enough?
J. Warner Wallace

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVWrZfcPAc&autoplay=1

Just a note: this is a short video; one of the one minute apologist videos. Certainly not extensive, and doesn’t make the case for the Christian history. But does fit into the discussion on evidence. Which is why I posted it.

J. Wallace is a retired cold case detective, formally aggressive atheist who became a Christian because of the evidence.

[Simon Moon]

When is enough evidence enough?
J. Warner Wallace

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=1aVWrZfcPAc&autoplay=1

Just a note: this is a short video; one of the one minute apologist videos. Certainly not extensive, and doesn’t make the case for the Christian history. But does fit into the discussion on evidence.  Which is why I posted it.

J. Wallace is a retired cold case detective, formally aggressive atheist who became a Christian because of the evidence.

I read Cold-Case Christianity a few years ago. Wallace is guilty of most of the same fallacious reasoning as any other apologist.

His being a detective adds nothing to his case.


If you want to hear a point by point demolishment of his book, watch this series -






Let me add, that this book does not even hold up to the 'quality' of books by McDowell, Craig, and Strobel. Which are also loaded with fallacious arguments.

[RoadRunner79]

Just a note: this is a short video; one of the one minute apologist videos. Certainly not extensive, and doesn’t make the case for the Christian history. But does fit into the discussion on evidence.  Which is why I posted it.

J. Wallace is a retired cold case detective, formally aggressive atheist who became a Christian because of the evidence.

I read Cold-Case Christianity a few years ago. Wallace is guilty of most of the same fallacious reasoning as any other apologist.

His being a detective adds nothing to his case.


If you want to hear a point by point demolishment of his book, watch this series -






Let me add, that this book does not even hold up to the 'quality' of books by McDowell, Craig, and Strobel. Which are also loaded with fallacious arguments.

I don't know if I will have time to watch.... Perhaps I should I just stop when he says he's an atheist as well as  call him an idiot and a liar?

If you have an issue, with something that I bring up, then feel free to chime in.