A blog where I discuss intelligent issues and discuss rationality, logic, evidence and my non belief in sky daddies.
The problem is not that Lennox was equivocating, but rather that he was showing that when faith is used in the manner that Dawkins used it, it is not the manner that Christianity uses it.In other words, Christianity is not saying that faith is used when there is no evidence. Christianity is using the term faith to include faithfulness founded from evidence.
Hi MWM,That's hilarious!!For those who might have missed it..www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Dhorpatan2. Dhorpatan An atheist youtuber, named after an anti-depresent drug, who makes very bad arguments against God's existence, makes up terms, and was never taught about logical fallacies as a child. He often uses terms that he completely made up such as "the primacy of consciousness" or "the proper epistemology of the law of causation." These terms generally have no meaning attached to them at all, but at least they convince his loyal group of 9 year old atheists that he's smart. His most well known argument is the argument from Pepsi. Most atheists prefer to believe that he is just a Christian imposter. However, it is generally agreed by scholars of the youtube community that he is one of the best forms of entertainment currently legal in the Western world.Dhorpatan: "Some theists say Pepsi is better than Coke. Pepsi is not better than Coke. If theists are wrong about simple things like this, then they must be wrong about more important things. Therefore, there is no God."People with common sense: "Couldn't you use that same argument against any position?"His 9 year old cult: "Your real problem is that you need to prove that Coke is better than Pepsi."Pepsi argument looks suspiciously like a google earth argument or a pizza tree argument. wow.johnny
Post a Comment