Advocates of the presuppositional approach to Christian Apologetics have long hailed the debate between Greg Bahnsen (the late Christian theologian and apologist, noted for his achievements in presuppositional apologetics and development of theonomy–a view of the Law for Christians, pictured left) and Gordon Stein (the late secularist noted for his links to Free Inquiry among other things, pictured below, right) as a stirring triumph of presuppositional apologetics over atheism in a point-by-point debate. Recently, I listened to the debate and thought I would share my impressions here.
Bahnsen Opening Statement
From the outset, it was clear this debate was going to be different from others I’d listened to or watched. Bahnsen outlined what he means by “God,” outlined a few general points about subjectivism, and then quickly dove into a presuppositional type of argument. He began with an attack on the idea that all existential questions can be answered…
View original post 2,210 more words
None need that absurd relationship with God!
Feser sure has that idiotic theology! He prefers teleology instead of what the pre-Socratics and modern science tell us pellucidly- no divine intent acts in or behind the Cosmos and thus no God for us! And per Reichenbach’s argument from Existence, it is all and thus no transcendent God can be and transcendence contradicts omnipresences, so He couldn’t God and again He cannot exist. Yes, theology is stupid to be blunt!
That’s theological babble. Prof. Irwin Corey makes more sense!
I agree with Flincke. Please subscribe to that worthy blog!