Go back
Bible Thumping Wingnut Program

Bible Thumping Wingnut Program

Spirituality

Clock
2 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

This YouTube program is new to me.
The Bible Thumping Wingnut Program

For a sample -

Matt Slick ( from Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry ) verses
Matt Dillahunty (from the Atheist Experience Show)

debate for maybe an hour.

The debate kind of starts around 4:34.


Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down
-1

Originally posted by sonship
This YouTube program is new to me.
[b]The Bible Thumping Wingnut Program

For a sample -

Matt Slick ( from Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry ) verses
Matt Dillahunty (from the Atheist Experience Show)

debate for maybe an hour.

The debate kind of starts around 4:34.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uaSO_xkigs[/b]
What is amazing is Slick prays for Dillweed some time I'm sure.

So does Mr. Dillweed send up negative thoughts for Mr. slick?

Thanks for sharing.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sonship
This YouTube program is new to me.
[b]The Bible Thumping Wingnut Program

For a sample -

Matt Slick ( from Christian Apologetics and Research Ministry ) verses
Matt Dillahunty (from the Atheist Experience Show)

debate for maybe an hour.

The debate kind of starts around 4:34.


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uaSO_xkigs[/b]
Matt with the beard is right about dichotomies, but boy, can they drag it out! Had to end the suffering after 10 minutes.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by sonship
debate for maybe an hour.
Anything of interest in it?

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by RBHILL
What is amazing is Slick prays for Dillweed some time I'm sure.

So does Mr. Dillweed send up negative thoughts for Mr. slick?

Thanks for sharing.
Dillahunty is very articulate. But he's no match for wolfgang59.

OK. Seriously now.

The debate is about the so called "Dillahunty Fallacy" whether is was a far criticism Matt Slick has been using for a couple of years now. So it is really a continuation of four or five year old debate between the two on Matt D's program "The Atheist Experience."

Matt D. is trying his best to make Matt Slick eat his words. The whole thing is based upon the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God, which Matt Slick is fond of.

I think Matt D. did get Matt Slick to possibly change the charge to "The Dillihunty Dodge". Matt Dillahunty calls it something like "The Not So Slick Fallacy" of Matt Slick. LOL.

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by twhitehead
Anything of interest in it?
Nope.

Matt Slick is as slippery a liar as they come.

It's only [maybe] of interest to those who watched the original debate and
were sitting on the fence as to how badly Matt Slick got his ass kicked.


EDIT: Basically imagine having an in person argument with a slipperier, more
devious, less honest version of RJHinds.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by googlefudge
Nope.

Matt Slick is as slippery a liar as they come.

It's only [maybe] of interest to those who watched the original debate and
were sitting on the fence as to how badly Matt Slick got his ass kicked.


EDIT: Basically imagine having an in person argument with a slipperier, more
devious, less honest version of RJHinds.
That is possible?

Clock
3 edits
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by googlefudge
Matt Slick is as slippery a liar as they come.


What was the lie ? Where in the video - (minutes: seconds) precisely is the lie told by Matt Slick ?

Should be easy for you to reference.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by googlefudge
Nope.

Matt Slick is as slippery a liar as they come.

It's only [maybe] of interest to those who watched the original debate and
were sitting on the fence as to how badly Matt Slick got his ass kicked.


EDIT: Basically imagine having an in person argument with a slipperier, more
devious, less honest version of RJHinds.
Some of us don't have to imagine.

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
1
Vote Down
-1

Originally posted by sonship
Matt Slick is as slippery a liar as they come.


What was the [b]lie ? Where in the video - (minutes: seconds) precisely is the lie told by Matt Slick ?

Should be easy for you to reference.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2uaSO_xkigs[/b]
His assertion is that anyone saying God exists is a liar, because God doesn't exist. Suddenly proof doesn't matter, and circular logic is okay.

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down

Originally posted by Suzianne
His assertion is that anyone saying God exists is a liar, because God [b]doesn't exist. Suddenly proof doesn't matter, and circular logic is okay.[/b]
No that's not even close to what I am saying.

Watch the original discussion, and the follow-up posted above and
decide for yourself if he's honest.


I watched the original debate between this guy and Matt D on TAE:

Atheist Experience #593: A Fallacy Model



Here is Matt Slick's version of TAG.

https://carm.org/transcendental-argument



And I have just re-watched the original debate.

Matt Dillahunty's version of events is correct.

[And Matt D's argument is logically sound and Matt Slick's is not.]

Clock
Vote Up
Vote Down
-2

Originally posted by googlefudge
No that's not even close to what I am saying.

Watch the original discussion, and the follow-up posted above and
decide for yourself if he's honest.


I watched the original debate between this guy and Matt D on TAE:

Atheist Experience #593: A Fallacy Model

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sKm57WKbxUU

Here is Matt Slick's version of TAG.
...[text shortened]... rrect.

[hidden] [And Matt D's argument is logically sound and Matt Slick's is not.] [/hidden]
Sigh.

More of this Logic nonsense.

And I mean Logic as a field of study and not adverbally.

It all amounts to mere mental masturbation. You and I will never see agreement on this question of the 'importance' of Logic. The Love of God is far more important and far more profoundly experienced than any of this Logic.

If only you had half as much belief in God as you do belief in Logic. And I'm not even talking about a love for God. Your head in is control, not your heart. That is one of man's biggest failings and one of Satan's biggest successes. You will never know God until you learn to feel from the heart.

Clock
Vote Up
1
Vote Down

Originally posted by Suzianne
Sigh.

More of this Logic nonsense.

And I mean Logic as a field of study and not adverbally.

It all amounts to mere mental masturbation. You and I will never see agreement on this question of the 'importance' of Logic. The Love of God is far more important and far more profoundly experienced than any of this Logic.

If only you had half as much ...[text shortened]... e of Satan's biggest successes. You will never know God until you learn to feel from the heart.
Wrong on every level.

I feel, I feel deeply, and for you to claim otherwise based on your complete
lack of knowledge about me is arrogant in the extreme.

TAG, the Transcendental Argument for God, is a stupid argument made up by
Christian Apologists who are trying to prove the existence of their god.

It is deeply logically flawed, and you point that out using logic.

Complaining that we do so is dumb.

If you don't like logical arguments for god, go tell the idiots who make this stuff up.


Logic is a tool, an invaluable one.

It's how you formulate sentences and arguments that make sense and actually mean
something.

Without logic you could not have a coherent discussion about anything.


And the abandonment of logic by you and people on 'your side' is why your posts/arguments
frequently make no sense or are just simply wrong.


Logic and reason with evidence is how we can look at a dispute and actually tell which, if
any, side is actually right.

It's how we make progress, learn things, solve problems, fight crime, free the innocent, and
make the world a better place.

In almost every sphere where the above is not happening you can at root find a failure to
be rational and logical and use the evidence.


And you believe in a religion, which promotes and relies on irrationality and a lack of logic
to survive.

Which is what above all else makes religion, yours included, dangerous.

Clock
Vote Up
3
Vote Down
-1

Originally posted by Suzianne
It all amounts to mere mental masturbation. You and I will never see agreement on this question of the 'importance' of Logic. The Love of God is far more important and far more profoundly experienced than any of this Logic.
Just admit it. Googlefudge was pointing out that one of your fellow theists was lying and you can't stand it. If logic is so unimportant to you, why did you even bother commenting on a thread about logic?

Clock
1 edit
Vote Up
Vote Down
-1

Originally posted by Suzianne
Sigh.

More of this Logic nonsense.

And I mean Logic as a field of study and not adverbally.

It all amounts to mere mental masturbation. You and I will never see agreement on this question of the 'importance' of Logic. The Love of God is far more important and far more profoundly experienced than any of this Logic.

If only you had half as much ...[text shortened]... e of Satan's biggest successes. You will never know God until you learn to feel from the heart.
Suzianne, I at least understand what you are saying. You can converse with me about your point if you wish.

You'll notice that the atheist Matt Dillahunty so jury rigged the discussion as to assure himself that God CANNOT enter into any explanation.

Matt Dillahunty states that "God has no explanatory power". So if he jury rigs the whole debate that, up front, "God has no explanatory power" you can see that he intends to win the point of atheism before anything else can even be said.

But on subjective experience of God, I do understand your point, that you are not likely to "argue" anyone into the subjective encounter with God.

Some apologist might not agree completely.

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.