R
Reformed Apologist
Guest
Christians are called to defend the faith (Jude 3, 1 Pet. 3:15) and this is a special job of overseers (Titus 1:9) that many Christians are failing at today.
Any atheists/agnostics who would like to debate the existence of the Christian God are free to e-mail me.
I will also debate other topics within Christianity:
Calvinism (I am pro)
Eschatology (I am partial preterist)
etc.
E-Mail:
[email protected]
In answer to questions that were asked:
(1) I am a Young Earth Creationist
(2) I am a Calvinist
(3) A preterist is someone who believes that the majority of the book of Revelation and Matthew 24 has already been fulfilled in 70AD.
(4) I am going to be debating from a Christian worldview... how would you expect me to defend Christianity on a worldview that isn't Christian? Therefore, I will use the Bible in debate. I have already demonstrated that all worldviews (even atheist worldviews) rely upon an ultimate starting point (c.f. my answer to "Faith or Knowledge?" question). We can debate this topic itself if you want.
(5) Yes, Christians can debate with me to if you disagree with me.
(6) In answer to "why am I not using a yahoo e-mail account" - Because (1) I don't use the yahoo account anymore and (2) even if I did use the yahoo e-mail account I wanted an e-mail address that was *specifically* for debate and not for friends and family to chit-chat with.
(7) In response to: "One can debate against Calvinism, but not by using the Bible." I am willing to debate the merits of the Calvinist view on purely philosophical terms. Anyone who wants to argue in favor of Libertarian free-will or bring up some other philosophical objection against Calvinism is free to e-mail me as well.
Atheists who come on here and mock Christianity by assertion and refuse to take up my debate offer fall under the "coward" category in my book.
Jesus Shakes: I've never seen so many fallacies in such a short response. Your first paragraph alone contains (1) a hermeneutical mistake, (2) a theological mistake, (3) a hasty generalization, and (4) a category mistake.
Your second and third paragraphs are even worse than the first. You confuse the category of human with the category of earth, for example. You also manage to commit factual mistakes in addition to the others: it was Noah that cursed Canaan, not God, Sarah was Abraham's half sister, Lot was raped by his daughters while he was drunk etc....
Then you manage to take things out of context: the biblical concept of men being righteous pertains to faith in God (Heb. 11), when Rom. talks about none being just it is in the context of their own righteousness by works.
Then you go back to more factual mistakes: God never blessed polygamy though he did bless people that were polygamous. He blesses sinners inspite of their sin. It's called grace.
Continuation of response to Jesus Shakes:
You then seem to think there is something wrong with material blessings (strange) but not before putting an arbitrary definition on "inbreeding"...
Your last paragraph is just more ad hominem and you seem to think that this somehow disproves the Bible... All you are doing is telling people that read this that you don't like the God of the Bible... congratulations. I don't like president Bush. Therefore, president Bush doesn't exist and is full of crap.
I suggest you save yourself future embarrassment and delete your response before more people read it. I certainly hope that any atheist who takes up my challenge has something more substantial to offer.
Any atheists/agnostics who would like to debate the existence of the Christian God are free to e-mail me.
I will also debate other topics within Christianity:
Calvinism (I am pro)
Eschatology (I am partial preterist)
etc.
E-Mail:
[email protected]
In answer to questions that were asked:
(1) I am a Young Earth Creationist
(2) I am a Calvinist
(3) A preterist is someone who believes that the majority of the book of Revelation and Matthew 24 has already been fulfilled in 70AD.
(4) I am going to be debating from a Christian worldview... how would you expect me to defend Christianity on a worldview that isn't Christian? Therefore, I will use the Bible in debate. I have already demonstrated that all worldviews (even atheist worldviews) rely upon an ultimate starting point (c.f. my answer to "Faith or Knowledge?" question). We can debate this topic itself if you want.
(5) Yes, Christians can debate with me to if you disagree with me.
(6) In answer to "why am I not using a yahoo e-mail account" - Because (1) I don't use the yahoo account anymore and (2) even if I did use the yahoo e-mail account I wanted an e-mail address that was *specifically* for debate and not for friends and family to chit-chat with.
(7) In response to: "One can debate against Calvinism, but not by using the Bible." I am willing to debate the merits of the Calvinist view on purely philosophical terms. Anyone who wants to argue in favor of Libertarian free-will or bring up some other philosophical objection against Calvinism is free to e-mail me as well.
Atheists who come on here and mock Christianity by assertion and refuse to take up my debate offer fall under the "coward" category in my book.
Jesus Shakes: I've never seen so many fallacies in such a short response. Your first paragraph alone contains (1) a hermeneutical mistake, (2) a theological mistake, (3) a hasty generalization, and (4) a category mistake.
Your second and third paragraphs are even worse than the first. You confuse the category of human with the category of earth, for example. You also manage to commit factual mistakes in addition to the others: it was Noah that cursed Canaan, not God, Sarah was Abraham's half sister, Lot was raped by his daughters while he was drunk etc....
Then you manage to take things out of context: the biblical concept of men being righteous pertains to faith in God (Heb. 11), when Rom. talks about none being just it is in the context of their own righteousness by works.
Then you go back to more factual mistakes: God never blessed polygamy though he did bless people that were polygamous. He blesses sinners inspite of their sin. It's called grace.
Continuation of response to Jesus Shakes:
You then seem to think there is something wrong with material blessings (strange) but not before putting an arbitrary definition on "inbreeding"...
Your last paragraph is just more ad hominem and you seem to think that this somehow disproves the Bible... All you are doing is telling people that read this that you don't like the God of the Bible... congratulations. I don't like president Bush. Therefore, president Bush doesn't exist and is full of crap.
I suggest you save yourself future embarrassment and delete your response before more people read it. I certainly hope that any atheist who takes up my challenge has something more substantial to offer.