TheoreticalBullshit vs Matt Slick (Part 3)

Part 3 of 6

Category:

Nonprofits & Activism

Tags:

• TheoreticalBullshit
• Matt
• Slick
• TAG
• Transcendental
• Argument
• atheist
• atheism
• agnostic
• christian
• christianity
• Dillahunty
• The
• Atheist
• Experience
• debate
• Philosophy
• logic
• science

[DickJohnson3434]

I know, he fully admits that the thing would exist as itself whether or not there was a mind at all, then he goes on to say later that since the logical absolute statements (which TBS clearly demonstrated are merely descriptions of the consistency of existence, which Matt admitted would hold even without any minds), can't be based on human minds, simply because they are absolute.

Matt is either really stupid, or deliberately dishonest. I assume the latter.

[InLucidReverie]

Matt should get into politics with his dodging all of these defeating points that TheoreticalBS brings up.

[mellestad]

I bet if Slick repeats himself in a condescending tone another ten or twenty times, he'll win!

[IzzyBunneh]

matt's very rude and insulting when comapred to TBS, for example asking a question of TBS and then proclaiming that "the atheist(TBS) cannot answer this!" how about you give him a chance, you dense douchebag

[IzzyBunneh]

@DickJohnson3434

i agree completely, matt's reasonably articulate, and seems to have at least a fleeting understanding of the basic principles involved, i'd suggest another possibility though, he's brain washed, he won't allow himself to draw correlation between different concessions he's made, because they debunk his arguments, and i don't think he's necessarily aware of that either

also, props to TBS for staying civil, anyone else would of gone nutts from having to repeat themselves

[RafaelEnvoy]

In summary:

"The atheist world view cannot rationally account for logic."

Oh, and by the way, I arbitrarily define rationality in such a way to be a universe where God exists.

/Facepalm

[RPFS2008]

Just like Kalam et al, Slick's argument is persuasive only to the lazy or uncritical mind.

[MasterDebator809]

@DickJohnson3434 No, its for sure the former.

[ArcaneLogic]

The comments from atheists (the ones I can read) on this video are pathetic, immature, aggressive, and just plain stupid. Anyone taking part in this kind of thing as a spectator needs to show up, shut up, and pay attention to the arguments being made. Let the viewers of the argument decide for themselves what their opinion is. If you already know your position, why even watch? Show some respect (at least while the debate is still going on).

[DickJohnson3434]

Matt's saying you need an absolute mind to account for absolute logic, even though he admits that the absoluteness of logic is entirely based on the consistency of nature, which even our limited minds can codify.

TBS repeated many times that it is the consistency of nature that is without explanation, and when Matt says God accounts for it and TBS asks how?

Matt says, by God's consistent nature.

LOL ! What a joke!