Irenaeus, Siteadmin, Check users, oversight, Administrators
351,830
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 95:
Line 95: − − == Dr. Michael Martin backing out of his scheduled debate with Dr. Greg Bahnsen == − − See also: [[Greg Bahnsen and debate]] − − [[Image:Bahnsen.jpg|thumb|150px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man atheists fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s cancellation of their scheduled debate.<ref>[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>]] − In 1985, [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] and prominent proponent of [[atheism]] Gordon Stein had a debate at the University of California, Irvine regarding the positions of atheism and theism. John Frame wrote regarding the debate in which Dr. Bahnsen used the [[transcendental argument for the existence of God]] that "In the end, Stein walked and talked like a broken man."<ref>http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm</ref> The Greg Bahnsen-Gordon Stein debate was recorded and transcribed and was dubbed "The Great Debate".<ref>http://www.bellevuechristian.org/faculty/dribera/htdocs/PDFs/Apol_Bahnsen_Stein_Debate_Transcript.pdf</ref> See also: [[Greg Bahnsen and debate]] − − ===Greg Bahnsen and Michael Martin=== − − '''See also:''' [[Greg Bahnsen and debate]] and [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|Bahnson-Martin debate press release]] − − Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the "man atheists fear most".<ref>http://mywebpages.comcast.net/webpages54/ap/biobahn.html</ref> − This is because [[Harvard]]-educated [[Michael Martin|Dr. Michael Martin]] was scheduled to debate Bahnsen in 1994 but pulled out of the debate at the "eleventh hour" according to a press release at the time.<ref>[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref><ref>[http://trueforms.wordpress.com/2013/07/22/greg-bahnsen-vs-michael-martin-opening-remarks/ Greg Bahnsen vs. Michael Martin: The Debate That Never Was (1/2)]</ref> − [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|The press release at the time]] said that Dr. Martin offered ruses on why he pulled out and didn't want the scheduled debate recorded but the real reason was that "...Michael Martin is afraid that he will be publicly humiliated just as his friend and fellow atheist, Dr. Gordon Stein, was...". − − Martin later released his [[transcendental argument for the non-existence of God]] (TANG) in 1996 which was rebutted by Christian apologists.<ref>http://www.reformed.org/apologetics/index.html?mainframe=/apologetics/martin_TAG.html</ref> − − Martin released his TANG argument after Bahnsen died. − − For more information please see: − − *[[Greg Bahnsen and debate]] − − *[[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|Bahnson-Martin debate press release]]
Atheism and cowardice (view source)
Revision as of 03:14, October 12, 2014
, 03:14, October 12, 2014→Dr. Michael Martin backing out of his scheduled debate with Dr. Greg Bahnsen
On August 28, 2011, Vox Day declared concerning Myers:
On August 28, 2011, Vox Day declared concerning Myers:
{{cquote|What you clearly do not understand is that, [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/05/we_arent_angry_were_effective.php by his own admission], PZ relies heavily upon emotional arguments rather than logical ones when he cannot simply appeal to an established scientific consensus. "I'll also cop to the obvious fact that, knowing that reason will not get through their skills, I'm happy to use emotional arguments as well. Passion is persuasive." His tendency to rely upon emotional rhetoric and passion rather than reason is precisely why he is afraid to debate people who rely primarily upon logic, because his ability to present reason-based arguments is relatively low. His ability to utilize reason is simply not equal to the skill of others who make use of it more effectively. PZ is without question an effective preacher to the godless choir of science fetishists, but he is remarkably unskilled at presenting convincing arguments, let alone conclusive ones, to those who do not already agree with him. Unlike you, he knows he is not an effective evangelist.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/08/can-one-dodge-dodger.html Can one dodge a dodger?]</ref>}}
{{cquote|What you clearly do not understand is that, [http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2011/05/we_arent_angry_were_effective.php by his own admission], PZ relies heavily upon emotional arguments rather than logical ones when he cannot simply appeal to an established scientific consensus. "I'll also cop to the obvious fact that, knowing that reason will not get through their skills, I'm happy to use emotional arguments as well. Passion is persuasive." His tendency to rely upon emotional rhetoric and passion rather than reason is precisely why he is afraid to debate people who rely primarily upon logic, because his ability to present reason-based arguments is relatively low. His ability to utilize reason is simply not equal to the skill of others who make use of it more effectively. PZ is without question an effective preacher to the godless choir of science fetishists, but he is remarkably unskilled at presenting convincing arguments, let alone conclusive ones, to those who do not already agree with him. Unlike you, he knows he is not an effective evangelist.<ref>[http://voxday.blogspot.com/2011/08/can-one-dodge-dodger.html Can one dodge a dodger?]</ref>}}
== Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates ==
== Creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates ==