Apologetics 3

The last section is the actual proofs and discussions. I'm not going to go over them because I don't have that much time, but while I was listening to the whole course I kept up a muttering commentary of objections, which says it all.

Among the logical fallacies on display were circular reasoning, strawman, argument from ignorance, false equivalence, nirvana fallacy, much special pleading and a large dollop of hypocrisy. (So often I thought 'now, if you just display the sense to turn that argument around on yourself and answer it… nope, you just avoid it.')

Listening to all this and the arguments presented, I wonder how many people actually tried them out in debate, rather than come up with arguments against the objections they thought were being given. I would also be interested if any of them actually sought out what apologists of other religions said. I'm fairly sure the Jews and Muslims might have some disagreements with what's said here, let alone Buddhists, Deists and Atheists. But I'm also fairly sure that that isn't likely to happen.

So I gave this a go, but it clearly didn’t meet my expectations of an actual challenge. Try again?

[END]