Monday, July 12, 2010

Apologist Interview: Matt Slick of Carm.org

Today's interview is with internet apologist Matt Slick of CARM.org. He talks about doing apologetics on the internet, specific challenges online, encouragement for bloggers, apologetic methodology, presuppositions and evidences, the transcendental argument for God's existence (TAG), cosmological arguments, advice for future apologists, and more. Check out Carm's podcast here.

Full Interview MP3 Audio here (43 min)

Enjoy.

Check out Matt's debate with Eddie Tabash here.

15 comments :

Davitor said...

I want to personally thank Mark Slick and his website for he has made thousands of Christians aware of how different their beliefs are and how easily they can condemn each other based on literal interpretations of the bible.
He is also very upfront with his Jesus only died for the elect and his constant condemnation of the Catholic Church. Interesting to see Christian debate these topics to the point of breaking up the very fabric of their belief in the bible.

Scott said...

Who's Mark Slick? I take it he's not a Christian apologist like Matt...

Hey Brian, when are you gonna interview that little known anti-theist William Lane Haig? ;-)

Davitor said...

I meant Matt Slick. Thank for the correction.

Russell said...

Davitor,

You posted the below on another post earlier today...

"the more you are attached to a verbal or mental judgment to things, to people, to situations, the more suffering and dead you become to the miracle of life that is continuously unfolding around you in the present moment."

You're comments on this post seem to contain, at least in a sarcastic manner, judgments. Doesn't this contradict your view that we should not make judgments on others?

Paul said...

Davitor,

"Interesting to see Christian debate these topics to the point of breaking up the very fabric of their belief in the bible."

Sigh...not likely. We will continue to say "Jesus is Lord and savour" despite our differences. Even in my own Church I disagree with many believers on secondary things, but we all hold to the Bible and the truth of the physical resurrection of Jesus and are unified by these primary beliefs.

You keep making these assertions and when you get called out you jump to the next blog post and start over. Remember, your world view does not allow you to make any judgements, it also fails to give you a bases for criticising others. This has been pointed out to you many times before.

Davitor said...

Paul for me to make a judgment would mean that I want it to stop. On the contrary I want it to continue on forever and that’s why I thank you and Matt Slick and all those who hold on to belief system for they continue the saga to fight evil. For it would have been like me wanting to stop Judas act of betrayal. What good can come from that?
I tell these things for those who have ears let them hear.

Davitor said...

Paul for me to make a judgment would mean that I want it to stop. On the contrary I want it to continue on forever and that’s why I thank you and Matt Slick and all those who hold on to belief system for they continue the saga to fight evil. For it would have been like me wanting to stop Judas act of betrayal. What good can come from that?
I tell these things for those who have ears let them hear.

Paul said...

I'm confused, Davitor. You say you are a pantheist but yet you continue to talk in terms of good and evil. Now your saying Christian beliefs are good?

Davitor said...

It has been said that the greatest evil in our history has been carried out by people with good intentions. So call it good call it evil who care for in the end consciousness sees all interaction between good and evil, light and darkness, backward and forward, and it needs neither for recognition.

Paul said...

Ok. I can ignore your first sentence because it is contradicted by your second.

God doesn't need us to recognise good and evil, he wants us too. You seem to be under the impression that God needs us, but this is incorrect.

Davitor said...

Paul if you can prove love exist without creation or a subject then your reasoning is valid.

bossmanham said...

Paul if you can prove love exist without creation or a subject then your reasoning is valid.

How would you even prove love exists with creation? What criteria are you looking at to "prove" something?

Paul said...

Davitor,

God is Trinity, therefore God is in a relationship and therefore God is love. Love exists without creation or subject.

Obviously there is a whole lot more that can be said about the Trinity, but if true then love does exist without creation.

Your question is inconsistent with your worldview again. Why should I prove anything? You are presupposing once again a moral code that says truth, and proving ideas correct are "good".

Davitor said...

Can you love without a subject?

Paul said...

Can I? No.

Post a Comment

Thanks for taking the time to comment. By posting your comment you are agreeing to the comment policy.

Blog Archive

Amz