/christian/ - Christian Discussion and Fellowship

>>720660

That was pretty annoying that I had to check your filename to even figure out who you were talking about… Incase no one else catches the file name just to make this thread easier some internet personality named AntiCitizenX and no I dont know anything about him and I doubt he wrecks all apologetics cause theres like 1000 different apologetics arguments and even differing opinions on genesis within the apologetics community.

dumb ecelebposter

I haven't watch AntiCitizenX videos, but undoubtedly his "arguments" is based on unwarranted presuppositions that would fail in an actual debate.

>>720660

I honestly don't want to go and watch all of his videos because I have better things to do with my time so if you can summarize his arguments I could try to address them

His NT video is bad and doesnt really interact with any NT Scholarship. Like watch it, when does any Jesus origin scholar or NT Scholarship like Blomberg or Hutardo gets brought up? This is someone who tauts his videos as being reviewed by philosophers mind you.

Most of his errors apart from that is to me due to a faulty set of starting points that he has to begin with which focuses on empiricalism. This is why in one video where he addresses InspiringPhilosophy, he asks "show me one plus one is two". That is literally I kid you not how his refutation goes. So clearly his objections are due to his presuppositions that underlie and guides his argumentation

get last superstition by ed feser

I hope no serious person would go through the effort of refuting some youtube eceleb atheist

>>720660

He's a retard. I watched his "nothing exists necessarily" video and it's complete tripe. He doesn't even properly understand the ontological argument and uses the old atheist "You can't define God into existence!" argument, nevermind the fact that Kurt Godel, one of the greatest logicians who ever lived created his own version of the ontological argument.