When I watched the first video, where you only hear the guy's voice and you don't get to see his face, I thought he was a nigra. I got quite a shock when I watched the second video. I don't know why he insists on speaking ebonics. Perhaps that's his target audience. He seems a bit full of himself, too.
Personally, I prefer a presuppositional apologetic. That is to say, whenever I encounter an "atheist," I simply point him to Rom 1:18-32 and tell him that he's not really an atheist; deep down he believes in God and knows the Bible is true. It's much easier. But I suppose if you encounter an atheist who stubbornly refuses to acknowledge the existence of God, this argument could be useful in exposing the weakness of his position.
Elliot proposes that the atheist is left with only two options as to the origin of the universe:
STE: Space and time are eternal.
SCPNCEU: Something can come from "pure" nothingness and then create entire universes.
Both of which are, of course, absurd. I can't think of any more options that are open to the atheist. It may prove to be a useful argument for Christians.
Mt 21:42, 44Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes . . . ? And whosoever shall fall on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind him to powder.
Comment