Stirred, NOT Shaken: Debate-ology


Hey peeps,

I’ve re-listened to a handful of helpful DEBATES in recent days. I’ve also heard a few new ones. So, I’m going to take this post and comment on several MUST listen interchanges between reforming Christians and Atheists. I guarantee you will be encouraged and edified by these academic dialogs, God’s truth sirred, but not shaken


Vs. Gordon Stein, this debate is incredible. Stein gets owned, and I really respect the guy. If you’ve never heard reformed theology in action, defended philosophically, or make short of the world’s intellectual strongholds, LISTEN NOW and get stoked!

Vs. Eddie Tabash, sadly, Eddie T doesn’t want to debate, have a rational interchange, or account for his arguments. This makes Bahnsen’s job more difficult but not impossible. If you follow the arguments, not just the emotive assertions, you’ll see the atheist worldview once more exposed as a faith-based inconsistency.

Vs. George Smith, this is a 1 hour long radio debate. The content is good, and GS is a respectable scholar. His book on Atheism is quite popular. Still, he cannot account for the questions/answers Bahnsen asks or gives. First principals exposed.

Vs. Himself, as mentioned, Michael Martin was supposed to be there, but flaked. The lecture, cross examination, and Q&A are priceless. In fact, B deals with the important of ‘universal negatives’ at the end, and no, there is not a transcendental Santa Claus.

Paul Manata: google it

Vs. Dan Barker, a great debate by a presupp cat who holds his own. The great thing about reformed argumentation is that it gets to the bottom of stuff quick, Barker was not ready to handle the arguments given him.

Vs. Dereke Sansone, ha, this one is entertaining.  A fun listen and yes, Manata wins.

James White:
Vs. Shabir Ally, on the subject of biblical reliability, this debate is powerful.

Vs. Bryan Lynch and Dan Barker (two separate debates), both decent, B-Lynch is a flailing fire ball, Barker is respectful, and both debates are from the radio. Lots of interesting calls, and although I agree with J-white, not sure he’s too strong against Atheists since his argumentation is always on the defensive.

Alvin Plantinga: google it

Vs. Himself, a great lecture on the ‘Evolutionary Arguement against Naturalism.’ Plantinga shows that rationality is defeated when both naturalism and Evo are assumed.

MORE TO COME, but this is a start.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s