Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Greg Hodgins v. Robert Baty - Presuppositionalism!

Expand Messages
  • rlbaty50
    ... Greg Hodgins v. Robert Baty Subject: Presuppositionalism
    Message 1 of 2 , May 19, 2013
    • 0 Attachment
      ---

      Greg Hodgins
      v.
      Robert Baty
      Subject: Presuppositionalism

      http://www.blogtalkradio.com/cross-encounters/2013/05/20/cross-encounters--special-guest-todd-friel (venue)

      https://www.facebook.com/greg.c.hodgins (Greg)

      (1)

      From: Greg Hodgins
      Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
      Time: About 7:20 PM MT

      What is your problem with
      presuppositional apologetics?

      If you already answered this,
      could you share the link?

      (2)

      From: Robert Baty
      Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
      Time: About 7:22 PM MT

      Greg,

      Here's the link if you are
      interested in taking up Sye's
      "proof of God" claim, explaining
      why you believe it to be true and
      why others should believe it to
      be true; and get my response
      thereto (either accepting your
      "justification" or offering a
      rebuttal).

      (3)

      From: Robert Baty
      Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
      Time: About 7:30 PM MT

      Oops!

      Forgot the link. Here it is:

      https://www.facebook.com/BruggencatevBaty


      -----------------------------
      -----------------------------
    • rlbaty50
      Greg accepted my invitation and made his appearance at my place. Here s how that conversation proceeded; it s currently on hold awaiting Greg s next
      Message 2 of 2 , May 20, 2013
      • 0 Attachment
        Greg accepted my invitation and made his appearance at my place. Here's how that conversation proceeded; it's currently on hold awaiting Greg's next appearance.

        Greg Hodgins
        v.
        Robert Baty
        Subject: Presuppositionalism

        https://www.facebook.com/BruggencatevBaty (venue)

        https://www.facebook.com/greg.c.hodgins (Greg)

        (4)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:00 PM MT

        I really havnt studied it.
        I was wondering your problems
        with it.

        (5)

        From: Robert Baty
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:15 PM MT

        Greg,

        Thanks for making your appearance here.

        Sye has claimed a "proof of God" which
        I don't think is a "proof of God".

        I think he's guilty of false advertising
        on that point.

        To date, the best I can come up with is
        that he simply "presupposes" that

        - "the proof of God is that
        - without Him you could not
        - prove anything."

        I think I get that.

        Alas, Sye's presuppositions are not
        equivalent to "proof".

        Sye's "proof of God" claim is simply
        false, in my opinion.

        I am wanting a representative Presuppositionalist
        to come out to me and, if it be the case,
        show me why he thinks I am wrong on that
        simple point.

        (6)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:30 PM MT

        Something to do with absolute
        truth correct?

        (7)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:35 PM MT

        I've listened to some of Syes stuff.
        So some of it is coming back to me

        (8)

        From: Robert Baty
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:45 PM MT

        Greg,

        If you refresh your mind on the matter
        and can reasonably explain why Sye should
        claim that as the "proof of God", I would
        like to hear your presentation if it is
        other than simply

        - "Sye said so (i.e., presupposed it)".

        (9)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:50 PM MT

        I will get back to you.

        (10)

        From: Robert Baty
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 9:55 PM MT

        Greg,

        I'll be looking forward to it!

        (11)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:00 PM MT

        Here is his answer to your question
        from his website.

        http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/proof.php

        This website is about truth.

        (12)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:05 PM MT

        Click on the link at the bottom and
        you'll get his explanation.

        Sorry.

        Here's that link.

        http://www.proofthatgodexists.org/why-is-god-necessary.php

        This website is about truth.

        (13)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:10 PM MT

        I think that second link is what your
        looking for.

        Draw your rebuttal against that.

        (14)

        From: Robert Baty
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:15 PM MT

        Greg,

        Please don't send me down that rabbit
        trail.

        I've read plenty of Sye and seen
        plenty of his videos.

        What you referenced and what I have
        seen offers no legitimate explanation
        as to why Sye believes he's got the
        "proof of God" as claimed and why
        anyone should believe his "proof of
        God" claim that

        - "the proof of God is that
        - without him you could not
        - prove anything."

        Greg, if you have any reasonable
        explanation as to why Sye should
        believe that and why you might believe
        it, just put it in your own words and
        I will either accept it or offer a
        rebuttal.

        (15)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:20 PM MT

        Did you read the second link?
        It's what your looking for.

        (16)

        From: Greg Hodgins
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:25 PM MT

        Why is God Necessary For:

        Knowledge: Unless one knows everything,
        or has revelation from someone (God) who
        does, something we don't know could
        contradict what we think we know.

        Truth: If our thoughts are the mere by-
        products of the electrochemical processes
        in our evolved brains, you would not get
        "truth" you would get "brain-fizz."

        Chemicals do not produce "truth" they
        just react. As Doug Wilson said, it would
        be like shaking up a can of Mountain Dew,
        and a can of Dr. Pepper, opening them,
        and watching them fizz. Neither fizz is
        "true," they just are. For truth you need
        someone (God) who transcends the natural
        realm.

        Universal, immaterial, unchanging logic:
        For universal, immaterial, unchanging
        logic, you need someone (God) who is
        universal (Psalm 90:2), not made of matter (
        John 4:24) and unchanging (Malachi 3:6).

        Without God, who has universal knowledge,
        we could not know anything to be universally
        true.

        Without God, who is Spirit (not made of
        matter), we could not make sense of immaterial
        things.

        Without God who is unchanging (and logic is
        a reflection of the way He thinks), we would
        have no basis for expecting logic not to change.

        (17)

        From: Robert Baty
        Date: Sunday, May 19, 2013
        Time: About 10:30 PM MT

        Greg,

        You've offered secondary and tertiary
        presuppositions as far as this exercise
        is concerned.

        I get the presuppositional angle;

        Sye says it,
        Presuppositionalists believe it,
        that settles it.

        We might agree on some of that; we might
        not. I'll try to deal with your specific
        problems as they become relevant.

        Sye's claim is that

        - "the proof of God is that
        - without him you could not
        - prove anything."

        Definitions are good in such cases, and I
        see you seem to have an appreciation for that.

        So, Greg, it might be helpful if you will
        provide a definition that you think Sye is
        relying on for the word

        - "proof".

        We can maybe work upward from there.

        Also, Greg, Sye's claim hypothesizes a world
        in which there is no God.

        Greg, are you willing to hypothesize such a
        world, such a world like ours but without God?

        ---------------------------------------------
        ---------------------------------------------
      Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.