Series on Does God Exist? Dr. Greg Bahnsen versus Dr. Gordon Stein
Should we argue for “general theism”?
Should our case be “subjective or personal”?
Should we concede anything to our opponents?
Should we get to the real topic?
The end of Bahnsen’s concession to Stein’s expertise notes that the subject of the debate between Bahnsen and Stein does not directly pertain to the specific area or field of Stein’s expertise. Bahnsen states that, “our subject tonight is really much different, calling for intelligent reflection upon issues which are philosophical or theological in character.” It is important to remember and unfortunately not unnecessary to point out that brilliant men with PhD’s (for example) in some realm of academics are not necessarily very qualified and certainly are not necessarily experts when it comes to other areas especially including in this case philosophy and theology. [Insert what names you will here.]
Bahnsen explains that Stein has, “left his field of expertise and given his life to a campaign for atheism.” Campaigning for atheism – if it is to be anything more than the emotional assertions and empty rhetoric which constitute what is perhaps the vast majority of atheism today as displayed most notably in the fundamentalist “New Atheism” – should have a great deal to do with philosophical and theological considerations. Such philosophical and theological considerations are no more immediately accessible to those who claim atheism than to anyone else including those who are well-versed in other subjects.
Bahnsen finishes by explaining that, “Whatever his perception of the reason for that, I do not believe that it is because of
any genuinely cogent philosophical case which might be made for atheism as a world view. And it is to this subject that I now turn for tonight’s debate.”
Leave a Reply