Is one way to argue for God’s existence better than…

Is one way to argue for God’s existence better than another? Should evidential and presuppositional case makers be divided based on their approach?

BTW, after watching today’s video you can vote for your preferred form of apologetics engagement in this poll:

[https://www.youtube.com/post/UgyvX5Kd23s0THC8Jlp4AaABCQ?fbclid=IwAR31CTEzQFVJPeinVaLljHjvSsIqj0PbndXdPACeB9n69m6DyvWh9i8iwKM](https://www.youtube.com/post/UgyvX5Kd23s0THC8Jlp4AaABCQ?fbclid=IwAR31CTEzQFVJPeinVaLljHjvSsIqj0PbndXdPACeB9n69m6DyvWh9i8iwKM)

Is one way to argue for God’s existence better than another? Should evidential and presuppositional case makers be divided based on their approach?

2 comments on Is one way to argue for God’s existence better than…

  1. Sorry, but your chain of evidence/custody in the gospels is so broken Serpico would have presented the problems to the Knapp Commission.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.