And if anyone would know it would be Mr. Religion. He has the loafty goal of being the man who used the word "hoi polloi" more than any other man in history.
Re: Bob Enyart
- Thread starter Nang
- Start date
:ha:
In round four of BRX, Lamerson stated:
Bob, would you be willing to pick out the three best passages of Scripture for the openness view? I will agree that if I fail to show how those passages fail to show that God did not know the future then I lose the debate.
Bob presented his three passages in round eight, and Lamerson did not address them at all in his remaining posts. Ouch! (See Bob's tenth round post, under the heading "Losing on Settled View Terms".)
So Lamerson lost BRX by his own standard. I think you'd do well to take Lamerson's word on this matter over Hilston's.
Ask Mr. Religion
☞☞☞☞Presbyterian (PCA) 	
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Wailing and gnashing of teeth whenever anyone says "boo!" in Enyart's direction, notwithstanding, of course. :sigh:
If anyone on TOL is misrepresented should the accuser be corrected? Yes or no?
Hilston is also an Acts9 Dispie, and claims to have debated Calvinists even more than he has open theists. He'd have plenty to disagree with you on also. I like Hilston, I've let him explain his beliefs to me, and I've read all the articles you linked, and several others from his church's website. I even bought a tape series from his church on the topic of presuppositional apologetics, which I think he is great on. I can't see how his beliefs on determinism work logically though, and his critiques of Enyart are interesting but do not convince me that Bob is off track. He does compliment Bob in at least a few places in his Plot critique btw.
As for the real subject of this thread...
Nang, Bob is very busy, but easily accessible by calling his show. I'd bet if you call and tell Will you'd like to talk to Bob off the air he'd talk to you after the show also. If you arent willing to at least try that, you should drop the attitude.
Nang
TOL Subscriber
That's o.k.
I have decided I don't want to talk with Bob.
Because, after reading more of his past debates, I conclude he would just talk at me, and not with me.
I am much too busy for that . . .
Nang
You are completely wrong about that. Bob is very easy to talk to and is very thorough on the topics he covers. If you call in and have a question, he will answer it. If you want to make a point then you can make it. Just be prepared to have an actual dialog to defend your point or view depending on what it is.
Don't take the easy way out, consider giving him a call!
Maybe listen to some shows first to get some examples of some calls.
http://www.kgov.com/bel/archive
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Uhh . . .maybe you people do not understand, but to "call in" to Bob, would be like approaching his throne on my belly.
All dialogue would be on his terms and probably quite abbreviated.
That is the reason for this kind of forum, IMO.
It levels the field between the famous radio personality and a lowly and humble grandmother.
Besides, I am only trying to lure him in and set him up for confrontation with AMR . . . :chuckle:
Nang
PKevman
New member
This is so ridiculous. I happen to have met Bob Enyart personally, and I know he is nothing like what you describe. You are the person with the pride problem here. "Lowly and humble"? You are hardly that.
I respect the fact that you are a grandmother, but you have to be one of the rudest grandmothers I have ever conversed with. This thread is a perfect indication of that.
And AMR has been thoroughly trounced many times already on this board, the result would be no different if he debated Bob.
You are only trying to impugn the character of a man of God simply because you happen to think you are right on a theological issue. If you are right and can defend your positions Scripturally, then why do you have to resort to such laughable tactics as this entire thread?
Mr. 5020
New member
Because she's an idiot? :idunno:
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Would you like to know what NANG stands for?
Where? When?
Must have missed it!
Impugn the character of Bob?
Just because I would like to talk to him?
You are revealing the obvious paranoia of the OVT people, IMO.
Can't discuss Scripture with persons who apparently are too busy for such discussions . . .
Nang
Mr. 5020
New member
Poly
Blessed beyond measure
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
LIFETIME MEMBER
Hall of Fame
Nang
TOL Subscriber
Wrong . . .
Don’t get me wrong, I’m against abortion. However Pastor Enyart picks very weak people to debate.
Mr. 5020
New member
I might be mistaken, but didn't the fruitcake call him?
PKevman
New member
Maybe it's because you dishonestly say things like this:
Nang said:
When you have been given a perfectly reasonable way to communicate with Bob. If you really wanted to have a discussion with him, you would call his show.
Instead you attempt to impugn his character to say that Bob "won't talk to you". This is a lie when you are unwilling to put any effort into trying to contact him.