I'm a bit shocked and bothered by this.<quoted text>
That is always the hope.
Have a look at presuppositional apologetics.
Start with Sye Ten Bruggencate, then move to Dr Jason Lisle and finish with the master Greg Bahnsen.
A week with them and you will have no problem dealing with your average militant atheist...
Although you have been having conversations about coming to rational conclusions... using logic... and such... all of which i am happy with..... now you are supporting presuppositional apologetics?
I feel like the pastafarians have a lot of fun with the same tactics because they are pointing out the absurdities of it.
Maybe that explains why you have been equating goddidit with arockdidit. Except in presuppositional apologetics ... goddidit is where it begins so it fills the gaps like a base color on a canvas. Science doesnt begin with the answer. It finds the highest probabilities while searching for answers. So if one answer was arockdidit... it wont be the answer to all of the unanswered questions.
If we walked into a room with a box and a note on it... you read the note and it said a 18 lb blue bowling ball was in the box... you believed it and sat down... and i picked up the small light weight box and said i didnt believe the note... coming from presuppositional apologetics... can i trust my senses when i think i see a small box that feels light weight?... so i think nothing is in the box?... this is very problematic.
Strawman? I don't know... but i dont see a difference.