* A dialogue of how not to engage in Christian apologetics:
Christian: The Lord God exists, enthroned in the heavens.
Unbeliever: I don't believe that.
C: Well, you're wrong, because God said he exists.
U: Okay, but I don't believe in God, which implies that I don't believe he's said anything. Can you provide me with any reason to believe your assertion?
C: Um, yeah, haven't you been listening? The reason is the best possible one: God said it.
U: Hmmm, that sou..
C: Bzzzzzzt! Don't even bother responding, God said it, he can't be wrong, so whatever you say is wrong.
U: Okaaaay, I was just going to say that it sounds like you're begging the question. Why should I believe God said it. What reason can you give me?
C: That he said it.
U: I don't feel like we're getting anywhere. Look, I don't believe that God exists, so telling me to repent sounds silly to me, what argument can you give me for accepting your religion over the thousands of others.
C: Well, because their gods don't exist and so haven't said anything, since my God exists, then he said he exists, and that's the only reason you need.
U: Well, I've really got to be going, we're not getting anywhere.
C: The Lord rebuke you!
U: Okaaaay. I don't really know what to say to that.
C: Just because you're not persuaded doesn't mean I'm wrong.
U: Quite right, so what reason or argument can you give me that might indicate that you're right?
C: Well, I've already told you the reason, God...said...it.
U: Yeah, I don't believe that.
C: So? The Lord rebuke you.
U: Well, I guess since you can't give me a reason or argument to believe in your version of God an religion, I'll continue to disbelieve.
C: Okay, let me give you an argument.
U: Whew, finally, I was getting worried there for a moment. So, what's the argument.
C:  God cannot be wrong.  God said he exists.  Therefore, he does.
U: [Looks around] Am I on candid camera? Isn't whether there is a God what's in question?
C: Not anymore. How could it be a question when God said it. Besides, that tree over there proves he exists.
U: Okay, how.
C: 'cause God said it did.
U: But I don't believe that.
C: The Lord rebuke you!
U: Okay, have a good day.
The above represents the approach to apologetics Turretin Fan apparently advocates.
Besides that, his post indicates that he thinks that I demand apologetics provide "rigorous proofs" (when I have denied this many times on this blog, where 'proofs' are considered in a strong sense ala Plantinga), and that I think apologetic argument will be persuasive to all (which I also deny, though cogency is a goal).
Turretin Fan also indicates that he thinks he is a prophet commissioned like Moses and Ezekiel were. Or that he's an Apostle like Paul. He also apparently thinks that Moses' engagement with the Pharaoh is an instruction on how to do apologetics (but he's had no luck with the stick-to-snake thing yet, and not for lack of trying!). So add weird exegesis to the list.
He also thinks his story is an answer to my questions that he provide some arguments for all the claims he's been making. Apparently I can't even question him, since he thinks his position is biblical, that means when I question him I question God!
Unfortunately, Turretin Fan has exhibited an all-too-common flaw with (many) contemporary Reformed: philosophical ignorance, intellectual laziness, and confusing the warm fuzzies that appeals to piety give for actual arguments.
Reformed Christians...wake up!