I looked over at Triablogue today and saw that Steve Hays has responded to Witmer too. It’s nice to see he agreed with me on several points ;-)
I encourage you to read the whole thing, but here’s some snippets:
But that [sic] Witmer is saying throughout this section is that an unbeliever should make opportunistic use of any blocking maneuver or evasive maneuver whether he believes it or not.
He is coaching the unbeliever on how to win the debate without winning the argument. How to lose on the merits, but survive intact. It’s pretty revealing that Witmer would resort to such unscrupulous counsel.
Use any old argument, good or bad, just to get the presuppositionalist off your back! The convenience, and not the cogence, of the argument is all that matters.
Exactly my conclusions as well.
