Today I listened to (and read) a debate, aptly titled "The Great Debate" . Dr. Greg Bahnsen and Dr. Gordon Stein debated with the passion of two hot headed teenagers . It was a a stirring debate (at least for me) and I have to say after which I am quite impressed with the transcendental argument. I had never really been very impressed with it's intellectual weight until I heard a true master of the Argument use it. It has honestly (GASP) got me looking into presuppositionalism as a viable intellectual position. I'm coming to realize that these arguments that I discounted the most (i.e. the transcendental and teleological arguments) could be much more convincing than what I once thought. I had always looked at an argument like the teleological argument said to myself "Sure, design in the world, that will convince them." Then one day I reassessed the Teleological argument and said "Sure, design in the world, that will convince them." This is quite simillar to the way I came around with the transcendental argument. I just hope that this doesn't happen with presuppositionalism.