Critical thinker, skeptical about atheism.

[robvalue]

I was the atheist authority, apparently. I advocated saying you don't know when you don't know. That was perceived as dogmatic enough to form an argument against atheism.

That shows how desperate the tactics are to try and debunk atheism, when all theists ever do is attack strawmen.

[robvalue]

Poor strawmen. How many more must die in this bloody war against atheism? Think of the baby strawmen.

[Whateverist]

I'm just astonished that admitting you don't know something means you're dogmatic.
I thought it meant that you don't change your mind regardless of new evidence.
I'm so glad we have the theists to tell us what words really mean.

^So very this^


I guess this latest apologist has moved on to more promising pastures.

[robvalue]

Shame. I wonder if he will take on board what we've said and try again. Some people don't want debate, they just want to preach or reassure themselves, under the pretence of debate. We'll see what category this guy falls into by his further responses, or lack of.

At least he didn't go ape shit like some people.

[abaris]

At least he didn't throw ape shit like some people.

Fixed that for you to honor HM.

[Minimalist]

I wonder if he will take on board what we've said and try again.

Nah. That would be out of character for those nuts.

[Esquilax]

I'm just astonished that admitting you don't know something means you're dogmatic.
I thought it meant that you don't change your mind regardless of new evidence.
I'm so glad we have the theists to tell us what words really mean.

Theism in general is the enemy of language; the only reason it survives is because its adherents seek to redefine every relevant word, often so that they mean exactly the opposite of what they do to normal people. Morality means commands, immoral acts are moral, unjust things are just, you have faith when you desire evidence for things, yet it's rational to believe certain things on faith, slavery isn't really slavery, because an objective and unchanging moral system had to change over time... this need that some christians have to demand caveats to normal rules of conduct and behavior so that god can get away with things no regular person could, leads them to twist the meanings of words, if not invent whole new terms without meanings at all, beyond what's required at any given time (let's not forget that "kinds" is an invention of christian theism.)

And of course, once they've given themselves the right to determine what words mean, it's really not that far fetched that they continue from there by giving themselves the right to tell us what we're thinking, etc etc. After all, the christian has a divine ownership over absolutely everything they need to assert.

[Whateverist]

And of course, once they've given themselves the right to determine what words mean, it's really not that far fetched that they continue from there by giving themselves the right to tell us what we're thinking, etc etc. After all, the christian has a divine ownership over absolutely everything they need to assert.

When you consider the logical necessity of God's existence I suppose that places certain restraints on the meaning of words. Derp.

[Losty]

Poor strawmen. How many more must die in this bloody war against atheism? Think of the baby strawmen.

Not the strawbabies!! Is there no end to this madness!?!?

[Mudhammam]

And of course, once they've given themselves the right to determine what words mean, it's really not that far fetched that they continue from there by giving themselves the right to tell us what we're thinking, etc etc. After all, the christian has a divine ownership over absolutely everything they need to assert.

When you consider the logical necessity of God's existence I suppose that places certain restraints on the meaning of words. Derp.

Theists plays a simple game: classify definitions as real objects rather than real objects by definitions.