RE: Kicking Atheism's little ass
December 22, 2012 at 1:25 pm
(This post was last modified: December 22, 2012 at 1:28 pm by Simon Moon.)
(December 22, 2012 at 1:10 pm)Dr.Barré Wrote: So far, I have found no signs of any intelligent lifeforms here.
Atheists, awaken from your arrogant dogmatic slumber. A pantheistic definition of God has caught you with your pants down. Your posts to me have all been unsupported blather and your triumphalism convinces no one but yourself. Your insults and mockery only demonstrate the intellectual bankruptcy of your undefended atheism. Your accusation of my alleged igniting a flame war is perfectly hypocritical and your hiding behind a username displays your intellectual cowardice.
I do not believe in the existence of beings that are not supported by demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid logic. How is that dogmatic?
I am perfectly aware with the pantheistic definition of god. I used to identify myself as a pantheist for years. You haven't caught anyone with their pants down.
You came here posting nothing but insults. You seem to be, among other things, a hypocrite.
Quote:I am challenging anyone in this forum to a rational debate on the topic of atheism and await a response to the allegations that I have made against it.
I'm not sure you are worth debating since you have yet to define your terms in a coherent manner.
Quote:I think it is fair to say the most atheists are hostile to some kind of Christian upbringing. Get over it. For anyone who would like to become informed about intelligent, critical interpretations of biblical literature, they are invited to my forum on Biblical Scholarship.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/biblical_scholarship/
Meaningless.
Until the case for existence of a god meets its burden of proof, there is no reason to debatie any particular religious texts.
I thought you were a pantheist?
You're amazingly dishonest. I mean, you truly aspire to new heights of dishonesty. Pretty impressive.
You'd believe if you just opened your heart" is a terrible argument for religion. It's basically saying, "If you bias yourself enough, you can convince yourself that this is true." If religion were true, people wouldn't need faith to believe it -- it would be supported by good evidence.
