RE: Evidence God Exists
March 24, 2010 at 9:16 pm
(This post was last modified: March 24, 2010 at 9:19 pm by tavarish.)
(March 24, 2010 at 2:41 pm)RedFish Wrote: You wish. I'll gather my information from my own sources, thanks. Far better things to do with my time..Loving, living, appreciating the wonderful gift that life is...You know the kind of s***
Missed the point. Use the search feature to see if the topic has been beaten to death, which it has. It gets a bit monotonous to have to explain to every theist that no, atheism has no inherent dogma or tenets.
(March 23, 2010 at 7:28 pm)RedFish Wrote: I was offering the information as proof that atheism has dogma, not that atheism is a religion. Do you understand the difference? I subscribe to no religion, as I have said. Neither do I deny them.
You're right, and you didn't make the religion assertion. I apologize. However your claim that atheism has an inherent doctrine has so many holes it would make swiss cheese jealous.
Moreover, not subscribing to and denying something is the same thing.
Here's a definition of denial:
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/denial
a. A refusal to accept or believe something, such as a doctrine or belief.
Unless you believe in the doctrines of other religions, which you just confirmed was NOT the case, then you are denying them.
(March 23, 2010 at 7:28 pm)RedFish Wrote: Err. What question? There is no question in that quote. You've lost me with that rant, but I feel it is aimed at me. Why? And WTF do you mean?
Here's the question: Does atheism have inherent tenets or dogma?
The same question you posited in statement form. It gets tiring explaining to people who just show up on this site that no, atheism isn't a worldview, nor is it dogmatic, or a presupposition on ANYTHING other than a lack of belief in God or gods.
(March 23, 2010 at 7:28 pm)RedFish Wrote: I'm sorry, the guy himself CALLED it a tenet. Listen again, rather than just enjoying the fun-making.
Which means you missed the entire point of the discussion.
(March 23, 2010 at 7:28 pm)RedFish Wrote: 1. Debate was for tv purposes.
2. 2 atheists, 1 theist.
3. Atheists in control of 'kill-switch' and used it as a threat.
Reminded me of here.
...and what is this evidence of? I'm guessing they should just let people call in with whatever unfounded rant they want, right? The caller wasn't making a point, he was repeating the same tired rhetoric. The hosts didn't use the phone as a threat, it was a warning that they have a finite amount of time and for the point to be concise with evidence to back it up. It's not hard.
I've actually seen all of their YouTube videos - they're very fair to those who call in with legitimate questions and claims.