The Evangelical Atheist
- Thread starter S.A.M.
- Start date
You know what falsifiability means, right?
Atheism is rejection of thiesm. It could be violent if necesary.
Probably a closet athiest. Dem materialists will do anything. And all the republicans keep falling out of closets.
As an atheist yourself, who rejects Christian and Jewish theisms, amongst hundreds of other various theisms, why would you decide to accept one theism over all the others, when none are equally demonstrable?
From the position of my atheism or your atheism?
I don't reject Christian or Jewish thiesms, they are all the same, I disagree with some of their practices as I do with some practices of Muslims.
I am as comfortable going to a church as to a mosque or a temple. It makes no difference to me.
From the point of those athiests who are anti-thiests.
Falsifiability means that there could theoretically be some piece of evidence that could prove it false. I could think of all kinds of things that would prove atheism false.
It's an extremely simple question, Sam. Why can't you answer a simple question? I don't think it's a stupid question. It's totally relevant to the discussion. Nice job with the ad hom, by the way. I thought you were a mod. What kind of mod uses ad homs?
I'm sure you can. When you publish your findings let me know.
If you cannot see the difference between a disagreement and writing a book, going on a podium and making television shows and world tours to popularise one belief over another, there is not much I can tell you.
And ad homs are directed to people. Your questions can be stupid.
Let's go back in the conversation a bit.
I said:
You said in response:
You said it right there. Only when he says his unfalsifiable beliefs are better than my unfalsifiable beliefs. Well, in my example, where you hypothetically believe in teletubbies partying under the surface of the planet Pluto, I am arguing "No there isn't!" I am saying that my unfalsifiable beliefs are better than yours! You said it yourself. It's evangelism.
And didn't you say in response to one of my questions (I don't know why...): ESL? Which I perceived to mean, English second language?. As if my English is really bad. I don't know why... I don't think I speak particularly bad English.
They are all the same, what?
In order for you to be a Muslim, you must reject those theisms, just as they must reject yours. To argue otherwise would be to claim all religions purport identical doctrines.
Silly in the extreme.
I know what evangelism is, Sam. You implied before that your answer to my question as to whether or not it's evangelism depends on certain contexts. What are those contexts?
I think you meant that if we were talking in private and discussing the reasons we believe things, it wouldn't be evangelism...
But if it were public and we were talking about the same thing, it would be? I'm not assuming, I'm asking. This is what I want to know. When does it become evangelism for you, Sam?
I'm not inventing the dictionary here, meboy. When you preach to mankind, inviting all to the glory of the Word, while denouncing the evil of all others, its evangelism.