Tags

, , ,

After I tweeted a video, an atheist confronted me about the tweet. Here is our conversation thus far:

Me: Atheists with Attention Deficit Disorder bit.ly/OAshbC via #religion #atheism

@VorianK: Craigites must resort to well-poisoning – they have no coherent definition of “god”, or evidence for it.
#atheism #religion

Me: This was not poisoning the well, which by definition is a PRE-EMPTIVE ad hominem attack. See here: http://bit.ly/PuW6X0. The video was mainly taken from Dr. Craig’s UK tour, in which a particular gentleman posed a version of the “Who made God?” question at one debate, and then posed the same exact question several days later at another debate. The man asked the question after the debate occurred, and we are merely observing this gentleman several months after the fact and describing him as probably having ADD. This is anything but PRE-EMPTIVE. Furthermore, the ADD accusation does not apply to all atheists, but only to those who repeatedly ask “Who made God?” after it is explained to them in the clearest of terms, as the gentleman in the video.

@VorianK: Of course it is. It’s claiming not accepting Craigs circular idiocy is a “disorder”. #atheism #religion

@VorianK: Meanwhile, still no coherent definition of this “god” thing, or evidence for it. #atheism #religion

@VorianK: And meanwhile, the fascist, anti-human politics of religonists is justified by fantasy. #atheism #religion

@VorianK: If religionists could establish this “god” thing, then criagite smears would not be – ahem – “necessary”
#atheism #religion

Me: “Circular idiocy”? How do you reckon Craig’s rebuttal to be circular idiocy?

@VorianK: The craigite assertion of “god” is circular, and idiotic. And basis for gross politics. #atheism #religion

@VorianK: And not letting the religonist mob off the hook for its delusion is not a “disorder”. #atheism #religion

Me: Let’s try this again. How exactly is Craig’s argument circular?

@VorianK: That would be by its circularity. And *still* no coherent definition of this “god”, or evidence for it. #atheism #religion

Me: Simply because you say Craig is making a circular argument doesn’t make it so. Why do you think his argument is circular?

@VorianK: Where is the coherent definition of this “god” thing, or evidence of it? #atheism #religion

@VorianK: Why on earth do you think it isn’t? All guff, all attack, no “god” in evidence. #atheism #religion

@VorianK: Your #religion is an excuse for otherwise-inexcusable illiberal, anti-human, anti-freedom politics.
#atheism

Me: After three times you have failed to directly answer a simple question. I have to assume you don’t know what you’re talking about.

My fellow Christian apologists, what do you think of the conversation? What would you say? Would you do anything different? I’ve dealt with this tweep before. S/he (probably he) makes a lot of accusations, but when asked “How did you reach that conclusion?” type questions, fails to support with any arguments, valid or otherwise.

Advertisements