Difference between revisions of "Talk:Essay: The question atheists fear"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
Conservative (talk | contribs) |
||
| Line 8: | Line 8: | ||
::Proof and evidence are not synonymous. For example, logical proofs. [[Greg Bahnsen]] utterly defeated atheist Gordon Stein by demonstrating that atheism/naturalism/materialism cannot account for the existence of logic. Stein was clearly rattled in the debate and became nervous. You can hear the debate and see for yourself at [http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/ Bahnsen-Stein debate]. The debate was another complete humiliation for the atheist community. To this day, the atheist community cannot defeat Bahnsen's argument. See also: [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate]] | ::Proof and evidence are not synonymous. For example, logical proofs. [[Greg Bahnsen]] utterly defeated atheist Gordon Stein by demonstrating that atheism/naturalism/materialism cannot account for the existence of logic. Stein was clearly rattled in the debate and became nervous. You can hear the debate and see for yourself at [http://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2006/12/05/greg-bahnsen-vs-gordon-stein-the-great-debate/ Bahnsen-Stein debate]. The debate was another complete humiliation for the atheist community. To this day, the atheist community cannot defeat Bahnsen's argument. See also: [[Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate]] | ||
| − | ::As far as accurate and correct, atheists are hardheaded and often very narcissistic. No doubt Shockofgod added the emphasis for that reason - so the message would get through. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:43, 13 January 2014 (EST) | + | ::As far as "accurate and correct", atheists are hardheaded and often very narcissistic. No doubt Shockofgod added the emphasis for that reason - so the message would get through. [[User:Conservative|Conservative]] 15:43, 13 January 2014 (EST) |
Latest revision as of 21:38, January 13, 2014
Could we cut down the question?
Instead of this: "What proof and evidence do you have that proves that atheism is accurate and correct?"
Why not a more concice version: "What proof is there for atheism?"
The reason I propose this is "evidence" and "proof" are pretty much the same thing. Likewise, "accurate" and "correct". Do the extra words add something I'm not seeing here?
- Proof and evidence are not synonymous. For example, logical proofs. Greg Bahnsen utterly defeated atheist Gordon Stein by demonstrating that atheism/naturalism/materialism cannot account for the existence of logic. Stein was clearly rattled in the debate and became nervous. You can hear the debate and see for yourself at Bahnsen-Stein debate. The debate was another complete humiliation for the atheist community. To this day, the atheist community cannot defeat Bahnsen's argument. See also: Press release concerning Michael Martin pulling out of Martin-Bahnsen debate
- As far as "accurate and correct", atheists are hardheaded and often very narcissistic. No doubt Shockofgod added the emphasis for that reason - so the message would get through. Conservative 15:43, 13 January 2014 (EST)