An atheist (if he is one) criticising atheism on another (comedy) site is not the same as you taking an opportunity to start another thread criticising atheists.
If people are being lead astray from the faith through bad logic and social/cultural wars shouldn't the topic of conversation be said bad logic and social/cultural wars? Many young Christians aren't having their faith challenged through intellectual rigour, but rather social and intellectual bullying, mockery, and condescension. Given this shouldn't it be a topic of conversation? I don't believe I'm being controversial at all about illuminating the caustic and vitriolic nature of internet New Atheism and it IS something that DOES need to be talked about
Many young Christians aren't having their faith challenged through intellectual rigour, but rather social and intellectual bullying, mockery, and condescension
Its constant conversations like this that make me worry that I am wasting my time and breath on here.
that it is still the perception of 'the atheist' that he is not intellectual and is using bad logic and flawed reasoning when confronting Christianity
I thought we were moving past some of these poor conceptions and misinformation, but it seems that we still have a long, long way to go.
It is amazing for me to think that you are the one who actually thinks that we are bullying you.
In support of what Lawless said above, I see that such a thing is required for this board, for although the vast majority of atheists here are not of the rude variety, many do however still directly or implicitly support those atheists who are rude, or at least deny that there is a problem which they as part of the 'atheist community' have responsibility to address.
The fact that this is a statement that is both uttered and agreed upon, on this site is itself part of the problem I see with the view of atheists here. It is amazing for me to think that you are the one who actually thinks that we are bullying you.
As a Christian apologist isn't it my job to criticize atheists, or for that matter any non-Christian religious belief?
Notice how you switched fluidly from "people" to "ideas"? That's your issue, and why your persistent thread spamming on this creates so much hostility here. You keep attacking atheists as people, and worse, you consistently refer to them as an unqualified demographic.If you truly were just attacking ideas, then it might, loosely and inefficiently be a part of your job as an "apologist". But your don't just do that. Even when you do, you're often attacking ideas that next to no one on this board holds.
krav, I don't care if he later makes the distinction. He didn't there, at the beginning, in the context of that paragraph. Making the distinction later doesn't make generalisation early on somehow valid. You'll also note that Lawless' title (and posting in general) shares the same lack of rigour.If you make a generalised negative claim, then it is your responsibility to ensure that you phrase your boundaries correctly. It isn't on me to assume that you don't mean what you say. If you are too lazy to use language properly, particularly when criticising groups, then don't pretend I'm somehow in denial for calling you out on it.
Now that is out of the way, what purpose did it serve ? Did stating it actually change anything ? Did it actually inform anything ? Did it make a positive difference in any possible way ?