wiegraf:

Anony, you've read many dictionary entries, they all give priority to the definition which includes religion, even the one our genius uses. In fact quite a few don't even use your definition. Yet you somehow think yourself the expert and declared them all wrong. The word was coined by xtian theologists. The wiki entry has a list of apologist organizations etc. There are even pantheist apologists. No mention of agnostics, let alone atheists involved in any 'apologist' organizations whatsoever. Makes sense since they're not religions (not sure what pantheists were doing associating themselves with apologists) Heck, even deists don't bother with the term, and they do believe in god(s). Of course you expect all this to be ignored and you create atheist apologists. Is there any period in time when you're not deluded?

wiegraf:

Compared to vedaxx a rabid dog would seem reasonble. With sweetnecta yes, it's the indoctrintion that gets in the way. Like say crazyman

Mr_Anony:

I think this definition pretty much sums it up

Mr_Anony:
All well and good. I have seen that the definitions you chose for the word apologetics are geared at christians only. Well those are not a correct representatation of the meaning of the word. The word comes from the Greek word "apologia" which means to explain a position. whenever you debate, you are engaging in apologetics. However, I can understand your confusion because the word apologetics has been christianized like the words salvation, redemption, covenant etc but let us not dwell on words and meanings at this point let us move on to burden of proof and reasons for not believing.

I'll use your quote to show you what I mean.


"there is no reason to" here is a non-answer.

Let us say I asked you why don't you believe in Santa and you said that there is no reason, and ask me for evidence

I reply that Santa brings the presents and I have seen him,

The moment you start arguing that the person that brings the presents is not Santa but daddy dressed in funny red clothes, you are providing and explaining your reason why you don't believe.

When I reply that daddy never says "Ho Ho Ho" in a weird voice. And you respond that daddy just makes his voice sound like that, you are defending your reason for not believing in santa ..... and so on and so forth.

By this time you are now fully engaged in Non-Santa apologetics as opposed to my Santa apologetics.

Hating the word apologetics doesn't change the fact that Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins are atheist apologists same as you, logicboy, cyrexx e.t.c.

vedaxcool:
Yes but we happen to be dealing with individuals who have no ability to distinguish between good and evil, hence lying seems honorable, and my initial definition was taken from wiki, now lie graft is quoting the same wiki to prove his point yet the boy whom many priests took turns in molesting (who rather than seek psychological assistence prefer denying god) insist the definition 2 I posted must be incorrect and he has a better definition!

What sums up their situation is they have no God, they cannot appreciate as we do the consequence of lying! The easiest way to know you have beaten this ignoromus is the fact they engage in insults and name calling when their puny brain cannot handle matured discussion!

Q.E.D


Unfollowing!

vedaxcool:

When a woman decides to misappropriate words that his parents possibly used in describing her being an atheist to others is rather the sad state of being a gaytheist my bad atheist! I guess the whole conversation
Possibly went something like this,

Wiwi grab: dad I am atheist!

Daddy Wiwi grab: son are you high right now?

Wiwi grab: yes, but there is no god nor does the my existence makes sense!

Daddy wiwi grab: you see son being on wiwi makes a rabid dog in comparison more reasonable! So son don't take drugs give it to the Nigaaaz!

Wiwi grab: I am high right now coz there is no atheist apologist!


Daddy wiwi grab stands up to slap him . . .

Mommy wiwi grab stops him and says: look wiwi grab, you are a crazy man, you are high even the ogres in the word are more decent than you, how dare u insult god, all because u are high?

Wiwi grab: I know who u are!

Mommy wiwi grab picks up a stick a planks him in the head ever since them it has been from one neurosurgery to another trying hard to fix the high velocity impact of the plank on wiwi grab head, but till date wiwi grab is being fed drugs to keep the pain away, and she still insist that there is no god, we keep praying god aid her recovery from brain damage.

The above story is fictional if it happens to resemble your life then it is merely coincidental!

fellis:



Vedaxcool I laughed so much.

Your head no correct at all

wiegraf:

fellis:

You also found it funny?

wiegraf:

Mayhaps if I were a 9 year old

fellis:

lol, you know it was funny

You just won't admit it cos he was making fun of atheists.

fellis:

lol, you know it was funny

You just won't admit it cos he was making fun of atheists.

Logicboy03:

a•pol•o•get•ics n. (used with a sing. verb) 1.
The branch of theology that is concerned with
defending or proving the alleged truth of
Christian doctrines. 2. Formal argumentation in
defense of something, such as a position or
system.


Definition 2 is a meaningless definition. So, if I claim that Vedaxcool is an Arabic name and you disagree with explanaitions of how Arabic language works- would you then be engaging in "name apoligetics" defending your name?


Apologetics mostly relates to a religion or religious position.

Logicboy03:


Fail......I left the trap open for yu to fail. I think this is how I will be debate dubious theists like you.

Apologetics has to mostly with religion. What I did not mention was that outside religion, apologetics can only apply to an ideology or a philosophy or a body of thought. You fail because atheism is none of these.

You cant engage in apologetics for arsenal football club or for eba preparation. You make it silly when you apply it outside a philosphy or ideology.


You made example of communist apologist- communism is an ideology not atheism.


-~Vedaxcool owned.

Ubenedictus: cool, so atheism isnt a body of thought? It must be abt thoughtlesnes

Ubenedictus: a lie, try amusing me by showing me the root of the word "apologetics"!

Logicboy03:


Did you make that comment out of malice or ignorance? Or both?

Logicboy03:


root of a word and the meaning are most of the time very different in meaning.

Surely, you should know this

Ubenedictus: wow! Really? Biology is still defined accding to d root words bio and logos, or is that an exception to ur different-meaning rule?

Ubenedictus: cool, so atheism isnt a body of thought? It must be abt thoughtlesnes

vedaxcool:

none could have put it better!

Logicboy03:


root--apologia


roots----bio + logo

Logicboy03:



Cheerleading nonsense again?

Ubenedictus: and apologia doesnt mean defending a position?

Apologetics (from Greek ἀπολογία, "speaking in defense" is the discipline of defending a position (often religious) through the systematic use of information. Early Christian writers (c. 120–220) who defended their faith against critics and recommended their faith to outsiders were called apologists.[1]

Logicboy03:


Apologia means "to defend".

Apologetics means something much more than to defend. It is mostly in a religious context.






That is the point. That is why it is called a "root". Just like a tree is much more than the root.

Ubenedictus: often in a religious context doesnt mean only in a religious context!

Logicboy03:


The main point is that it doesnt apply to atheism. To make it apply to atheism is to make it aplly to a whole lot of things lacking an ideology eg a dsibelief in Santa claus, sophistry etc

Ubenedictus: so atheism isnt a body of thought? I ask a 2nd time!

Logicboy03:

It is not. It is only a theological stance on the exustence of god.

Ubenedictus: dont worry i'll certainly remind u of this one day, atheism isnt a body of thought! Amen

Logicboy03:


Epic fail of a threat

Ubenedictus: it was no threat man! Cool off! Atheism isnt a body of thought, it even isnt a position to it cant be defended becos apologetic is defending a position!

Logicboy03:






atheism is only a stance on the existence of god.