“Are you a Fundamentalist Atheist? Here's a little test:
1). You compare God to "Santa Claus" or "Flying Spaghetti Monster" unaware of the huge ontological Category Error you make.”
Explain the category error, here? God and Santa are fictional characters that we believe in ONLY because people we trust tell us they exist.
FSM is not compared to god, we use the FSM to show you shallow the ‘evidence’ for God really is. It’s just as good to explain that FSM exists.
“2). You refer to God as "sky fairy", "magical man in the sky", "Sky Daddy", etc. showing ignorance of the classical understanding of God's nature and attributes.”
No, i’m pretty clear on the classical understanding. I use mocking terms to mock the classical understanding.
You’re not very good at this.
“3). You claim "there is no evidence for God", apparently ignorant of the vast body of evidence for God that has been contemplated by believers and non-believers for centuries.”
Yes. I am ignorant of this vast body of evidence because no one ever provides it. Instead, i get really stupid arguments, poor history, poorer math, and GROSS misunderstandings of science.
“5). You think "science" is the only way to knowledge, ignorant that physical science is limited to the material workings of the world.”
No, that’s the definition of science. You use ‘ignorant’ a lot of just not agreeing with your conclusions, don’t you?
“6). You say, "Philosophy is not needed! Only science! And that's my philosophy, (which I need to show philosophy is not needed)!".”
No, I’ve never said that.
“7). You think the Problem of Evil disproves God, ignorant of the universal acceptance among philosophers and theologians that it does not.”
I really don’t care if they just say it doesn’t disprove the tri-omni god unless they can actually solve the problem of evil.
“8). You've heard somewhere that the Big Bang does not indicate an absolute beginning of all time, space, matter, and energy, not knowing the growing current consensus is: yes it does! Which shows something transcendent brought it about, thus obliterating Naturalism.”
I don’t think there’s a single honest claim in that statement.
“9). You think Quantum Mechanics, evolutionary adaptation, and multi-verse theories rule out God. Nothing could be further from the truth!”
Feel free to show this rather than just announce it…?
“10). You call names, attack persons rather than their arguments,"
Hang on, dipshit, I can call you names AND deal with your argument without any ethical dilemma. The problem is an ad hominem ONLY attacks you, such as saying, ‘yeah, well, you’re nearsighted, so what do you know?’ Not all insults are ad homs.
“belittle, offend, blame others for shoving religion down your throat, and proclaim freely in the public square that Christian or religious views should have NO freedom in the public square!”
You’re really butthurt that you lose the privilege to discriminate and think that’s persecution, don’ tyou?
“Oh! And the big sign you're a Fundamentalist Atheist: you are irritated or downright angry that God, informed faith, science, reason, evidence, philosophy, history, and the arts can be joyfully embraced by the follower of Christ! So, how's your blood pressure right now?”
Why would i be upset at that? I don’t understand waht you think your point is, here?
YOU are probably angry that you can’t bring your religion into a science discussion because that’s not Kosher, but why would i care if you believe in god, as long as you don’t trying to pretend it supports your science?