You are viewing an obsolete version of the DU website which is no longer supported by the Administrators. Visit The New DU.
Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Reply #47: Well, You're certainly no fundamentalists. [View All]

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread		 This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU
cosmik debris Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Mar-04-07 05:52 PM
Response to Reply #44
47. Well, You're certainly no fundamentalists.
You reject the literal truth of your own definition of fundamentalism by extending "sacred text" to mean "canon" and "literal truth" to mean "concrete thinking".

And you are right about my understanding of "canon". I haven't a clue what you mean by the canon of atheism. Would you be so kind as to enlighten me?

And BTW, I am an atheists. I don't have any canon. I do not believe. I can't imagine how anyone who doesn't believe can be accused of holding as literal truth "no belief" in "no sacred text".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Religion/Theology Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators

Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC