I can't believe that you are so arrogant (or offensive)
I was listening to a discussion on the radio a couple of weeks ago. One of the interviewees expressed her honest beliefs about the topic and the other claimed to have empirical evidence to the contrary. The topic was not religion, and you can read more about it here, but in a minute you might see a parallel.
Discussing this matter a bit later with (as it happens) a Christian, I was told that the guy with empirical evidence was just arrogant, and that by the very process of offering this evidence (which he never actually had chance to present) he had essentially lost the argument. He was the politest of the three people involved, and allowed his arguments to be shouted down before he made his point.
At the time I was surprised to hear this point of view but then I realised what was going on.
Does this seem familiar? It seems to me to be like the war between science and religion. Some people trust evidence. Others trust heartfelt emotion and well wielded rhetoric and call people arrogant if they disagree.
Christians might claim to be in the former category but I suggest that it doesn't work out that way very often.
What would you call someone who uses a logical argument that you can't defeat?
If I were a Christian, I would call them 'an atheist'. There is no need for any pejorative adjectives.
Last week: To be an atheist you would have to go everywhere in the universe and search for god and not find him to really be sure that there is no god.
Next week: You're not really an atheist!