Atheism

What's the question? you're saying the same thing. I have faith that they don't exist AND I don't believe in their existance.

I believe in the Christian God and I believe that Christ His Son and my Savior. That is the opposite of atheism.

No, Atheism is the belief that there is no God. It's more active than not believeing in God.

Not Christian viewpoint... English language
Atheism: (n) The doctorine or belief that there is no God.

 

I can't answer for HB, but I can answer for myself (and I imagine his response would be similar). I have faith that there's a God. I have as much faith that God is real as I do that the sun will come up. However, I can't PROVE that God exists - but faith is enough for me.

 

Not exactly. Faith and trust are interchangeable. While it's possible to place one's trust in something or someone with nothing to base it on, it's just as possible to place that trust in something or someone because he has seen enough evidence that he accepts it as proof. Your example of a trial is perfect.

I wouldn't disagree with that.

That, I don't think I can agree with. Gravity is true whether people choose to believe in it or not. A person can make a choice about it, but it exists regardless, making the choice largely irrelevant.

I take faith at face value -- faith = trust, no more, no less. Faith has no magical or mystical properties for me. It's just a decision.

 

Sure it does. Once a decision is made -- regardless of what that decision is -- adhering to that decision is a separate, ongoing choice.

To continue to reject supernatural and/or divine posits and theories that come into opposition to a strict, natural universe-only set of beliefs.

 

Not absolutely, no. But I have a very, very, very strong belief that there is, based on the evidence I've seen and thoroughly examined over the past decade.

 

..

Paraphrasing from above:

If they simply don't believe - then neither of the things you posted would be required. The decision was made, end of story. It's kinda weird that the Christians here seem to want to keep insisting that decision requires continual reinforcement that is equivalent to their expression of faith.

 

Go back and look at the intent of the original post in the thread. Mortimer says Atheism makes more sense than quibbling over religion. Then why did he start a thread to quibble?

Atheists seem to spend as much time defending Atheism as Deists spend defending religion. As i said earlier, I think ideally it would be best for everyone to be concerned with their own beliefs than those of others.

 

i don't think i'd say that faith requires that there not be evidence, just that evidence isn't a requirement for faith in something.

gravity is true? who says? the theory of gravity is actually something that has been revised a number of times.

so your trust that there's a supernatural creator who's given man a system of moral codes by which we are supposed to live our lives is just a decision? like, i dunno, picking a cell phone company? i've always figured people who have faith in god have some internal feeling that transcends all others.

 

Well, yeah....but mortimer is a tool that's just stirring the pot. I was a lot more interested in the exchange between you, BV, and HB. Fascinating.

 

It's not just about atheism and deism -- any choice of that magnitude requires continual reinforcement. Why do you think marriages fail?