Athiesm is, by definition, faith. It's just a faith in NOT god rather than God.

The definition of atheism is at issue here. I prefer the definition lack of belief in one or more Gods. This is not much different from agnosticism and I tend to use the terms interchangeably.

However, people who want to claim that atheism is a faith will prefer to us the definition, belief that there is no God. This seems to imply that an atheist must have a clear notion of the concept of God, whereas to me the concept is a bit muddled.

This raises the question, what is the definition of God. This second question is quite relevant to the question of whether one is an atheist and it is a question I have never been able to answer.

Richard Dawkins' chapter about agnosticism was probably one of the best in The God Delusion.

Dawkins' basic point was that, sure, we're all agnostics to some degree inasmuch as no one can definitively prove that there is no God. But that doesn't mean that the chances of there being or not being a God are equal.

I actually think the question of the non-existence of God is meaningless. I can say that the Christian God is highly, highly implausible. Or that the existence of Allah defies credulity. By the process of elimination, I can discern that all the dieties that have been proposed to date are hard to give creedence to. But who's to say that just because all the Gods mankind has hitherto known are obviously manufactured that there isn't some God completely unknown to man? It's narcissistic to think that if God exists, we would necessarily have to know something about him.

But the fact is, if you're an agnostic, you're probably not going to participate in any of the rituals or sacraments of the existing religions, which means for all practical purposes, you're an atheist. God is not going to give you all the goodies he has reserved for the faithful simply because you put an open-minded asterisk next to your unbelief.

You are certainly giving yourself an enormous pat on the back about the subtlety and humor of YOUR posts, which comports well with the generally self-congratulatory tone of your writing.

And thank you for not responding to my questions, because I am sure that if you did, it would be very tedious indeed.

Personally I think you're just embarrassed that someone called you out on your cliched "profundities."

You display an acute level of antagonism when comforting someone over the issues of religion, which gives me doubt to your claim of being an atheist. You have made atheism your belief, and you have succumbed to defending your belief, by expressing intolerance of other's beliefs. Being an atheists implies that you have no beliefs on the subject of religion or god(s), which would mean you would have no beliefs to defend. In other words you have become that which you despise.

Why don't you try to become more tolerant about your atheism?

Athiesm [sic] is, by definition, faith. It's just a faith in NOT Zeus rather than Zeus.

Athiesm [sic] is, by definition, faith. It's just a faith in NOT Thor rather than Thor.

Athiesm [sic] is, by definition, faith. It's just a faith in NOT Cthulhu rather than Cthulhu.

Hmmm. No matter how I change it around, it still doesn't look quite right.

I venture that you and I are both atheists, sir. I just believe in one fewer god than you do.

Actually Mormons believe the holyland is somewhere in Missouri. The church has purchased that very property.

Mormons also believe that Mr. Smith was tooling around New York state circa 1830 & found golden tablets from God that told him to start the Mormon church & have a bunch of teen-age wives, amongst other things.

Of course, when he was asked to show the tablets, they had already been taken to heaven by angels.

I swear I am not making any of this stuff up.

So, now I suppose it's easy to understand if a person believed all of the above, they'd also swallow the idea that GW Bush is a great president.

>>From what I understand decreasing Church going numbers are phenomenon everywhere in America, and I believe Sunday Morning football has a lot to do with that. I go to the Buddhist temple with my wife and kids almost every weekend (she goes every weekend), and I am astonished at how my "Christian" conservative coworkers, neighbors, and friends, whom almost never go to Church, claim that they are more religious than I am. Their reasoning is that they don't consider Buddhism a serious religion, and in their mind being a good Christian means only believing in Jesus (even if you have never talked to a Christian priest/reverend/minister in your life, and have never read a page of the bible).<<

I am I wrong in thinking that you might like me to explain to you why this is so? I will tell you what I think some Christian perspectives on this are. Please remember that this is NOT my perspective. There are Protestant Christians who think that only the Protestant religious belief is true Christianity. They do not even think of Catholics as Christians. They sure aren't going to think of Mormons as Christians. Right now they are trying to freeze out Guiliani as a possible Republican candidate. If they succeed, they will turn their attention to Romney and freeze him out too. To them Mormons are definitely not Christians.

However there are other Christians (not so extreme) who will look down on Buddhism as a religion when they might not look askance at Judaism. Judaism shares with Christianity the first (five I think) books of the Bible. So they have common roots. However, I will tell you frankly that they will (some of them) look down on Buddhism for RACIAL reasons or simply because Buddhism is Eastern and not Western.

Also, correct me if I am wrong, but some Buddhism is theistic and some is practiced in a non-theistic way. If you practice in a non-theistic way, they will just see you as being an atheist.

>>I am beginning to believe that Christianity to American Fundies is more of a patriotic thing than anything else. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't Mormonism the fastest growing branch of Christianity in America, and isn't that the Branch of Christianity that claims that Jesus came to America, and that God will create Heaven on Earth in Salt Lake City?<<

Not my sort of patriotism. I cleave to the constitution. Mormonism may be the fastest growing, but many Christians would argue that it is NOT Christianity and therefore cannot be a denomination. Also, Mormons never take anyone off the rolls unless they excommunicate them or unless those people who are lapsed Mormons go to a lot of trouble to have their names removed. I am sure in Salt Lake that I am still counted as a Mormon. There are many, many lapsed Mormons. They can convert us but often they can't keep us.

I would say a fast growing segment of Christianty tends to call itself "non-denominational" and that most of these are evangelical. Old mainstream Christian churches (Methodist, Episcopal, First Christian) have lost a lot of membership. These were the saner ones.

>>One of my biggest falling outs with Christianity was that I saw it is a death cult, whose practitioners believed that the world is coming to end, possibly tomorrow, because god (or Jesus) is coming, and we're all f*cked, unless we get baptized.<<

Yes, in a way. But also remember that the PAYOFF is life after death. For almost all faiths, not just Christianity, are erected to deal with the horror of death. In your own, there is lots of belief in reincarnation.

>>There is so much more to live for. The world and the Universe is beautiful, and I am going to love as much of it as I possibly can, regardless of what city or culture I walk through.<<

Yes, beautiful and horrible, and -- as far as I know -- all there is for us. My own personal view is to try to operate based on evidence, but I think if you scratch most people you will find a bit of superstition. It is sort of like trying to beat the house in Vegas. We don't like the odds, so we invent fairy tales.

(sigh)

First, I think it's a bit ridiculous to suggest that atheists are itching to take over and persecute Christians and other believers. That just sounds like one of the more fevered paranoias of the Christian right.

My point about Twain, Nietzsche and Voltaire is that none of them were overly polite in their critiques of Christianity or religion in general. They did not traffic in insincere respect. Socrates was a master of sarcasm and he was put to death for impiety. Hell, I don't remember Jesus being all that respectful of the Pharisees.

Some people have this idea that at the end of the day we all have to respect each others' ideas. Personally, I think we just need to respect the good ones.