Re: Evidence of God

Al Evan wrote:

> stoney <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > On Sat, 22 Nov 2003 10:04:02 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED],
> > Message ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in
> > alt.atheism;
> >
> > >On 21 Nov 2003 16:35:42 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (whysohard)
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > >>> On 21 Nov 2003 00:32:21 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (whysohard)
> > >>> wrote:
> >  snip
> > >>> >>>>>>>This is a good example of the wisdom of men.Since by their own decision
> > >>> >> > > to be an athiest, they gain faith in something else. Everyone has to
> > >>> >> > > believe they have an origin, so the same applies
> >  . only those with no wisdom would believe such a silly thing......
> > >>> >> > > The author of the above line should be commended for proving their
> > >>> >> > > own silliness, as you can apply any faith to it.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> Despite your erroneous conception of atheism, I do not have a faith.
> > >>> I see absolutely no sense in basing a belief in anything on faith.
> > >>> Believing something in spite of their being no evidence for it and in
> > >>> spite of it being irrational is silly, and you have provided no
> > >>> argument against that.
> > >>>
> > >>>
> > >>> None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
> > >>> "But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
> > >>
> > >>
> > >>
> > >
> > >
> > >>> >If you don't have a faith, then you have no faith in athiesm,
> > >>> > since athiesm cannot be proved to be correct-beyond reasonable doubt.
> > >>> > So you are an athiest by faith, despite the conception, are you not?
> > >>>
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >No I am not.  Atheism is not the positive claim of anything, so there
> > >is nothing to have faith in.  I am 100% certain that I have no faith
> > >in any god, and that is all atheism is.
> > >
> > >
> > >None of the Emperor's clothes had been so successful before.
> > >"But he has got nothing on," said a little child.
> >
> > Damn!  The moron, "why" can't even post properly
> >
> >
> >
> >              Stoney
> > "Designated Rascal and Rapscallion
> >                and
> >           SCAMPERMEISTER!"
> >
> > When in doubt, SCAMPER about!
> > When things are fair, SCAMPER everywhere!
> > When things are rough, can't SCAMPER enough!
> > /end humour alert
> >
> > alt.atheism military veteran #11
> > {so much for the 'no atheists in foxholes' rubbish}
>
> Stoney,
> Atheism is the disbelief in god.  Disbelief is an action:  To
> disbelieve something requires mental, and, sometimes, physical
> activity.  It is not, as you say above, "...Atheism is not the
> positive claim of anything..."  It most definitly is the positive
> claim that there is no god.
>
> Therefore, your response to Why, that being an Atheist requires no
> faith, is not true, because, if, as Why claims (and you did not
> disagree), there is no proof that god does not exist, then you must
> believe it as an act of faith--since you can't prove it.
>
> Thus, Why is logically correct:  You have Faith.

===>If you decline to buy a piece of beach front in Arizona
or the Bokklyn Bridge, you have "faith"????