Be skeptical of atheism.

My faith isn't blindly following scraps of paper from the middle east. We are a living faith with Holy Orders and active Monasticism.Our faith is Truth worship. Something you don't understand because in your mind it is "Oh no, anything but that."And you certainly aren't judging rightly.No, the epistemological black hole comes from pride and false humility. It isn't that one in that situation doesn't know, it is that they know better. They know better than to even receive instruction, because if they can't know, no one can know!It is faith in one's own understanding, not faith in The Truth, which has long been scribbled away as some absurdity.

So I don't agree with atheism=scepticism.   For me scepticism=agnosticism.

My faith isn't blindly following scraps of paper from the middle east. We are a living faith with Holy Orders and active Monasticism.Our faith is Truth worship. Something you don't understand because in your mind it is "Oh no, anything but that."And you certainly aren't judging rightly.No, the epistemological black hole comes from pride and false humility. It isn't that one in that situation doesn't know, it is that they know better. They know better than to even receive instruction, because if they can't know, no one can know!It is faith in one's own understanding, not faith in The Truth, which has long been scribbled away as some absurdity.

You don't seem to understand standards of evidence.

If you have sound evidence, you don't need faith.

And you don't need a book, or a church in order to know god(s).

If you have sound evidence, you don't need faith.

Normally you need faith to act reasonably upon sound evidence.

Evidence for what? I see plenty of evidence right now that you don't even know what you want evidence for. You have dismissed something, and are unwilling to understand it to the point that evidence would be meaningful.

I doubt evidence for you is any more substantial than believing what you read. I see this as a pretentious argument.

But truly, you don't need a book or teacher to know The Ultimate Reality exists. It's existence is self evident. And it should also be self evident that one's influences, priorities, attachments, aversions, etc. Have an effect on one's ability to be completwly honest toward The Truth.

And what is our religion? 


Truth worship.

Purifying the intellect.


And we have ways of going about this that help people at all stages of development. You don't understand our recognize our methods. You are simply dismissive. 

Normally you need faith to act reasonably upon sound evidence.

You are conflating "faith" with "confidence".

Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.

Not based on Quantifiable evidence.  Faith is the exact opposite of a justified, evidence based belief.

Faith is not thinking that he can, but knowing that he will.

Faith is not thinking that he can, but knowing that he will.

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about.  You are ignoring your epistemological limits.

You are conflating "faith" with "confidence".

Fatih, confidence and trust are synonyms.

I trust, have faith and confident that the vehicle approaching me will not cross over the center to a great degree to cause me to drive off the road and that is based observed by me evidence { observed reality }.

Yes, we know that this does happen occasionally.

God = Universe ergo God exists as Universe.

Uni - verse = one{ single } verse { narrative as expressed via occupied space }

" U "niverse { " G "od } =

1}eternally existent, metaphyical-1, mind/intellect/concepts and ego ergo concepts of God/Universe, Space, Time, Dogs etc,

-----metaphysical line of demarcation-----------

2} eternally existent, macro-infinite non-occupied space,

3} eternally existent, finite, occupied space Universe.

This is the primary Cosmic Trinity set, that,  none have ever added to it, or invalided it, with any rational, logical common sense and, none ever will.

123, ABC thats how easy " U "niverse { " G "od }can be...sung to M Jackson tune

Yeah, that's exactly what I'm talking about.  You are ignoring your epistemological limits.

Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.

If you're not a theist, then you're a de facto atheist.

If there were three boxes on a form, I wonder how many agnostics would tick the atheist box because they think of themselves as 'de facto atheists'!

I suppose one could argue that the a-prefix means it's a binary thing, but wikipedia has a page on that.

3Ru---In a religious context, "faith" has a little more baggage than the dictionary (which is merely a reflection of common usage and not authoritative).

Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see. 2 This is what the ancients were commended for.

In a religious context, "faith" has a little more baggage than the dictionary (which is merely a reflection of common usage and not authoritative).

If faith had no baggage, what would you have faith in?

You may not follow the same faith, but you have the same kind of faith as a Christian or a Jew.

If faith had no baggage, what would you have faith in?

He said it has "a little more baggage than the dictionary". This has got to be an intentional misrepresentation.

You may not follow the same faith, but you have the same kind of faith as a Christian or a Jew

I don't like the same ice cream as you but you still like the same kind of ice cream as me. What are you even saying?

You basically said no then yes.

You said you don't have the same faith then you said you have the same kind of faith. 

If faith had no baggage, what would you have faith in?  You may not follow the same faith, but you have the same kind of faith as a Christian or a Jew.

Faith in anything has baggage... The misrepresentation, if there is one, has been presented to 3RU7AL   by someone other than myself.

I'm saying that although your faith is placed in different things, we are both still referring to faith.

I'm saying that although your faith is placed in different things, we are both still referring to faith.

Confidence in hard data is not the same as faith in a bronze age superstition.

I suppose one could argue that the a-prefix means it's a binary thing, but wikipedia has a page on that.

The "hard data" is different from the "bronze age superstition".  Faith is still faith, and I'm guessing you believe that faith in "bronze age superstition" is misplaced.

Christianity is Truth worship through the purifying of the intellect. This is not a superstitious faith.

So, when you say "faith" (like "faith in god") do you mean "100% confidence" or just "some unspecified level of confidence"?