XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.athiesm, alt.talk.creationism   
   XPost: sci.skeptic   
      
   On Sun, 18 Jan 2015 09:41:07 +1100, felix_unger  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 12-January-2015 2:21 AM, Malte Runz wrote:   
   >   
   >> "felix_unger"  skrev i meddelelsen   
   >> news:chec85Ft503U1@mid.individual.net...   
   >>   
   >>> it's a belief that you have, if you happen to think that. it's also   
   >>> something that you happen to believe is true. to say you have faith that   
   >>> your belief is correct is just another way of saying that. but in this   
   >>> instance the amount of 'faith' in your belief is miniscule since you   
   >>> already know that it can't happen. so we could say that for all intents   
   >>> and purpose, there is really no faith involved. ...   
   >>   
   >> Good. But that means that there /is/, after all, a difference between   
   >> religious faith (based not "on proof") and belief where "there is   
   >> really no   
   >> faith involved".   
   >   
   >there are no beliefs that don't involve a degree of faith in them being true   
      
       Another basic starting line these morons can't get a "far" as.   
      
   >>> ... however, if your bathroom were in a thatched bungalow in the African   
   >>> jungle, where tigers are know to roam, that had only open unglazed   
   >>> windows, you would need to have a great deal more faith that any such   
   >>> belief was correct. this is the problem with you atheists. ...   
   >>   
   >> Why does everybody say there is a problem with atheist?   
   >   
   >atheists don't seem to be able to understand simple things that ordinary   
   >ppl can   
      
       That's for damn sure.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)