423c521e   
   XPost: alt.agnosticism, alt.atheism, alt.philosophy   
   XPost: alt.christnet.christianlife   
   From: reverend_dave@minister.com   
      
   Errol  wrote in   
   news:d1d945e4-4449-4409-95b2-a97787f6a0e4@g10g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:   
      
   > On Mar 5, 7:10 am, Reverend Dave  wrote:   
   >   
   >> Believing there are no gods is believing in the same way that eating   
   >> no apples is eating.   
   >>   
   >   
   > Huh??? :-)   
      
   Yes, it doesn't make that much sense, and yet it does.   
      
      
   >   
   > There are atheists and then there is atheism. Individual atheists   
   > might hold certain beliefs because they haven't sorted out their own   
   > epistemological basis for determing knowledge derived from truth or   
   > beliefs, however atheism needs to be clearly defined to eliminate this   
   > ambiguity which theists leap on to verify their own prejudices about   
   > atheists.   
      
   If someone who claims to be an atheist hasn't sorted it out, as you say,   
   and still holds some beliefs pertaining to the existence of a god or   
   gods, then the absolute best you can call that person is a skeptic.   
      
   >   
   > My vote is for the definition that states that atheism is the   
   > rejection of belief in the existence of deities, without any further   
   > assertions that deities do not exist.   
      
   Which plainly stated is - Atheists have no belief in the existence of a   
   god or gods.   
      
   *snip*   
      
      
   --   
   Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is   
   those who know little, not those who know much, who so positively assert   
   that this or that problem will never be solved by science. - Charles   
   Darwin   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)