So in order to think logically you must surrender your faith? That doesn't seem to be quite so simple. Asserting that there is not a god without any evidence may be just as easily dismissed in this case.
Well the idea of god existed before the idea of anti-god, therefore the god idealists must prove their premise first. But I understand what you are saying, and yes the dispute is impossible to solve.
So in order to think logically you must surrender your faith? That doesn't seem to be quite so simple. Asserting that there is not a god without any evidence may be just as easily dismissed in this case.
I don't assert there is no god. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. Gnostic atheism is the assertion there is no god, which is an ideology I don't prescribe to, it's just as folly as theism.
I don't assert there is no god. Atheism is the lack of belief in a god. Gnostic atheism is the assertion there is no god, which is an ideology I don't prescribe to, it's just as folly as theism.
I wasn't referring to you in specific. Just a general statement. I can honestly say we're on the same page, although I choose to have faith in something more. I'm intrigued by both sides opinions.