American Atheists....

[Way Cool Jr]

Interesting article.

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10277230&top_story=1

30 Million atheists in America, nearly double the amount of Jews, but we will always be labels as "anti-god" How can we be "anti-god" when we don't believe in god. :(

[avinson]

<--- One of the 30 million :)

[Denny]

I started reading the article, but it went too far left of my screen for me to even scroll. :o

[DarkWolf]

Interesting article.

http://www.economist.com/daily/news/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10277230&top_story=1

30 Million atheists in America, nearly double the amount of Jews, but we will always be labels as "anti-god" How can we be "anti-god" when we don't believe in god. :(

Actually, the article states 30 million in the last census answered "no religion". While that includes athiests, that doesn't imply only athiests.

Never the less, that number is double what it was in the 1990 census. In contrast, only 2.8 million claim to be Jewish, and 53 million claim to be Catholic (the largest christian denomination in America).

It's going to be interesting to see how things shake out in the 2010 census :) According to the article, some polls show that young American's are turning away from religion in record numbers, because of Bush and his overreaching religious agenda, and general incompetence.

[Mr Majestyk]

Young Americans are also turning away from getting a job and supporting themselves in record numbers, opting instead to sponge off Mommy and Daddy. Is that because of someone else too?

[DarkWolf]

Young Americans are also turning away from getting a job and supporting themselves in record numbers, opting instead to sponge off Mommy and Daddy. Is that because of someone else too?

If Mommy and Daddy are allowing it, then yes, it's because of Mommy and Daddy spoiling their children.

[flashstang04]

It's because left leaning political correctness has made them all victims of something...they want everything handed to them.


"He called me something, I can't work"

"I can't express my feelings at work"

"I am asked to do too much"

"I am stressed out because of work and it's affecting my marriage"

" My people were oppressed a hundred years ago, now give me something"


Our grandfathers would have laughed at this crap.....

[Mr Majestyk]

If Mommy and Daddy are allowing it, then yes, it's because of Mommy and Daddy spoiling their children.

Nah....it couldn't possibly be just because the effers are lazy, now could it???

[FSON]

Newspaper today or yesterday:

Young people are using less drugs, although prescription pain killers are the drug of choice.

Dang it Bush, you're hurten our young people and driving them pain killers to numb life. We need some legislation. OK, Dems, let's beat this one to death in congress for the next 15 years.

[Mr Majestyk]

It's because left leaning political correctness has made them all victims of something...they want everything handed to them.


"He called me something, I can't work"

"I can't express my feelings at work"

"I am asked to do too much"

"I am stressed out because of work and it's affecting my marriage"

" My people were oppressed a hundred years ago, now give me something"


Our grandfathers would have laughed at this crap.....

The above excuses could all be summarized by:

"I am a whiney _____" (insert bitch or bastard as appropriate)

[DarkWolf]

Nah....it couldn't possibly be just because the effers are lazy, now could it???

And who enables them to be lazy?

That's right. Mommy and Daddy. But in this day and age, parents don't want to take responsibility for how their children are raised, so it's understandable that you aren't grasping this concept of the parents being at fault.

It's because left leaning political correctness has made them all victims of something...they want everything handed to them.

:rolleyes:

Going back to parental responsibility, lazy parents beget lazy children.

[Mr Majestyk]

And who enables them to be lazy?

That's right. Mommy and Daddy. But in this day and age, parents don't want to take responsibility for how their children are raised, so it's understandable that you aren't grasping this concept of the parents being at fault.



:rolleyes:

Going back to parental responsibility, lazy parents beget lazy children.


You, like many others, place the blame anywhere but where it belongs. I, and many other parents I know, take full responsibity for how our children are raised. Some of the kids are just lazy....but like you, they'll blame anyone but themselves. Don't feel too bad, you're not the only blind boy out there today.

[DarkWolf]

You, like many others, place the blame anywhere but where it belongs.

You, like many others, know jack shit about me... yet try to come off clever with bold claims.

I, and many other parents I know, take full responsibity for how our children are raised.

That would make you a rarity in this day and age.

Some of the kids are just lazy....but like you, they'll blame anyone but themselves. Don't feel too bad, you're not the only blind boy out there today.

Failure.

[Mr Majestyk]

Being a parent myself, I know just a little about the subject about which I speak. Regarding you personally, I don't give a rat's ass, nor is any real challenge to point out the fallacies in your statements. As I posted before, you're just one of many who falls into the "blame someone else" parade. Doesn't make you stupid by any means, just wrong in this case.

[D]

Whatever happened to people taking responsibility for their own actions?


People turning away from relgion because of the President? Guess their faith wasn't that strong to begin with. :rolleyes:

[Mr Majestyk]

The statement about it being Bush's fault was in line with cetain posts in this thread, as well as being typically naive.

[flashstang04]

That is so true...if your faith is based on your perception on someone elses faith, then you have to examine more than you think. We live in a "pass the buck" society..

[DarkWolf]

As I posted before, you're just one of many who falls into the "blame someone else" parade. Doesn't make you stupid by any means, just wrong in this case.

As I posted before, you're just one of the many who falls into the "doesn't know jack shit about me" parade. Doesn't make you stupid by any means, just wrong in this case.

And, as I said before, you are among the minority of parents that take responsibility for the way they raise their children. Take the compliment for what it is.

The statement about it being Bush's fault was in line with cetain posts in this thread, as well as being typically naive.

Just restating what the article showed.

That is so true...if your faith is based on your perception on someone elses faith, then you have to examine more than you think. We live in a "pass the buck" society..

Care to explain where it indicated anyone was basing their faith on someone else's? All I saw was that young people are turning away from religion. That doesn't say anything about faith.

Oh yea of quick judgement.

[D]

Care to explain where it indicated anyone was basing their faith on someone else's? All I saw was that young people are turning away from religion. That doesn't say anything about faith.

Oh yea of quick judgement.

Was it, or was it not you who said "According to the article, some polls show that young American's are turning away from religion in record numbers, because of Bush and his overreaching religious agenda, and general incompetence"?

[DarkWolf]

I did. And I ask again, what does that have to do with faith?

[D]

I did. And I ask again, what does that have to do with faith?


People turning away from relgion because of the President? Guess their faith wasn't that strong to begin with. :rolleyes:

Already answered you.

[DarkWolf]

Already answered you.

People often confuse religion with faith. While they have some overlap, religion is not faith.

[D]

People often confuse religion with faith. While they have some overlap, religion is not faith.

My mistake. I thought it said faith. Me iz not da goodest reedr.

[Mr Majestyk]

As I posted before, you're just one of the many who falls into the "doesn't know jack shit about me" parade.

As I posted before, I don't give a rat's ass about you personally, or care to "know jack shit about about you". You're still wrong, nothing more.

And, as I said before, you are among the minority of parents that take responsibility for the way they raise their children. Take the compliment for what it is.

You know nothing about the parents of the kids our child is friends with. None of them seem to shirk their responsibilities, so I don't find myself, or them, to be in any minority whatsoever. Stick to what you know about, not things of which you are ignorant. And don't forget to blame someone else for your ignorance.

[DarkWolf]

As I posted before, I don't give a rat's ass about you personally, or care to "know jack shit about about you".

You keep saying this. Yet you continue to make assumptions about me. You are the definition of hypocrisy, my friend.

You know nothing about the parents of the kids our child is friends with. None of them seem to shirk their responsibilities, so I don't find myself, or them, to be in any minority whatsoever.

Yay for anecdotes!

Unfortunately, you and your circle of friends don't amount to the hair on a rat's ass, when compared to the entire country.

And don't forget to blame someone else for your ignorance.

You just can't give it up, can you?

[Mr Majestyk]

Was it, or was it not you who said "According to the article, some polls show that young American's are turning away from religion in record numbers, because of Bush and his overreaching religious agenda, and general incompetence"?

You got to laugh at someone using "an article" and "some polls" to try to back up, and still fail to make, some BS point. Our kid has been active in the youth group at our church, along with many of his friends, and Bush has been in office the entire time. He may or not like Bush, but he's got enough common sense to make up his own mind about religion and doesn't appear too concerned about some "overreaching religious agenda and general incompetance" LOL

Don't sell our youth short, many of them are not nearly as dumb as the older folks writing articles (and quoting articles) about them.

[Mr Majestyk]

You keep saying this. Yet you continue to make assumptions about me. You are the definition of hypocrisy, my friend.



Yay for anecdotes!

Unfortunately, you and your circle of friends don't amount to the hair on a rat's ass, when compared to the entire country.



You just can't give it up, can you?

Sad, yes you are. Come back when you grow up and can mount a cognizant argument. No assuption there, it shows in your pathetic attempts at posting in this thread.

For the verbally challenged

cognizant:
Main Entry: cog·ni·zant
Function: adjective
Def: knowledgeable of something especially through personal experience

[flashstang04]

Unfortunately, you and your circle of friends don't amount to the hair on a rat's ass, when compared to the entire country.




Care to expound on that some?

[Mr Majestyk]

X2

Even in this thread, no one else seems to be outwardly disagreeing with my posts. Please do tell us more about this "minority" and exactly who considers them to be such, other than yourself LOL

[DarkWolf]

Care to expound on that some?

Well, let's see, we're nearing 400 million people in this country. One person, and their circle of friends, is more often far less than 1% of that 400 million.

I think it's fairly obvious that the anecdotal data point of one person and their circle of friends, is not a proper sampling needed to draw general conclusions.

No assuption there, it shows in your pathetic attempts at posting in this thread.

For the verbally challenged

cognizant:
Main Entry: cog·ni·zant
Function: adjective
Def: knowledgeable of something especially through personal experienceWell, while we're on the subject, for the verbally challenged

assumption:
<dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd">as·sump·tion http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?assump02.wav=assumption'))</dd><dt class="pron">Pronunciation:</dt><dd class="pron"> \ə-ˈsəm(p)-shən\ </dd><dt class="func">Function:</dt><dd class="func">noun </dd></dl>4: arrogance (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/arrogance), pretension (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pretension)
5 a: an assuming (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/assuming) that something is true b: a fact or statement (as a proposition, axiom, postulate, or notion) taken for granted

Please do tell us more about this "minority" and exactly who considers them to be such, other than yourself LOL

Parents suing video game companies, because they bought their child a Mature rated game, and are shocked it contains violence and sexuality.

Or where they go on the internet. Or what movies they go see. Or when Huckleberry Fin gets banned from a school's curriculum.

The very existence of the Parents Television Council is evidence that parents would rather not be responsible for the TV their children watch. Instead of limiting the time their children watch TV to when they can be there to monitor it, they'd rather have the "nanny" watch their kids for them.

More and more there are stories all over the country of parents that would rather have society raise their children for them. Because they're too busy. Or overwhelmed. Or tired. Or they "just don't know what to do".

But god forbid we have any corporal punishment! Or sports. Or valedictorians. Because it's just not fair to the other kids, regardless of the effort they put into it.

It's no wonder people overwhelmingly expect everything to be handed to them. It's no wonder they feel entitled. It's no wonder they're quick to sue. It's no wonder they want to take the easy way out. It's no wonder they'd rather mooch off their parents the rest of their lives. THEY WERE RAISED THAT WAY.

[Mr Majestyk]

Well, let's see, we're nearing 400 million people in this country. One person, and their circle of friends, is more often far less than 1% of that 400 million.

I think it's fairly obvious that the anecdotal data point of one person and their circle of friends, is not a proper sampling needed to draw general conclusions.

Well, while we're on the subject, for the verbally challenged

assumption:
<dl><dt class="hwrd">Main Entry:</dt><dd class="hwrd">as·sump·tion http://www.m-w.com/images/audio.gif (javascript:popWin('/cgi-bin/audio.pl?assump02.wav=assumption'))</dd><dt class="pron">Pronunciation:</dt><dd class="pron"> \ə-ˈsəm(p)-shən\ </dd><dt class="func">Function:</dt><dd class="func">noun </dd></dl>4: arrogance (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/arrogance), pretension (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/pretension)
5 a: an assuming (http://www.m-w.com/dictionary/assuming) that something is true b: a fact or statement (as a proposition, axiom, postulate, or notion) taken for granted



Parents suing video game companies, because they bought their child a Mature rated game, and are shocked it contains violence and sexuality.

Or where they go on the internet. Or what movies they go see. Or when Huckleberry Fin gets banned from a school's curriculum.

The very existence of the Parents Television Council is evidence that parents would rather not be responsible for the TV their children watch. Instead of limiting the time their children watch TV to when they can be there to monitor it, they'd rather have the "nanny" watch their kids for them.

More and more there are stories all over the country of parents that would rather have society raise their children for them. Because they're too busy. Or overwhelmed. Or tired. Or they "just don't know what to do".

But god forbid we have any corporal punishment! Or sports. Or valedictorians. Because it's just not fair to the other kids, regardless of the effort they put into it.

It's no wonder people overwhelmingly expect everything to be handed to them. It's no wonder they feel entitled. It's no wonder they're quick to sue. It's no wonder they want to take the easy way out. It's no wonder they'd rather mooch off their parents the rest of their lives. THEY WERE RAISED THAT WAY.

Fairly decent rant, but be careful on your spell check there sport, and don't make assumptions based on what the media in this country or internet sites may spoon feed you. Negative reporting is often assumed by an indescriminate viewer/reader to be the norm for a much larger population than is the case in reality.

Main Entry: fin
Function: noun
Def: an external membranous process of an aquatic animal (as a fish) used in propelling or guiding the body


For the verbally challenged:

Main Entry: in·dis·crim·i·nate
Function: adjective
Def: not marked by careful distinction : deficient in discrimination and discernment

[DarkWolf]

Fairly decent rant, but be careful on your spell check there sport, and don't make assumptions based on what the media in this country or internet sites may spoon feed you. Negative reporting is often assumed by an indescriminate viewer/reader to be the norm for a much larger population than is the case in reality.

I don't get it. Are you now denying people are overwhelmingly lazy and want everything handed to them? Are you denying that people don't want to take responsibility for their own actions?

Or, are you doing just what you're warning me against, and using your own anecdotal evidence of how you and your friends raise your kids, and assuming it's the norm for a much larger population?

[Mr Majestyk]

Some do that, but not everyone, and certainly not the majority. Some people have always tried to get out of taking responsibilty for their actions, that's nothing new or surprising. Since this is a theology forum, look at Adam and Eve as the original example of shirking responsibility. Adam blamed Eve for making him eat of the forbidden fruit, while Eve blamed the serpent for making her eat of it first. Since they were the only two humans in the world at that time, you could say in that case that the majority of people (or actually all of the people) blamed others instead of taking responsibilty for their own actions, and be 100% correct. They did not, however, continue that manner of behavior as an ongoing lifestyle.

I prefer to see the glass as half full, rather than half empty, until proven otherwise. Freeloading kids, who do exist in significant number, are however not representative of the majority, at least not yet. All I have to do is walk into any retail or eating establishment for proof that young Americans are indeed willing to work.

[DarkWolf]

And I agree with you to an extent. I've never suggested no one is willing to work, or take responsibility for their own actions.

Honestly, we cannot know which group makes up the majority. We can only base our conclusions on the evidence we are given. I'd probably be better off not using "minority" and "majority", as I cannot know for certain. I won't change my past statements, but I will from this point use "many" instead, if we should continue this debate.

[flashstang04]

I think we are saying similar things to a point....but just to clarify.. we are nowhere NEAR 400,000,000 poulation..... last census put us at 301,139,947....

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/us.html

[DarkWolf]

I think we are saying similar things to a point....but just to clarify.. we are nowhere NEAR 400,000,000 poulation..... last census put us at 301,139,947....

https://www.cia.gov/library/publications/the-world-factbook/print/us.html

My bad, I thought I'd read it was over 330 million in the 2000 census. Not sure where I got that number though.

[Mr Majestyk]

And I agree with you to an extent. I've never suggested no one is willing to work, or take responsibility for their own actions.

Honestly, we cannot know which group makes up the majority. We can only base our conclusions on the evidence we are given. I'd probably be better off not using "minority" and "majority", as I cannot know for certain. I won't change my past statements, but I will from this point use "many" instead, if we should continue this debate.

I agree completely with many.....too many actually.

[DarkWolf]

I agree completely with many.....too many actually.

On that, we agree completely :)

[Casper]

Young Americans are also turning away from getting a job and supporting themselves in record numbers, opting instead to sponge off Mommy and Daddy. Is that because of someone else too?

We can be thankful for that.

Consider what it does for the entry level job market.

Not to mention commuter traffic.

And then there is the personal enjoyment you get when you lay off some dingbat "single parent" who is supporting 3-4 30+ Year old "children".

"But I have a family to feed!"

"Your family consistsof 3 adults in their late 20s and a dozen cats"

"You just don't like cats"

"That's not true, if cooked right I like them very much"

"I'm going to HR!"

"Don't bother, they are on their way to see you now."

-click-

[Brain_Mach1]

I like you example Casper.

I am currently in a case with the Texas Employment Commision because of an 80 year old employee who quit. She claims I owe her for processing 2204# of raw material but I have invoices which show I only bought 1200# of raw material and 400# of it was still in the wharehouse when she came for her check!

She has to take care of her family. Her kids are almost my Mom's age!

The previous owner never checked her work.

[Zarathustra]

People often confuse religion with faith. While they have some overlap, religion is not faith.

What? I don't know how how you mean that. I guess you're right to a certain degree. Faith is the disease that infects the body by means of religion. Is this what you mean?

[Mr Majestyk]

You have that completely backwards. One does not need religion to have faith. Religion, at least in the case of Christianity, is a part of ones faith and serves no purpose without the faith the precedes it.

Do you consider the Islamic faith a disease that has infected the bodies of your Iranian forebears by the way?

[Casper]

Religion is a meme, not a disease.

Faith is a conclusion, based on memes.

[flashstang04]

Religion is a meme, not a disease.

Faith is a conclusion, based on memes.

I would disagree. I have known many that have much faith while not having religion. I guess then one must ask "what is religion". For instance, I am a Christian, yet I am not religious. I know that I cannot get closer to Heaven by jumping through man made religious hoops. Being dunked and eating bread will not get you closer to the Father. Christians are saved through faith alone, and NOTHING else. On the other side of the coin..we ALL know people that are very religious, and have no faith at all. In fact, we all know people that are very religious, and may not even be Christians at all while claiming to be, relying on attendance numbers to save them in the end.

Scripture is not a religion, and one can come to faith through scripture alone.

[DarkWolf]

What? I don't know how how you mean that. I guess you're right to a certain degree. Faith is the disease that infects the body by means of religion. Is this what you mean?

Faith is a belief, despite any evidence, that something is true (ie: belief in God).

Religion is an organized set of rules and practices, generally based around a particular faith (or belief).

They often interweave, but they are not the same. Faith exists without religion, but religion typically cannot exist without faith.

[Brain_Mach1]

Christians are saved through faith alone, and NOTHING else.
Can you give the bible verse and bible translation please?

[Zarathustra]

Religion is a meme, not a disease.

Faith is a conclusion, based on memes.

I like it...

[Casper]

I would disagree. I have known many that have much faith while not having religion. I guess then one must ask "what is religion". For instance, I am a Christian, yet I am not religious. I know that I cannot get closer to Heaven by jumping through man made religious hoops. Being dunked and eating bread will not get you closer to the Father. Christians are saved through faith alone, and NOTHING else. On the other side of the coin..we ALL know people that are very religious, and have no faith at all. In fact, we all know people that are very religious, and may not even be Christians at all while claiming to be, relying on attendance numbers to save them in the end.

Scripture is not a religion, and one can come to faith through scripture alone.

There are many memes, religious memes are just one category. And you have to seriously limit the definition of religion to fit your stance that you "have faith without religion".

I think I know what you meant, that you have a faith based on something other than an organized structure, but that isn't the only form religion can take. Nor is your faith the only form that faith can take.

I have to ask, how do you claim to know the minds of those with whom you disagree? Claiming that someone is religious without faith puts you in the Karnack category. Perhaps they have faith that their stance is valid?

[flashstang04]

Can you give the bible verse and bible translation please?



Are you comfortable with KJV? I would assume that you are:


“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” -Ephesians 2:8,9

[flashstang04]

There are many memes, religious memes are just one category. And you have to seriously limit the definition of religion to fit your stance that you "have faith without religion".

I think I know what you meant, that you have a faith based on something other than an organized structure, but that isn't the only form religion can take. Nor is your faith the only form that faith can take.

I have to ask, how do you claim to know the minds of those with whom you disagree? Claiming that someone is religious without faith puts you in the Karnack category. Perhaps they have faith that their stance is valid?

First you would have to clarify your question. Which people are you talking about that I disagree with? I agree with many peoples "religious beliefs" in the Christian world. I am not mind reading by any means. There are many who think that they are saved by works. While it's true that "faith without works is dead", there can be faith with NO works, just as there can be works without faith.

In short, I can believe the same things that some people can, yet if they have not made a valid profession of faith, then they are not and never have been Christian. This is seen many times in people that have been brought up in the church and do what they have been "taught" because their parents did, and never receive Christ. It's akin to wearing a fireman jacket and hat....you may look the part, but you aren't equipped to fight any fires.

[Casper]

It was mainly rhetorical.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but your claim that certain people have never made a "profession of faith" assumes you know their personal thoughts.

You are verging on the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

[flashstang04]

It was mainly rhetorical.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing, but your claim that certain people have never made a "profession of faith" assumes you know their personal thoughts.

You are verging on the "No True Scotsman" fallacy.

Oh well I would in noway claim to know someones heart. That is impossible. All I am saying is that it DOES happen. You said "certain" people in a way that makes it sound like I had a specific people in mind, which I didn't. But I have opinions like anyone else.

[Casper]

Bad wording on my part.

I do know of an example that almost fits, although it isn't because he was raised that way and just goes through the motions. It is because he had to be confirmed to marry his current wife. So he sits in church, going through the motions to keep the peace, and allows his children to learn catholic values because he truly doesn't see anything wrong with them overall. He is an agnostic and is quite happy with his spirituality. Pascal's wager means nothing to him.

[flashstang04]

Bad wording on my part.

I do know of an example that almost fits, although it isn't because he was raised that way and just goes through the motions. It is because he had to be confirmed to marry his current wife. So he sits in church, going through the motions to keep the peace, and allows his children to learn catholic values because he truly doesn't see anything wrong with them overall. He is an agnostic and is quite happy with his spirituality. Pascal's wager means nothing to him.


How is that you and I, who are on opposite ends of the spectrum I would say, always end up saying the same thing lol.

[Casper]

Probably because we view these things as matters of "walking a private personal path".

And we both have a "live and let live" philosophy. I guess that is just something that comes with age.

[Brain_Mach1]

“For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast.” -Ephesians 2:8,9

Christians are saved through faith aloneYour statement and the Ephesians are not the same. Ephesians does not say alone. This is the biggest misquote of Protestants.

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

or NAB James 2:17 So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.While it's true that "faith without works is dead", there can be faith with NO works, just as there can be works without faith.

So it is not by Faith Alone. It is both!

[Casper]

No fair! Luther considered James heretical at best.

[flashstang04]

Your statement and the Ephesians are not the same. Ephesians does not say alone. This is the biggest misquote of Protestants.

James 2:17 Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

or NAB James 2:17 So also faith of itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

So it is not by Faith Alone. It is both!

I believe that you are taking it out of context. What it is referring to is that the mark of someone who has accepted Christ in faith is works. It is definitely not making good works the co- qualifier of salvation. You and I are a certain way BECAUSE we are Christian, so our works show the change inside, but do nothing to usher us closer to salvation apart from Christ. If that were so then we would have the power to get "unsaved" due to non- works, and that is just not so.

[Mr Majestyk]

There are many memes, religious memes are just one category. And you have to seriously limit the definition of religion to fit your stance that you "have faith without religion".

I think I know what you meant, that you have a faith based on something other than an organized structure, but that isn't the only form religion can take. Nor is your faith the only form that faith can take.

I have to ask, how do you claim to know the minds of those with whom you disagree? Claiming that someone is religious without faith puts you in the Karnack category. Perhaps they have faith that their stance is valid?

There will be those who use religion simply as a means of socializing with others in an environment where they are unlikely to be shunned. These people could not accurately be termed "religious" however. You can indeed have faith without religion, but religious teaching and communion can further solidify one's faith.

[FSON]

Why is the word "faith" used to describe one's relationship with one's G#d and in the same sentence the word "know" is used.
What is the relationship between Faith and Knowledge?

[Casper]

Why is the word "faith" used to describe one's relationship with one's G#d and in the same sentence the word "know" is used.
What is the relationship between Faith and Knowledge?

Now that is the first really good question I've seen from you in a long time.

[Mr Majestyk]

I didn't use the word "know" in the same sentence with the word "faith" in any sentence I posted in this thread.

[Casper]

I didn't use the word "know" in the same sentence with the word "faith" in any sentence I posted in this thread.

However it is often used as a non-sequitor that even an atheist has faith, no mater what he or she "knows".

I call it a non-sequitor because I see no issue.

[FSON]

Now that is the first really good question I've seen from you in a long time.
Thank you, somehow I now feel like a student.

[FSON]

I didn't use the word "know" in the same sentence with the word "faith" in any sentence I posted in this thread.
In general religio-speak.