The Context of "Separation of Church and State"
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church and State…An excellent discussion of The Separation Illusion by Gregory Koukl at Stand to Reason is at this site.
--Thomas Jefferson
Atheism is not the opposite of religion. It is as much based on faith, and has a set of beliefs as any other religion. Atheism relies on the active suppression of the truth about God. In any honest intellectual discussion, the truth about God is irresistible, but atheists and secular fundamentalists dismiss or explain away large areas of human experience related to spiritual and supernatural phenomena. In fact, one of the fundamental beliefs of atheism is that there is no supernatural. "In the beginning, there was only the cosmos" is a fundamental belief of atheism, sustained only by faith.
Yet, the Supreme Court has maintained the illusion that it did not establish religion when it favored atheism in associating everything having to do with God as religion. Atheism has elements of religious faith. The position of the Supreme Court is logically in error.
It takes faith to believe that the cosmos is all there is, to suppress the truth, and believe that there is no God.
posted at 2:16 PM PermaLink
8 Comments:
Atheism is not the opposite of religion, because some religions can be atheistic. It also doesn't have a set of beliefs or doctrines. It is nothing more and nothing less than the absence of theism - the absence of belief in gods.
http://atheism.about.com/od/aboutatheism/p/atheism101.htm
Even atheists explain religious experience in terms of psychology because they believe that there is no God.
Yet the atheists who actively suppress the truth about God are behaving as if atheism were a religion.
They have to base their belief that there is no God on nothing but an assertion based on faith. Where they present at the Creation of the world to say that God doesn't exist? Thus, they can't prove empirically that there is no God. They are not omnipotent and exhaustive in knowledge to say that they have examined all possible phenomena and conclude that God doesn't exist.
Thus they only believe by faith that there is no God.
Thus the Supreme Court has established a belief akin to the establishment of religion.
If some religions can be atheistic, then atheism can be a religion.
Thus, the supreme court has violated the constiution.
The Supreme Court is in denial.
It is biased against the existence of God.
The fact that a religion can include atheism does not logically mean that, therefore, atheism is a religion. Some religions include ritual recitation of sacred texts, but that doesn't mean that ritual recitation is - all by itself - a religion. That's nonsense.
Follow the link I gave. Atheism is not a religion. Atheism is not based on faith.
The atheist has limited himself to what he can see with his eyes. His knowledge is limited to empirical knowledge.
Since he is limited by time and space, he cannot reach beyond the planets, nor travel to the past. He cannot say "I have seen everything" or "I have gone everywhere."
Therefore, he makes a leap of faith and says "there is no God."
Atheism is most certainly based on faith because it fills the gap of what the atheist cannot see and where he cannot go.
"Therefore, he makes a leap of faith and says "there is no God.""
You've already been informed that that is not the definition of atheism. If you have to make up things to attack, then you have essentially conceded the argument because you concede that you can't criticize what atheism really is.
There is only one definition that prevails:
GOD IS.
Post a Comment
<< Home