A much safer ploy! Allow me to join you ...

(It's a new Olympic sport for the rapturites - synchronised ascending)

I believe god exists....in a theists mind. It is a concept - an explanation to fill in gaps of understanding. Nothing more nothing less. Read a book, learn to think.

Oh and as a "side-note" when I experienced these paralyses, I experienced the feeling that there was an "evil force" in the room with me. In ingnorance I blamed demons, in knowledge I realized that is was just bad diet and sleep patterns.

They really don't need to prove that God doesn't exist.  They aren't open to the possibility of his existence, and they have no concrete reason to be.  But don't let that shake your personal beliefs, because they are far more important than a petty debate like this.  You should simply agree to disagree with these folks, even if they aren't respectful enough to do the same for you.  Don't argue with them, because you'll lose every argument, every time, if you try to prove the logical existence of God.  It simply isn't possible, and if faith is your cup of tea, that really shouldn't matter to you.

Don't stray from the core of your belief system.  If it's based on logic, you have no choice but to side with the atheists.  If it's based on faith, stick with what you've got.  They're like oil and water-- one has to rise to the top.  It's up to you to decide if it's logic or faith, and personally I don't find anything wrong with either of them.

I consider myself a logical person, but I hold faith just a little bit higher than logic.

Which, if your outlook is common, just goes to show how lucky the species has been to survive so long.

Or else perhaps you and your ilk are but selectively insane and in fact apply logic in the important areas of your life, even while you claim at the same time to favour belief without factual fundament?

It would explain your unlikely survival in the face of your assertion. It also explains beautifully why religion harbours so many frauds and liars. The religious person cannot be honest with himself.

Actually, mankind wouldn't be half as far along as we are today without those of us who allow faith to guide our hard, logical core.  It's the basis of being a visionary, knowing that more is possible that what the facts we presently have might lead us to believe.  I'm not talking about God or religion, of course, simply the mindset in which faith powers logic like gasoline in a combustion engine.  Based only on the post you've just made, you and your ilk would be the "if it ain't broked, don't fix it" bunch, who'd still have us running around with sharp metal sticks and animal-based transportation, persecuting anyone with different beliefs.

There's a well-defined line between religious zealots and those of us who choose to have faith that something beyond our sensual and intellectual perception, even though we may not be able to define it, exists.  This view in and of itself does not conflict with logic, so long as you aren't arrogant enough to believe you know what this something is.  If there's anything science has taught us, it's that there is always another layer of the onion waiting to be peeled away if you have the right instruments and an open mind.

Science also tells us that there's a realm in physics that is inherently immeasurable to us, namely the planck length, meaning we're quite free to dream about what might lay beyond.  I have faith that somewhere in that mess, there exists a consciousness that transcends our own, but only because logic allows it.  There's nothing ludicrous about such a belief, there's simply nothing to directly support it-- yet.  I'm not talking about resurrected men, talking snakes, burning bushes, psychics, or levitation.

Do you realize that the vast majority of these Christians won't be converted through intolerance?  Blatant insults and overtly hostile responses will show these people that you are exactly as "evil" and immoral as their churches tell them you are.  By following this course of action, you, my friend, are being extremely irrational, letting your emotions and personal convictions cloud your judgment and harm your cause.  Personally, I think this type of behavior should be banned from the "rational" response as they are anything but rational.  It reminds me of a member of one religion telling another how stupid and horrible he is for believing in some other God, which is something I believe 'you and your ilk' are trying to do away with, no?  Lead by example.

Butterbattle:

Faith is simply a different way of thinking about the world.  It doesn't require obedience or violence any more than logic demands that you exterminate the weak and crippled for the good of the gene pool.  Either way of thinking can be used wisely or abused, depending the brain doing the work.  If you skew the facts, you've got the rational under your thumb, fully convinced that he's right.  It's not much different from distorting a religion, and it's not much harder.  All you have to do in either case is gain the person's trust, lie to them, and then make sure your lies aren't discovered.

You're quite correct when you say that faith begins where knowledge ends, and that's part of its strength.  While logic has the luxury of always leading to a more correct answer, so long as your facts are correct, faith has the power to move the race forward in imprecise leaps and bounds.

Both are essential to the advancement of our species, and waging war on either is quite foolish.

Individual belief systems, sure.  They're easily corrupted.  But so is any culture, cause, or movement.

People are stupid.

But don't let me shake your faith that this course of action, insulting and belittling people because they believe differently from you, is the right thing to do.  Don't let me shake your faith that some day you'll put religion in its place.  Enjoy the power, confidence, and energy it gives you to come back to this site and talk down on the next wave of emailers.

Don't let anybody tell you that you're blindly following a cause that does more harm than good.  People need some bashing every now and then, don't you think?  It's the logical thing to do.

I think you're confusing faith with optimism.

Butterbattle:

1 & 2:  I'll refer to the second definition of faith.

"2. belief that is not based on proof: He had faith that the hypothesis would be substantiated by fact."

Logic demands that your beliefs should be based on proof and probability.  However, the probability of accomplishing extremely difficult tasks severely diminishes if the group of people undertaking them don't believe in the cause.  There's a certain energy that belief can provide which knowing that "if we all work together we have a better chance of succeeding" just doesn't.

3:  The point is that the evils ascribed to faith, the reasons it should be abolished, have their roots in the people rather than faith as a whole.  Faith is just one of a great many different ways those people could have brought them about.  Websites like this, or anything else where people come together for a common purpose, are another.  It's part of human nature.

4: Refers to the first, and you can't do it without relying on logic.  Faith and logic work side by side in varying degrees, depending on who you are.  That's why I say it's foolish to wage war on either.  The example used on dictionary.com which I posted above is an excellent example of faith and science working hand-in-hand.  It may lead the scientist down the wrong path until he loses faith, but it may also lead him to a discovery that would've taken other scientists decades to make working from the ground up.

5: Glory, glory, hallelujah!  You've been saved!  Glad I could be of service.

To the guy above him:

Yes, faith is closely tied to optimism, see excerpt from dictionary.com above.

To the guy above him:

Grow up and enlighten me.

Hear, Hear!

If I had a dollar for every theist who in conversation failed to distinguish between reasonable presumption and blind faith ...

Personally when I hear it I think of the drowning man clutching despairingly at his last straw - the re-invention of semantics in religion's favour.

Inexact use of language indicates either ignorance or intention to deceive. If religious people persist in resorting to it as a defense then they must take into account that they will be justifiably regarded as either stupid or deceitful by clear-thinking honest people.

Not a place I'd like to be myself ....

The burden of proof lies on you to prove the existence of God. Since you can't prove that (or maybe you can, but don't show us any conclusive evidence), that is enough reason for me to be an atheist. 

Asking someone to prove or disprove something without rational thinking is like asking someone to hear without functioning ears. Rational thinking (which many Christians believe God gave to humans) is the reason for the success of the human species. If you're expecting to "prove" something with mere faith, you can douse yourself with cold water right now. 

You've got a mighty fine brain in that cranium of yours. It's the best database of all our experiences in the known universe. Laws of logic need no source. 

The reason we focus on Christianity more than other religions is because people are more familiar with it than other religions, there are many atheists on these forums who are ex-Christian (I am ex-Jewish), and because Christian fundamentalists are pervasive in the politics and culture of a supposedly secular American society. 

Sincerely, 

SevenScarletSharks