Poor uneducated unintelligent aheists

[Eudaimonia]

---

The same goes for the word "skeptic" there is no word that atheists use that is exclusive to thier position. So any idea that can be crafted like this, "If only theists would just ask skeptic/intelligent/atheistic/green/deep/open-minded/well seasoned questions, they would see that God probably does not exist." Can be crafted by theists to impugn the idiocy of atheism. For me, I've realized that I am an atheist because my life experiences leave me with an inability to believe in God. I think it would be great to believe and I've spent most of my life earnestly seeking reasons to believe, and yet I don't.

On a different note, I wonder when Ashendent is going to post a link to the overwhelming evidence to support the idea that sexuality is so loose weave that people will pretty much just fuck whomever is nearest them... I doubt very much that it will be forthcoming and imagine that his "source" is http://www.imagination.com/intuition.his ass

Now, I'm not sure I understand your point...

My point was that a skeptical or critical question.. - the kind which challenges one's faith -are not usually asked by the faithful.. I don't see how one can draw from that that any skeptical, critical question means one MUST be atheist..

I used the word atheistic to suggest the naturalness of such a query from that position.. not to equate skepticism/critical analysis solely with atheists.. or to suggest that believers are not capable of critical analysis of their faith.. only that it is less likely.. the nature of faith usually requires suspension of critical analysis.. hence why it is called "faith"..

---

Having faith does not prevent critical analysis, it just prevents objective analysis.
I'm not sure what flavor or theism you're referencing, But in every chuch I've been in and spoken with the pastor, except 2 southern baptist churches, do allow questioning and critical thinking. Some more apologetic (read evangelical) denominations actually outwardly promote it.

If you know of some that don't feel free show them Luke 2:46-47 as a good example to follow, 1 Thes 5:20-21 as a clear command to test prophecies and prophets or Pr 14:15 for a good word of wisdom about it. If the denomination cherry picks the Bible, they're obviously making up the rules as they go. Most modern denominations (including non-denominational) have an all bible approach though, in my experience.

I understand critical analysis as a process that includes objectivity and reliance upon evidence .... Otherwise.. I understand non critical analysis as literary analysis where objectivity is not required and one’s subjective opinion is warranted ....

Irrespective of our disagreement on the terms.. my point is that faith by definition does not require any analysis and in my experience when analysis is attempted the goal is to rectify and/or justify one's belief.. It is a circular endeavor.. or an inductive analysis before deductive investigation...

In other words how many of the churches which you are familiar ask questions along the lines of why should the theophanies of distant tribal/desert dwellers loom heavily over my moral sensibilities.. This removes romantic and biased notions of their chosen status.. divine favor status etc.. or to seriously evaluate whether Jesus was a real person.. for instance.. Unless they are seeking ammunition to combat a disbeliever.. I have not known such thinking (similar that is..) to be prevalent among any religious group as a natural course of inquiry..