Atheism is the punk rock of religion

[Reforged]

No Raphael, a theist is someone who believes in a deity. Do you not adhere to your own rhetoric??

Cheery picking the dictionary now I see. Atheiofundy/ atheiotard... I see you haven't updated your religious views to be more accurate

That definition of faith certainly doesn't apply at all to Christians. Nor to most faiths. I'd explain it to you but it'd be a waste of effort. You are demonstrably incapable of serious thought, hence atheism.

For anyone else who happens accross this post...

What is Faith:
Being persuaded and fully committed in trust, involving a confident belief in the truth, value, and trustworthiness of God. When it comes to Christianity, 'faith' is defined by three separate but vitally connected aspects (especially from Luther and Melancthon onwards): notitia (informational content), assensus (intellectual assent), and fiducia (committed trust). So faith is the sum of having the information, being persuaded of its truthfulness, and trusting in it. To illustrate the three aspects: "Christ died for ours sins" (notitia); "I am persuaded that Christ died for our sins" (notitia + assensus); "I deeply commit in trust to Christ who I am persuaded died for our sins" (notitia + assensus + fiducia). Only the latter constitutes faith, on the Christian view.

Consequently, notitia and fiducia without assensus is blind and therefore not faith. This shipwrecks the egregious canard that faith is merely a blind leap. Faith goes beyond reason—i.e., into the arena of trust—but never against reason. From the Enlightenment onwards, faith has been subject to constant attempts at redefining it into the realm of the irrational or irrelevant (e.g., Kant's noumenal category); but all such attempts are built on irresponsible straw man caricatures that bear no resemblance to faith as held under the Christian view: notitia, assensus, and fiducia.

Please pretend that you didn't read that Raphael. I wouldn't like you to stop pretending that I run away from questions

Pretending? I think people who read this can judge for themselves. Not only did you fail to register a theology is based around a deity thereby making your distinction meaningless but you didn't even make an attempt to answer my question. Instead you went on a long rant trying to convince people that faith is as legitimate a reason for showing certainty in anything as proof, even going so far as to attack the enlightenment itself. A period responsible for some of the most ground-breaking discoveries and innovations ever made. I'm not sure I've ever seen such a desperate, brazen and shameless attempt to sidetrack a subject in my life.
I'm not moved by your insults or your stalling fr0d0, I'm too adult to humour either.

I'll paste it here again in the vain hope you might develop some dignity and actually answer it but I'm not expecting much.
"Your theology is Christianity, your position is therefore Yahweh exists and the Bible is true to the letter. Do you deny this?"

Answer, retreat or further insult the intelligence of everyone here.
Your choice.