Would someone, or a collection of someones, be willing to provide a definition of "faith"?

"Those who walk in the clouded vision of faith are unaware that all around them is a beautiful, glorious world, byzantine in its complexity, rich in its diversity, capable of inspiring more awe and wonder than even the most wildly imaginative fantasies of humans. We stand on the shores of galaxies, we map the countless branches of the tree of life and find our own small leaf among them; we write down the harmonies and symmetries that govern the cosmos on a piece of paper. Compared to the vast sweep of natural history, all the pantheons of the past seem like pale shadows. Who needs the small mythologies of a bygone age when we have the entire universe to study and explore?"

Are you saying that those who believe in God are unable to comprehend or to appreciate the beauty and majesty of the natural world as deeply as atheists are? This seems like the sort of sweeping generalization, couched in beautiful language, that the faithful are often accused of. Why should a believer in God be any less capable of appreciating the world we have been given?

For that matter, I don't necessarily see where C.S. Lewis has made a gaffe either. Specifically, I haven't yet found on the site here anywhere where anybody has discussed C.S. Lewis's notion that The Fall was not inevitable. In most (all?) of C.S. Lewis's fictional worlds, The Fall never happened, and this is why they are so "perfect."

The Fall, it is believed, is the source of suffering and our desire to sin (although I've been asking myself lately why The Fall makes me want to sleep with my neighbor's wife and not, say, throw tomatos at her, or spend long hours fantasizing about her fixing my gutters and sealing my driveway -- it seems that this Evil Urge is best explained by evolution). We are right to disbelieve it, but shouldn't ignore it if we're going to actively claim that Christianity is internally inconsistant.

I'm becoming increasingly convinced that Atheist authors should have a Christian (or former Christian) proofread their work before they publish it, so as to avoid raising objections that are "easily harmonized". (e.g. Dawkins and the geneology of Jesus, or Stenger and the seed of the woman.)

I can appreciate the above essay in terms of something written for Atheists to reflect on, but I think it goes too far in accusing Paul of a "gaffe."

It's wonderful to be able to see the world as it really is, it is even more empowering to realize that we don't need to wait for a "Second Coming" or a "rapture" in order to change the way the world is, we have the power to do wonderful things and we CAN solve the largest problems that now face us. We don't need to be "saved" by some imaginary sky daddy.

I agree with terrence - this is a book in itself.

Anyone with an open mind can only be cheered by the thought and it can be used to open a chink in the armour of anyone with a closed mind.

I can't wait to get my hands on the book you are working on, your writing style is great and your imagery can be quite evocative. Good luck!

I think you've just perfected fusion technology. That comment is worth a billion words of other books.

"No, I don't believe in God. I believe in something much greater."

---- Artur Rubenstein