Reply #127: OK

[manic expression]

many theists probably do get a bit confused. However, "many theists" do not represent all religious beliefs or religious people.

"I will offer up that theists, especially of the Christian persuasion, will tend to evangelize more than atheists."

And you'd be right, and then some (is it even possible for atheists to evangelize?). The thing that you should not forget is that Christianity is perhaps the most aggressive religion on the face of the planet. Christianity is very unique in this sense, perhaps along with Islam, although it is debatable which is more "aggressive". Most religions are very non-aggressive and tolerant; there's a reason why Hinduism coexisted with Buddhism peacefully for so many years in India (Buddhism is gone from India today, as a virtually direct result of the Mughal invasions), or why the cult of Dionysus didn't try to convert the devotees of Zeus. Again, most religions are not aggressive, Christianity is an anomaly.

"...if one believes that a rational belief must be supported by physical evidence, then the atheists are right."

This may be off topic, but I disagree. I would argue that smoke is physical evidence of fire, even though the actual fire may be out of view. Using this, we can make conclusions on deeper aspects of existence without readily observing them directly. For instance, the law of conservation of mass/energy would (IMO) point to the eternal existence of a soul; furthermore, the fact that all objects are attracted to one another would (again, IMO) show that all things are ultimately connected on the truest level. There are more examples, but I just wanted to share that thought.

Just a few thoughts, sorry for inviting myself into the discussion again.