well, i think the cause of the problem was that you misintepreted dwayne as asking for evidence of the meaninglessness of religion. i think that's not at all what he meant, and so it wasn't what i offered.
>
> But could you say more about the difference between negative theology
> and atheism. I think most people who call themselves atheists mean that
> they do not believe in god, nor in any significance to religion or
> religious feeling in any form....except as a form of delusion -- of self
> and others.
well, alex has already responded to most of this in a way that i find completely satisfactory.
as for atheism and negative theology, some (like jerry?) would say there's no meaningful difference, and others would say that negative theology likes to play at atheism without taking on any of the consequences. negative theology comes in a variety of forms, btw, and while eckhart's is probably the most famous, it is not i think the most influential version.
negative theology basically says we can't say anything entirely accurately about god. we can't say such things about god because we can't know them. clearly this is a threat to religion in geeneral and theology in particular.
that's the short version. there are others on the list whom i know also to be steeped in these things.
j
-- http://brainmortgage.blogspot.com/