With time to reflect, I am not going to bother responding to those who either failed to understand the point of the original post or who are getting defensive about their religious views/offensive about my world view. I have spent years agonising about what I believe about the world, looking for truths and being open, and I don't feel the need to go round in the same tired old circles again.
All I will say about atheism "as a religion" is that the burden of proof falls to the person who asserts that something is there. Recognising the lack of evidence for something is not the same as taking it on faith that "something isn't there".
For those who feel that I am "attacking" or mocking - you should have found my writing on this topic to be clear, considered and thoughtful. As has been illustrated by examples given by myself and others, the use of magical illusion to illustrate the mundane explanations behind the so-called paranormal is documented and has been shown to be an interesting exercise.
Fails to prove it's point fully? I'll say. If there was definitive evidence for anything, there would be no debate.
It's funny that the concept of using magic to "lead people to Jesus Christ" is enthusiastically discussed, whereas the idea of using magic to open people's minds to take a look at what they take on faith is met with hostility. In both cases the aim is the same; to challenge people's perceptions. Yes, in some ways, this topic is a response to the Evangelistic one. Not a mockery, but a representation of another point of view.
To those that have attempted to discuss some of the questions raised in the original post, I thank you for your thoughts. RebelAce; Derren Brown thought the issue was important enough to write about at length and even to make a TV programme on; I guess he saw a connection between magic and religion!
As a closing thought, the notion that this topic could be percieved to be offensive to religious people should be as far-fetched as the idea that a topic on using magic as an evangelistic tool could be considered offensive to atheists.
All I will say about atheism "as a religion" is that the burden of proof falls to the person who asserts that something is there. Recognising the lack of evidence for something is not the same as taking it on faith that "something isn't there".
For those who feel that I am "attacking" or mocking - you should have found my writing on this topic to be clear, considered and thoughtful. As has been illustrated by examples given by myself and others, the use of magical illusion to illustrate the mundane explanations behind the so-called paranormal is documented and has been shown to be an interesting exercise.
Fails to prove it's point fully? I'll say. If there was definitive evidence for anything, there would be no debate.
It's funny that the concept of using magic to "lead people to Jesus Christ" is enthusiastically discussed, whereas the idea of using magic to open people's minds to take a look at what they take on faith is met with hostility. In both cases the aim is the same; to challenge people's perceptions. Yes, in some ways, this topic is a response to the Evangelistic one. Not a mockery, but a representation of another point of view.
To those that have attempted to discuss some of the questions raised in the original post, I thank you for your thoughts. RebelAce; Derren Brown thought the issue was important enough to write about at length and even to make a TV programme on; I guess he saw a connection between magic and religion!
As a closing thought, the notion that this topic could be percieved to be offensive to religious people should be as far-fetched as the idea that a topic on using magic as an evangelistic tool could be considered offensive to atheists.