Those who believe there is no God live by faith

[McBell]

If one does not believe in God it is a belief that there is no God the same as someone who does not believe in the existence of God is a belief that God does not exist. Which ever why you want to spin it if you have no evidence for your belief then your belief is based on faith.

Those who believe there is no god have a belief, yes.
Those who lack a belief of god do not have a belief in god.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not at all. I love athiests or I would not be here. However, the better question would be, do I agree with what athiesm promotes? Well of course not. I guess that is pretty obvious. The statement about atheism being a religion was not that it is but simply some that are athiests follow the same patterns of those who have a religion that believe in God but in the opposite direction. This OP is simply observations on two belief systems being the same and being based on faith, nothing more and nothing less.

What do you think that atheism promotes? The only thing that I can think of is rational thought. And from reading your posts you do appear to oppose that.

If you could reason rationally you would understand that no faith is needed to be an atheist.

 

[Polymath257]

Athiesm says in his heart there is no God then again according to the scriptures so does the fool.

Nice little bit of propaganda, if you ask me.

 

[Polymath257]

Either way a belief that is not supported by evidence is based on faith.

You made a jump here. Before, you wanted *conclusive* evidence, not just 'beyond a reasonable doubt' or even 'majority of the evidence'. There is certainly evidence against the existence of a God given the *lack* of evidence when such evidence *should* exist.

If you cannot prove there is no God or there is no existence of God and you have no evidence that belief is simply your faith because you have no evidence that God does not exist

Proof only exists in mathematics and alcohol. But you can have high degrees of confidence based on evidence or lack thereof.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Anyone who has had a religious experience.
I don’t believe that. That’s Calvinist nonsense. We blind ourselves. And, if you don’t believe in God, why do you believe this? Your argument looks to me like a straw man argument..

Or hallucination.
What has Calvin to do with that? It is in the book. Of course, I do not believe anything about this supposed God, his word and his messengers / sons. Good, when you have no answer, it is a straw man.

 

[Milton Platt]

Hi all some questions for consideration for this OP....

1. If one does not believe that there is a God and they have no evidence that there is no God does that mean that God does not exist?

2. If one believes there is no God and cannot prove there is no God then is this belief simply another religion that is based on faith and not evidence?

3. Now for those who do not believe in God and you have no evidence for this belief (faith), does it not worry you that you could be wrong if the scriptures are true?

4. Finally if there is a God obviously not all religions can be correct as many are contradictory to each other. How would one go about finding what is the correct faith? Seems we all live by faith IMO wheather we believe or do not believe in God.

I believe God's judgments are coming to this world to all those who do not believe and follow God's Word according to the scriptures. Can you prove they are not

Thanks for your thoughts...

1. If one does have no evidence that there is no Thor, does that mean that Thor does not exist?
2. I believe there is no planet closer to the sun than Mercury...is that a religion also? No.
3. Not having a belief in a god is not the same as believing there is no god.
4. Faith should have absolutely nothing to do with knowing what is true.

 

[Subduction Zone]

1. If one does have no evidence that there is no Thor, does that mean that Thor does not exist?
2. I believe there is no planet closer to the sun than Mercury...is that a religion also? No.
3. Not having a belief in a god is not the same as there is no god.
4. Faith should have absolutely nothing to do with knowing what is true.

1. How else do you explain Mjolnir?
2. Yes, Spock lives.
3. Ummm, okay.
4. But I want it to matter.

Sorry, I don't know who I was channeling.

 

[sojourner]

Or hallucination.
What has Calvin to do with that? It is in the book. Of course, I do not believe anything about this supposed God, his word and his messengers / sons. Good, when you have no answer, it is a straw man.

Sometimes hallucinations are religious experiences.
Only if your misunderstanding things.
Therefore a straw man fallacy.

 

[Milton Platt]

1. How else do you explain Mjolnir?
2. Yes, Spock lives.
3. Ummm, okay.
4. But I want it to matter.

Sorry, I don't know who I was channeling.

I fumbled number 3. I will edt, thanks!

 

[Milton Platt]

Hi all some questions for consideration for this OP....

1. If one does not believe that there is a God and they have no evidence that there is no God does that mean that God does not exist?

2. If one believes there is no God and cannot prove there is no God then is this belief simply another religion that is based on faith and not evidence?

3. Now for those who do not believe in God and you have no evidence for this belief (faith), does it not worry you that you could be wrong if the scriptures are true?

4. Finally if there is a God obviously not all religions can be correct as many are contradictory to each other. How would one go about finding what is the correct faith? Seems we all live by faith IMO wheather we believe or do not believe in God.

I believe God's judgments are coming to this world to all those who do not believe and follow God's Word according to the scriptures. Can you prove they are not

Thanks for your thoughts...

Provide your definition of the word "faith". You seem to be using a non-biblical version.

 

[Tiberius]

Not really. I do not know anyone that claims leprechauns are real or anyone that has made a religion out of leprechauns. In many religions many millions of people claim that God has revealed himself to them and given them messages to give to the world this is their belief so your example here is not relavant to the OP. If you believe there is no God or you do not believe in the existence of God that is your belief for which you have no evidence. Therefore your living by faith just as much as those who believe in God and the existense of God.

One third of Irish people believe leprechauns exist

In any case, are you seriously suggesting that the more people believe in something, the more likely it is to be true?

 

[Tiberius]

I would say the burden of proof is on anyone making claims of proof. I believe in God and have been upfront my belief is based on faith and have peace in my faith. I can say God has revealed himself to me personally but this is my evidence but to you I can only point you in that direction. You must take the steps to see. On the other hand of those who claim and believe there is no God and that God does not exist the burden of proof is on those who make these claims to prove them IMO

I believe in the Flying Squirrel that brings me happiness each day when I leave a steak out overnight for him.

Do you believe me? If not, you must show why the Flying Happiness Squirrel does not exist, because those who claim there is no Flying Happiness Squirrel bear the burden of proof to support their claims.

 

[3rdAngel]

I was not dishonest. Please if you could be honest you would see your error.

Do you think that you can have an honest discussion? That means you need to acknowledge your errors when they are pointed out to you. You also need to answer questions when asked. That is part of an honest discussion.

First question do you understand the difference between a lack of belief and a belief of nonexistence?

Sure I would love an honest discussion. You haven't provided one. Your also the one that said in your own words that you do not believe there is a God and you do not believe in the existence of God not me. Then claimed you said no such thing. Then when your own words were posted back to you saying you do not believe in God or the existence of God word for word you back step and part apologize. It seems to me you do not know what you believe or what you post IMO. Nothing personal. It is just that your sending out mixed messages.

 

[3rdAngel]

Again, not necessarily so. You do not understand the logical argument properly. Lack of evidence is not necessarily evidence of nonexistence. If an event would leave clear evidence behind a lack of evidence is evidence against that event or belief. That is how we know that the Noah's Ark story is a myth. It would have left endless clear evidence that it happened, but there is no such evidence to be found. That tells us that it did not happen. If you need a link to explain this to you further I can provide one, but this is another logical concept that you fail at understanding.

I am sorry, I have no idea what you are talking about or how what you have posted here addresses what you are quoting from.

 

[3rdAngel]

Nope, that is a falsehood. The one place that an atheist would not use to say anything about God (at least for a rational atheist) is in his heart. By the way, that verse is just as true if someone says "The fool says in his heart 'there is a God'."

Not really it was scripture that was posted. It was not my words.

 

[3rdAngel]

But it is not a belief for most atheists. Here you were complaining about honesty and you cannot be honest enough to understand that a lack of belief is not a belief. I lack a belief in God because there is no reliable evidence for one. Give me some evidence and then you might be able to claim that my belief or lack of it is irrational.

No you already told me that you do not believe in God and you do not believe in the existence of God. Have you changed your mind now? Evidence is all around you. Even if you had evidence you would not believe because your believe there is no God unless you have changed your mind since the last time we have talked?

 

[3rdAngel]

And atheism does? Let's find a definition and see:

• Each individual atheist does have a set of beliefs... but all atheists are all different, and can be on every other issue. Just mounds and mounds of difference. There is no core set of beliefs, nor does there need to be. It is not a cohesive group, nor does it try to be.
• There are no "devotional" or "ritual" observances either. Nothing even close that you can attribute to atheists.
• There is also no moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. Atheists can disagree on anything and everything (except one thing) and still be atheists.

Sorry I do not see any difference as it is the same in all religions. Also, within most religions. Christianity being a good examples of over 40,000 different versions. Yet you would notice that of the 40,000 versions of Christianity they also all call themselves "christian". No difference in my view. People can make a religion out of anything. Athiesm in my opinion simply being an example of people making a religion out of a belief that has no evidnence living by faith in what they believe.

What you're missing here is some "core" doctrine or beliefs that are common among atheists. The only thing they have to do is say "I don't believe you" to any and all claims of the existence of deity. That's it, and you're in. And nobody even necessarily cares that you are in, and no one is going to "kick you out" or claim you "aren't doing it right" unless you believe in a god. That's it. Not a religion. NOT.

Not really the core common beliefs are the disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods

My response would be no different than it is now. I didn't have to "think hard" at all. Millions to billions of people used to also believe that the world was flat -the vast majority of humanity during a certain span of time in fact. Does it make it more true that the Earth is flat because so many people believed it? Boo hoo for you... no. Sorry, it doesn't. It doesn't matter how many people claim it IF THEY CAN'T DEMONSTRATE IT. Doesn't matter. Here you are, assuming that I care about the negative connotations of the phrase "closed-minded." If closed-minded means that I withhold belief in extraordinary claims until evidence is produced or made available to me, then yep... count me as "closed minded." I'm closed minded in that respect for sure. Now what have you got? Based on your reply I have no choice but to surmise that you've got nothing.

You have missed the point the example you gave earlier is plausable to one person but not relavant to 1/3 of the worlds population that are all saying the same thing that God has revealed himself to them personally. Something they cannot prove and something you cannot disprove. Therefore not matter what you say does not mean what 1/3 of the earth's population have experiences is not true.

 

[3rdAngel]

It's not about disproving God, it's about not believing you. For example, I have no faith in you and your claims whatsoever.

Ok. Yet here you are in a relgious forum unable to prove that there is no God.

 

[3rdAngel]

Belief that a god exist and belief that no god exist are two separate sets of beliefs.

Exactly that is the point of the OP here. One claims a belief in God by faith and the other claims they do not believe in God or have a lack of belief in God by faith.

Those two beliefs are the same. But you're forgetting the two "lacks," lack of belief that no god exist and lack of belief that god exist. Both atheism and theism can fall under the first one, but only atheism can fall under both. When you are asked, do you believe that no god exist? The only valid answers are you believe that no god exist or you lack the belief that no god exist. Your belief that god exist is irrelevant to that proposition. When asked, do you believe that god exist? The only valid answers are, you believe that god exist or you lack the belief that god exist. Believing that no god exist is irrelevant to that proposition. Your misunderstanding in the difference between the two proposition is the source of this confusion.

Ok so we agree in the above first section that those athiests that believe there is no God or in the existence of God have the same type of belief those who believe in God do. It is to these that the OP is directed. However I want you examine this lack of belief in God of gods in relation to the etymological root for the word meaning of atheism. Are you really saying here that this form of Athiest is really agnostic? - think it through. What is the belief of someone that is agnostic? Is not a lack of beleif really another term for no belief or someone who does not believe in God or does it mean a person that has some belief in God or futher more does it mean that I person is open to believing in God? If a person is open to believing in God how can he be Athiest when an Athiest is defined as...

“Atheism” is typically defined in terms of “theism”. Theism, in turn, is best understood as a proposition—something that is either true or false. It is often defined as “the belief that God exists”, but here “belief” means “something believed”. It refers to the propositional content of belief, not to the attitude or psychological state of believing. This is why it makes sense to say that theism is true or false and to argue for or against theism. If, however, “atheism” is defined in terms of theism and theism is the proposition that God exists and not the psychological condition of believing that there is a God, then it follows that atheism is not the absence of the psychological condition of believing that God exists (more on this below). The “a-” in “atheism” must be understood as negation instead of absence, as “not” instead of “without”. Therefore, in philosophy at least, atheism should be construed as the proposition that God does not exist (or, more broadly, the proposition that there are no gods). (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

Atheism is, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities. The etymological root for the word atheism originated before the 5th century BCE from the ancient Greek ἄθεος (atheos), meaning "without god(s)". (Wiki).

Atheism, in general, the critique and denial of metaphysical beliefs in God or spiritual beings. As such, it is usually distinguished from theism, which affirms the reality of the divine and often seeks to demonstrate its existence. Atheism is also distinguished from agnosticism, which leaves open the question whether there is a god or not, professing to find the questions unanswered or unanswerable. (Encyclopedia Britannica)

Atheism a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods; a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods (Merriam Webster dictionary)

Atheism the doctrine or belief that there is no God or disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. (Dictionary.com)

Atheism The term “atheist” describes a person who does not believe that God or a divine being exists (Encyclopedia of Philisophy).

Athiesm a'-the-iz'-m (atheos, "without God" (Ephesians 2:12)): Ordinarily this word is interpreted to mean a denial of the existence of God, a disbelief in God, the opposite of theism. (International Stantard Bible Encyclopedia)

Athiesm the belief that God does not exist; not believing in any God or gods, or relating to such beliefs (Cambridge Dictionary)

Athiesm the belief that there is no God, or denial that God or gods exist godlessness (Your Dictionary)

Someone who believes in Atheism...........?

Atheist, a person who does not believe in the existence of a god or any gods : one who subscribes to or advocates atheism (Merriam Webster dictionary)

No do not midunderstand what is being shared here. I understand that there is many brands of Athiesm as there are Christianity and there is no misunderstanding of the two propositions only the questioning of them.

Thanks for your thoughts. Hope you better understand where I am coming from.

 

[3rdAngel]

Those who believe there is no god have a belief, yes.

Thankyou that is my point.

Those who lack a belief of god do not have a belief in god.

Agreed, but this is worth consideration also for example if somone does not have a belief in something does that mean that something does not exist? Of course not.