Atheism is a faith

[MoonWater]

Wow, too many ignorant posts lurking here.

And what makes these posts ignorant.

 

[UnTheist]

Then what praytell is the correct version of Atheism

"The non-belief in the existence of God(s)."

 

[ChristineES]

I don't have a sense of humor.

You ought to get one. I was insulted that you called my joke ignorant. I know I am not that funny, but I try.

 

[UnTheist]

You ought to get one.

I don't want one.

 

[MoonWater]

"The non-belief in the existence of God(s)."

You do realize that that equates to the same thing as "belief in the nonexistence of god(s)." And if dictionary.com's "version" of atheism is incorrect what EVIDENCE do you have that YOUR "version" IS correct.

 

[ChristineES]

I don't want one.

That's too bad . Laughter keeps me from hurting people and it makes me feel better. :angel2:

 

[MoonWater]

I don't want one.

Why not there a lot of fun. Often times my sense of humor is the one thing that keeps me from going COMPLETELY insane

 

[UnTheist]

You do realize that that equates to the same thing as "belief in the nonexistence of god(s)."

No. It is not the same thing. If you can not decipher the difference between belief and non-belief then I don't feel like going in circles with you.

 

[Smoke]

Belief

1. Mental acceptance of and conviction in the truth, actuality, or validity of something
2. Something believed or accepted as true, especially a particular tenet or a body of tenets accepted by a group of persons.

According to these definitions then Atheism is a belief. After all there are certain ideas that an atheist must accept to be an atheist(like the idea that there is no God.) And these ideas, these "tenets" are accepted by a group of people.

Atheists have beliefs. Everybody has beliefs. But "atheist" doesn't imply any particular belief. You can be an atheist and be a Quaker, a Unitarian, a Buddhist, a Marxist, Taoist, a rationalist, a naturalist -- anything, in fact, other than a theist. An atheist might see "god" as a useless or harmful false belief or as a useful metaphor. An atheist may even identity with a theistic tradition, like Bill Dever, who converted to Judaism because although he's a non-theist he finds the Jewish tradition deeply meaningful, or even like me. I find much that's beautiful and meaningful in my former faith, even though I no longer believe it's factual. An atheist can be religious, or opposed to all religion, or indifferent to religion. When you attempt to group all atheists together a sharing a particular "faith," what you're doing is really no different from saying that all people who don't worship Kali share a common "faith," the "faith" of Akalism, the tenet of which is that Kali doesn't exist. It's utter nonsense.

I believe that my tv is on right now. The evidence I perceive leads me to believe that. The evidence is so convincing that I feel quite certain the tv is on. But I don't have faith the tv is on. My belief that the tv is on is subject to modification in the light of new and convincing evidence. That's how all my beliefs are. I'm prepared to discard any belief in the light of new and convincing evidence. But in the interim, I make the best judgment I can in light of the evidence I have.

To those who assert that "belief" is the same thing as "faith," I can only say that your faith doesn't seem worth much, if it's nothing but unevidenced belief. If it's not something very much deeper than an arbitrary and unevidenced adherence to belief, it's really just something silly and unworthy of an intelligent adult. If, on the other hand, it's a metaphor for something ineffable, a symbol of the eternal, a point of contact with a profound mystery, then it might be something worth having and holding. If you can honestly see no difference between your faith in a god or gods and my lack of belief in a god, then your religion is really rather pitiful.

Is that really what you theists want to say, that all beliefs are matters of opinion, and all beliefs are equally arbitrary? If there's no deeper meaning in your theism than in my atheism, no point of contact with something greater than mere disbelief, what's the use of your theism?

Or they think that faith and religion are the same thing which is not really the case even though the words are often used interchangebly. Faith is a requirment of religion but religion is not a requirment of faith.

I don't think faith is a requirement of religion. You can be, and many people are, deeply religious without having faith in anything at all. You can be deeply religious and yet hold no beliefs that aren't subject to change. And you can be deeply religious, and even deeply faithful, without being a theist. Personally, I don't believe that either faith or theism is desirable. But you can find many people with deep faith, and with beliefs as irrational as any theism, who are nevertheless not theists.

J. B. Phillips told his fellow Christians, Your God Is Too Small. One of the problems that many theists have with understanding what atheism is and is not is that their atheism is too small.

 

[UnTheist]

That's too bad . Laughter keeps me from hurting people and it makes me feel better. :angel2:

I'm happy, don't worry.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Atheists have faith that God does not exist. Theycan not prove that God exists but neither can they prove that God does not exist.

Wow, too many ignorant posts lurking here.

Are you saying that you CAN prove that God does not exist? BTW, the use of "ignorant" is pretty condescending. I would hope we can discuss this without the worry of being flamed.

Everyone: do you see faith as a positive or negative attribute? Do you feel that reliance on faith is a good thing or a bad thing? Do you think that your assertion (one way or another) that atheism is either a faith or not is dependant on your personal feelings about faith?

 

[ChristineES]

The whole thing is that since people have faith in God, then someone who does not want or just doesn't believe in God does not want the word "faith" used about them. (I hope that makes sense). Since they cannot separate faith from God, then they want no part of it. When people talk about religion, they use the word "faith" to mean "faith in a god".

My example-If I have faith that my daughter will get straight As in school, that is not a religious thing at all. There is no way it can be, since neither my daughter nor the school are deities.

 

[UnTheist]

Are you saying that you CAN prove that God does not exist? BTW, the use of "ignorant" is pretty condescending. I would hope we can discuss this without the worry of being flamed.

If the post is ignorant, I will call it ignorant. Nothing 'condescending' about it. (but due to my lack of a sense of humor, I didn't realize she was joking.)

 

[Scuba Pete]

I guess you use a different definition of condescending as well. Do you have a special dictionary that only has definitions that suit you? But hey, it's your call if you want to continue to be unfriendly in your interactions here. That will definitely limit our discussions.

If the post is ignorant, I will call it ignorant. Nothing 'condescending' about it. (but due to my lack of a sense of humor, I didn't realize she was joking.)

 

[ChristineES]

Are you saying that you have faith in God, but you're not even able to prove it to yourself?

I have no scientific proof of God exists(and no one does), but I have proof that works for me- such as prayers being answered.. I don't really expect an atheist to understand that- Anymore than I can understand them.

 

[UnTheist]

I guess you use a different definition of condescending as well. Do you have a special dictionary that only has definitions that suit you? But hey, it's your call if you want to continue to be unfriendly in your interactions here

Please tell me how simply pointing out someone's flaws in an argument is somehow condescending. Methinks you're a bit too emotional.

 

[ChristineES]

Please tell me how simply pointing out someone's flaws in an argument is somehow condescending. Methinks you're a bit too emotional.

Well, actually, your post did offend me; It would have offended me more if I had been totally serious. No one wants to be called ignorant even if they are (I am not agreeing that my post is ignorant).
I am over it now: my anger is quick, nonviolent and it passes quickly. If I hadn't responded to it, I may still be angry.
This is my last off-topic post on this matter.

 

[Scuba Pete]

Please tell me how simply pointing out someone's flaws in an argument is somehow condescending. Methinks you're a bit too emotional.

You failed to point out any logical flaw in that post: you merely flamed the person you quoted. Now you want to defend your actions as somehow being noble? Well, that makes as much sense as you redefining faith and atheism to suit your needs.

 

[Smoke]

The whole thing is that since people have faith in God, then someone who does not want or just doesn't believe in God does not want the word "faith" used about them. (I hope that makes sense). Since they cannot separate faith from God, then they want no part of it. When people talk about religion, they use the word "faith" to mean "faith in a god".

Faith need not be in a god. You can have faith in anything at all, if your powers of suspending disbelief are great enough. I don't call my atheism "faith" because faith is not what it is.

And by the way, I don't object to all religions, nor even to all theisms (bearing in mind that not all religions are theistic). I think all theisms are equally non-factual, but I don't think all theisms are equally objectionable. There are some theisms I feel very warm and fuzzy about. I don't think it's necessarily wrong or stupid or immoral to be a theist or to have faith (remembering that the two are not the same), though I do think it matters what you have faith in, since some kinds of faith -- Stalinism and Dispensationalism, for example -- are very harmful, and conduce to stupidity and immorality. But theism as such, and faith as such are not necessarily evil or stupid or contemptible. They just aren't descriptive of my beliefs. I really think it's extremely presumptuous for people who know me only slightly, and only through an internet forum, to insist that they know otherwise.

 

[UnTheist]

You failed to point out any logical flaw in that post: you merely flamed the person you quoted. Now you want to defend your actions as somehow being noble.

You don't listen, do you? I called her post ignorant because I thought she was serious. If she really believed what she posted, the word "ignorant" would not in any way be inappropriate. I already admitted that I didn't realize she was kidding.

Well, that makes as much sense as you redefining faith and atheism to suit your needs.

:biglaugh::biglaugh:

Nope. My definition of "Atheism" is perfectly accurate.