20 Mar 06
1 edit
Think about this for a minute. When those of faith say that they are 100% convinced that there is a God, then those who do not beleive ask us to prove it or retract our statement. However, those who say that they are convinced 100% that there is no God are not held to the same standards. Prove to us that there is no God or retract your statement as well. Those of us that have faith have no problem admitting that we derive our beleif from our faith. On the other hand, those who are atheist insist they do not use faith in their beleifs and are soley derived from the facts. Well? What are these facts? Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyMost athesits do not claim to be 100% convinced that there is no god. They just see no reason to believe that there is one. Atheism is not a belief, it is the lack of belief.
Think about this for a minute. When those of faith say that they are 100% convinced that there is a God, then those who do not beleive ask us to prove it or retract our statement. However, those who say that they are convinced 100% that there is no God are not held to the same standards. Prove to us that there is no God or retract your statement as well. ...[text shortened]... e facts. Well? What are these facts? Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
Those minority of atheists who will go so far as to say they are convinced that there is no god do so not from faith, but from very sound philosophical grounds. The "Argument From Evil" is a very powerful argument frequently used against theism.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyNo, seek the term "parsimony".
Think about this for a minute. When those of faith say that they are 100% convinced that there is a God, then those who do not beleive ask us to prove it or retract our statement. However, those who say that they are convinced 100% that there is no God are not held to the same standards. Prove to us that there is no God or retract your statement as well. ...[text shortened]... e facts. Well? What are these facts? Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
With the current lack of evidence it is more parsimonious to not believe in a god. You guys want or require the use of a superflous entity - it's up to you to prove it's necessity.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by rwingettSo there are really no true atheists out there? There are only agnostics?
Most athesits do not claim to be 100% convinced that there is no god. They just see no reason to believe that there is one. Atheism is not a belief, it is the lack of belief.
Those minority of atheists who will go so far as to say they are convinced that there is no god do so not from faith, but from very sound philosophical grounds. The "Argument From Evil" is a very powerful argument frequently used against theism.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeypeople throw around the term faith with different ideas of what faith is.
Think about this for a minute. When those of faith say that they are 100% convinced that there is a God, then those who do not believe ask us to prove it or retract our statement. However, those who say that they are convinced 100% that there is no God are not held to the same standards. Prove to us that there is no God or retract your statement as well. ...[text shortened]... e facts. Well? What are these facts? Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
for instance a lot of people believe in blind faith. gullibility and faith are two different things. blind faith is for the gullabull. true faith has a proven and consistant track record. faith in a parent can be built or destryed by what a parent does in a childs life.
so when you make your statement, what sort of faith are you talking about?
20 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by whodeyNo. You just don't know what an atheist is, obviously. Atheists do not claim to "believe" in the non-existence of god. They just see insufficient grounds to believe in god's existence. It is a passive non-belief in god, not an active belief in the non-existence of god.
So there are really no true atheists out there? There are only agnostics?
The burden of proof is always on the theist, who is claiming that there is a god. If he fails to provide sufficient evidence for his claim, then there is no choice but to disbelieve him. There is no need to prove the theist wrong. An atheist will say although it cannot be known whether god exists, there is no reason to believe that one does. So he will treat god as though he does not exist, without maintaining any certianty in that regard.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by gollumprawnWhen I speak in terms of faith, I am speaking about not knowing something with certainty based on my ability to understand, grasp, or observe something. In effect, you are betting the house that you are right with the limited amount of info that you possess.
people throw around the term faith with different ideas of what faith is.
for instance a lot of people believe in blind faith. gullibility and faith are two different things. blind faith is for the gullabull. true faith has a proven and consistant track record. faith in a parent can be built or destryed by what a parent does in a childs life.
so when you make your statement, what sort of faith are you talking about?
20 Mar 06
2 edits
Originally posted by whodeyGood thing you can believe something truly and justifiedly without being absolutely certain of it. I believe that I live in Seattle, but it's logically possible I'm hallucinating. So, I can't be absolutely certain that I live in Seattle. Does this mean that my belief that I live in Seattle is based on faith? Of course not, that would be an absurd claim. If you think that all beliefs that are not based on evidence sufficient for absolute, 100% certainty are based on faith, then everything everybody believes is based on faith. If you accept that entailment, then you simply mean something different by 'faith' than the rest of us. This is unsurprising, however, given theists' willingness to do semantic violence. Newsflash: The lexicon is not your personal plaything.
Think about this for a minute. When those of faith say that they are 100% convinced that there is a God, then those who do not beleive ask us to prove it or retract our statement. However, those who say that they are convinced 100% that there is no God are not held to the same standards. Prove to us that there is no God or retract your statement as well. ...[text shortened]... e facts. Well? What are these facts? Personally, I don't have enough faith to be an atheist.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyNo, I'll throw my hat in the ring and agree with you.
So there are really no true atheists out there? There are only agnostics?
I'm an atheist and can only reach this viewpoint entirely from faith - that is, I have the utmost faith in the non-existence of a god.
I'd like to be able to say that I hold to this view based on a philsophical perspective or logical reasoning, but I can't - despite many eminent attempts to do so. I'd like to because it would add weight to my faith - but in the end I don't require it.
Despite arguments to the contrary - and particularly Scottishinnz's talkk about parsimony - the only rational position to take on this would be as you suggest ... agnosticism.
I don't accept that, because it leaves the door open for the existence of a god.
I don't believe that and therefore in the end, my belief is a faith.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by amannionIt is nice to get some honest responses for a change. Thanks!!!
No, I'll throw my hat in the ring and agree with you.
I'm an atheist and can only reach this viewpoint entirely from faith - that is, I have the utmost faith in the non-existence of a god.
I'd like to be able to say that I hold to this view based on a philsophical perspective or logical reasoning, but I can't - despite many eminent attempts to do so. I' ...[text shortened]... istence of a god.
I don't believe that and therefore in the end, my belief is a faith.
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyso your faith is based on doubt, a faith based on sand
When I speak in terms of faith, I am speaking about not knowing something with certainty based on my ability to understand, grasp, or observe something. In effect, you are betting the house that you are right with the limited amount of info that you possess.
20 Mar 06
1 edit
Originally posted by amannionSo there you have it, there is a spectrum of atheism/agnosticism.
No, I'll throw my hat in the ring and agree with you.
I'm an atheist and can only reach this viewpoint entirely from faith - that is, I have the utmost faith in the non-existence of a god.
I'd like to be able to say that I hold to this view based on a philsophical perspective or logical reasoning, but I can't - despite many eminent attempts to do so. I' istence of a god.
I don't believe that and therefore in the end, my belief is a faith.
Just like religion. Hmm, maybe there's a pattern here. Doesn't seem assocoiated with god though. Whodey, when you say you don't have enough faith to believe in a god also?
- Joined
- 15 Sep 04
- Moves
- 7051
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by whodeyAnd what everyone else is lying?
It is nice to get some honest responses for a change. Thanks!!!
Heres why atheists dont believe in God:
Why not believe in unicorns? Elves? Invisible unicorns or Invisible elves?
Its called Occams Razor. Look it up. If we accept Gods existence, why not accept every other conceivable thing's existence?
20 Mar 06
Originally posted by Conrau KRelevance.
And what everyone else is lying?
Heres why atheists dont believe in God:
Why not believe in unicorns? Elves? Invisible unicorns or Invisible elves?
Its called Occams Razor. Look it up. If we accept Gods existence, why not accept every other conceivable thing's existence?