5 pages in, we have numerous definitions of methods for establishing fact, numerous definitions of faith, and you still haven't made any argument, which I hold you could have done in 3 lines:
1) Faith is believing in something without good reason or without good evidence.
2) Believing "there is no God" is a belief without good evidence, or good reason.
3) Therefore believing "there is no God" is a faith position.
Of course, I suspect some strong atheists would question number 2, but the fact is that you can never have "good evidence" for the non-existence of something, because we work from a position of adding things to our knowledge that we didn't know before, and adding them requires them to exist. Even if we created a perfect vacuum, and someone said "There is nothing in that vacuum", we could easily point to things that could be in there (does time reside in vacuums? I think so). The statement requires an absolute belief in materialism, which isn't provable. Realistically, there could be any number of things residing in the vacuum as long as they weren't comprised of matter.
1) Faith is believing in something without good reason or without good evidence.
2) Believing "there is no God" is a belief without good evidence, or good reason.
3) Therefore believing "there is no God" is a faith position.
Of course, I suspect some strong atheists would question number 2, but the fact is that you can never have "good evidence" for the non-existence of something, because we work from a position of adding things to our knowledge that we didn't know before, and adding them requires them to exist. Even if we created a perfect vacuum, and someone said "There is nothing in that vacuum", we could easily point to things that could be in there (does time reside in vacuums? I think so). The statement requires an absolute belief in materialism, which isn't provable. Realistically, there could be any number of things residing in the vacuum as long as they weren't comprised of matter.