RE: Is atheism ever a faith?
September 23, 2008 at 8:35 am
(This post was last modified: September 23, 2008 at 9:23 am by Edwardo Piet.)
Depends on your definition of faith....
you don't need faith to dis-believe something but you must need SOME faith to dis-believe it 100% because theres still a possibility (an incredibly incredibly incredibly recurring tiny possibility) that something supernatural, or a God of any sort exists.
If God appeared and threw me into space I'd either believe it or assume its a dream...and If I did believe it I would most likely wake up afterwards...
My point is if God actually showed up, asuming its not a dream that would be at least SOME evidence of his existence so if you still dis-believed 100% you must have some faith against God's existence not just evidence....
You could easily believe God exists if he showed up; but not believe 'in' him in the sense despite his existence you still wouldn't worship him..(most likely because you think he's a total s**t).
Futhermore if God didn't do anything to you physically (like throw you into space) and merely did miracles in front of you; and you're not dreaming - it's probably more likely you are hallucinating than that there is a God despite the fact that hallucinating for no known reason 'out of the blue' is very unlikely. Dawkins talks about the argument of belief in God because of personal experience in TGD; and gives some examples of arguments against such an argument.
I guess there's a difference between the definition of faith as in believing 'in', as in worshiping and the definition of faith as in believing in or not believing in God 100% either way. Because God's always a possibility he can't be disproved like Russels teapot, and to believe 100% against the possibility of God must therefore contain atleast enough faith against God to fill the gap of the very very tiny possibilty of his existence.
To conclude, technically I do believe in God...but only to the extent I believe in Russels Teapot or pink unicorns (which obviously is an incredibly incredibly tiny extent).
However I 100% do not believe 'in' God in the sense I don't worship him at all.
There is difference between believing 'in' in the sense of worship; and believing in the POSSIBILITY, however small, of God's existence. That's the misunderstanding I think.
In the case of this poll I'm talking about believing in the possibility of his existence - however small - or not. I'm not talking about belief as in worship. I mean faith as in belief not ENTIRELY based on evidence. Or faith for the sake of faith and preference and 'intuitive observations or predictions'. I don't mean worship.
you don't need faith to dis-believe something but you must need SOME faith to dis-believe it 100% because theres still a possibility (an incredibly incredibly incredibly recurring tiny possibility) that something supernatural, or a God of any sort exists.
If God appeared and threw me into space I'd either believe it or assume its a dream...and If I did believe it I would most likely wake up afterwards...
My point is if God actually showed up, asuming its not a dream that would be at least SOME evidence of his existence so if you still dis-believed 100% you must have some faith against God's existence not just evidence....
You could easily believe God exists if he showed up; but not believe 'in' him in the sense despite his existence you still wouldn't worship him..(most likely because you think he's a total s**t).
Futhermore if God didn't do anything to you physically (like throw you into space) and merely did miracles in front of you; and you're not dreaming - it's probably more likely you are hallucinating than that there is a God despite the fact that hallucinating for no known reason 'out of the blue' is very unlikely. Dawkins talks about the argument of belief in God because of personal experience in TGD; and gives some examples of arguments against such an argument.
I guess there's a difference between the definition of faith as in believing 'in', as in worshiping and the definition of faith as in believing in or not believing in God 100% either way. Because God's always a possibility he can't be disproved like Russels teapot, and to believe 100% against the possibility of God must therefore contain atleast enough faith against God to fill the gap of the very very tiny possibilty of his existence.
To conclude, technically I do believe in God...but only to the extent I believe in Russels Teapot or pink unicorns (which obviously is an incredibly incredibly tiny extent).
However I 100% do not believe 'in' God in the sense I don't worship him at all.
There is difference between believing 'in' in the sense of worship; and believing in the POSSIBILITY, however small, of God's existence. That's the misunderstanding I think.
In the case of this poll I'm talking about believing in the possibility of his existence - however small - or not. I'm not talking about belief as in worship. I mean faith as in belief not ENTIRELY based on evidence. Or faith for the sake of faith and preference and 'intuitive observations or predictions'. I don't mean worship.
