Strong Atheism starts from faith

[theVOID]

That's nonsense Fr0d0, it would be entirely possible to have conclusive evidence for the existence of God and still be religious by observing the practices and rituals and following the rules of the religion. You would also still be required to have faith in the actions of this God, such as believing that suffering such as natural disasters and poverty are necessary as opposed to him getting off on our suffering as if it's a big cosmic stage show and he's sitting back with popcorn.

Faith is only core to religious belief because they have nothing else, there is no valid logical argument or empirical evidence, but that does not mean by default that there cannot be evidence for God.

Though if you disagree I would like to hear why.

You're talking about a fantasy god that doesn't feature in any religion VOID. That's nice and naive, but this is the rational world where we consider rational notions. Yours is no where near a rational notion.

I'm sorry, where in your religious texts does it state that there is and cannot ever be a way to verify the existence of God?

In the real world, with real understanding, we know that God cannot be verified.

I'm not interested in you asserting that God cannot be verified, i want to know why you hold that position. Where is your reasoning?

Additionally you propose a god we don't know yet. This isn't anything any theist here is talking about either. Yes there are infinite possibilities of anything yet unknown to us existing. The Christian God isn't one of these.

Assuming there is evidence for the existence of God, do you still not need faith in his actions? Do you not need faith to believe that this Omni-benevolent does not prevent natural disasters because they are a necessary evil? Do you not need faith to believe he has a good reason for giving children cancer so they spend their short lives suffering in and out of hospitals?

---

I have ZERO evidence for the non-existence of God.
I have ZERO evidence for the existence of God.
I have ZERO reason to favor either position.

So you're really on the fence on this one? I would have thought atheism has some position for the non existence of "God" otherwise you're really being skeptical which isn't proper atheism to me.

To be an Atheist is to be 'without belief in god(s)', literally. I am an Agnostic atheist, i do not believe in any gods not because i think they don't exist, but because there is no evidence either logical or empirical to support the position that they do exist. It is a simple position and is ultimately saying "I do not know", something that i am more than comfortable admitting.

If you want to argue that is is more reasonable to assume there is no god rather than to admit it is not known then i will gladly have that debate with you.

Ok, but don't you think we need more room?

More room for?