Atheism Requires Faith.

[Theland]

Atheism require a strong faith in a belief there is no God.
How can you be so sure?

[nescio]

as several others have noted, Theland is under the misapprehension that atheism is the belief there is no God. It is not, it is the absence of belief in a God or Gods - entirely different.

[mibn2cweus]

'Atheism' is at best an ambiguous term, no less so in that it is derived from an equally ambiguous term, 'god'. A genuine quest for meaningful answers begins with the refusal to ask loaded presumptive questions like "Atheism require a strong faith..." and "...a belief there is no God."
You come across to me as many believers do as someone who is not seeking knowledge of what to believe but rather as someone trying to smuggle your own beliefs in through a backdoor.

[cassa333]

Is trust and faith the same thing though?

[naomi24]

Cassa, what do you mean?

[mibn2cweus]

I derive my certainty not by believing in arbitrary assertions but rather by seeking to understand why and how something is or can never be.

[Old_Geezer]

"Theland is under the misapprehension that atheism is the belief there is no God. It is not, it is the absence of belief in a God or Gods - entirely different."

Clearly not so, as agnostics can hold no belief in a God yet not hold a belief in there being no God. This indicates the difference. Atheists have made the leap of faith that as they see no evidence that convinces them, God does not exist, and is a myth. But some will continue to argue otherwise, in thread after thread, presumably because they feel more comfortable denying their faith.

[cassa333]

Well in the context of the God discussion I see a merging of the two words to an extent.

The JW god squad that come round often say they trust gods words and advice in the bible and ofter times they say they have faith in gods words and advice in the bible.

Faith, trust and even belief are interchangeable it seems.

But is belief the same as faith? Hmm not sure. Perhaps it is down to which side you are coming from.

[Old_Geezer]

≠ represents 'not equal to'
works quite well too.

[Old_Geezer]

Not collecting stamps doesn't require you to do something therefore it can't be classed as a hobby.

Insisting something doesn't exist when you can not know does require faith. More relevant when it is a conjecture made in an effort to explain something.

[naomi24]

Cassa, an interesting thought. Perhaps faith and trust result from belief. In this context without initial belief there would be no faith or trust.

[mibn2cweus]

Ultimately it all comes down to either you believe there is a 'god' (whatever) or you don't . . . there really is no other alternative.

[Old_Geezer]

doesn't work very well
Blooming nuisance
<
>

[naomi24]

OG, if the claim that a supernatural God exists wasn’t presented, there would be nothing to refute and hence no discussion. Nailit’s analogy is a good one.

[beso]

Some tangential trivia.

Computer languages have some practical symbols for "not equals" using combinations of symbols from the usual keyboard.

SQL uses:

The ! (often known as "bang" rather than the rather wordy "exclamation mark") is used in some languages (eg Javascript) to represent "not" so "not equals" is written as: !=

Similarly "not less than": !

[Old_Geezer]

But it is presented. One could use that same argument for denials of all conjecture, even those you might approve of. So I have to disagree. The analogy falls flat.

[beso]

^^ Ol site doesn't like the SQL symbol for not equals. Not surprising simce it is very like a html bracket and the back end databse would use sql.

Take way the space between them: < >

[Kromovaracun]

I actually see where Theland/OG are coming from, though I don't agree overall. 'God does not exist' is an expression of certainty which agnostics do not make. Further, it's arguably an expression of certainty on an issue where there isn't any real evidence - i.e. how the universe was created.

Of course, as I said, the idea that the universe was made by a creator is not just about the past - it also has implications for how the universe looks now, for which there is evidence. And even if there is none about how the universe was created, I don't understand why that should then be a question of faith because it is a scientific question to begin with rather than a moral or ethical one.

[andy-hughes]

As usual with Christians Theland, you don't want an answer to your question, you want to tell us what you believe.

Fine.

Atheism doesn't require a 'strong faith' at all - I don't give God a moment's thought from one day to the next, it's Christians who carry the burden of trying to believe in their loving God, when evidence of his absence / malice(delete as appropriate) surrounds them every waking second.