Is Atheism faith?

[Eliminativism Without Tears]

Yes, it is.

For deism, sure, but not for theism.

We've driven off from your original argument. You tried to reduce my argument to absurdity by saying that you exist despite the fact that you didn't create the universe. I countered by showing that it doesn't belong to your definition in the same way that god does. Is it necessary that we define god in such a way? Absolutely not. When I said god, I am speaking of the culturally relevant definition that billions of people believe in.

So you've proved a certain interpretation of god doesn't exist, which in no way proves that there is no god.

"God" in this sense refers to a creator of the universe, so it does prove that there is no "God". I didn't make a post stating that I could refute every single definition of god anyone could make, including god as a toothbrush, book, or piece of paper.

[Cannot think of a name]

Prepare to accept the possibility of Elbotor, the Funginator. No proof he doesn't exist, and that's all we need to accept the possibility, right? We don't weigh things on 'likely' or anything like that.

Pardon? I'm simply saying that we have no actual proof that a god doesn't exist. It's unlikely, very unlikely, that a god exists.

Why do I need proof that something doesn't exist? What kind of crazy ass bullshit standard is that? Why do I have to entertain the idea that anyone farts out of their food hole just because they said it? Why is "you can't prove me wrong!" any kind of standard at all? Why bother with this game?

[Eliminativism Without Tears]

It is a proof, because a logical contradiction is being presented. It's not as if it's an inductive argument; The conclusion follows necessarily from the premises.

The trouble with logic is that it's man made.

That doesn't mean it's truth is contingent on man.

[Mediterreania]

Is abstinence a sex position?

No, but masturbation is a sex act.

[Neo Rome Republic]

This is starting to depend on semantics. When I indicate that there is proof god does not exist, I am referring to the typical definition of the word god. If you want to define god as something else, then go ahead, but this wouldn't take away from the proof that god didn't create the universe.

Again, you haven't shown us proof. I don't believe in a God, but I don't think you know what proof means. Proof means you know exactly what happened. We can't be sure that a God didn't create the universe. You've given valid evidence that he/she didn't create the universe, but not proof.

In certain definitions, proof is synonymous with evidence.
Proof: The evidence or argument that compels the mind to accept an assertion as true.

[Zottistan]

No, there isn't. There is no "proof" for or against God.

Prepare to accept the possibility of Elbotor, the Funginator. No proof he doesn't exist, and that's all we need to accept the possibility, right? We don't weigh things on 'likely' or anything like that.

There is, as far as I'm aware, no proof that Elbotor the Funginator exists. So we shouldn't claim there is.

For deism, sure, but not for theism.

So you've proved a certain interpretation of god doesn't exist, which in no way proves that there is no god.

"God" in this sense refers to a creator of the universe, so it does prove that there is no "God". I didn't make a post stating that I could refute every single definition of god anyone could make, including god as a toothbrush, book, or piece of paper.

You made a post saying that god didn't exist. There are lots of pretty widespread interpretations of god that don't involve creating the universe. But fine, this isn't important. Just bickering over definitions.

[Bordav]

No. Atheism is the absence of faith. It is like asking is darkness a type of light?

[Eliminativism Without Tears]

You made a post saying that god didn't exist. There are lots of pretty widespread interpretations of god that don't involve creating the universe. But fine, this isn't important. Just bickering over definitions.

Yes.

[Seriong]

Sure, if you felt like lying you could say that.

Would you care to explain your logic behind that statement?

There is no faith involved in saying you do not know something to be true. So, the only way to say that agnostic atheism is based on faith is to lie.

[Lost heros]

No. Atheism is the absence of faith. It is like asking is darkness a type of light?

Is cold a type of heat?

[Tolmekkia]

It's more like a philosophy. You can have faith in Atheism, but it is not a "Faith", since it is only a belief in a lack of something, not in something in particular. It would have to be coupled with another ideology like Confucianism or Deism to make it even close to that of a "Faith" status, otherwise it I only a simple belief. An example of your question (Not a stupid one, mind you; in fact, a well-asked one) would be me calling Ham Sandwiches a Faith, since it doesn't have Turkey or Fish in it. It's not because Ham Sandwiches are ultra-divine or are the reason to life, the universe, and everything, but simply because it doesn't contain Turkey or Fish. Now, does that make any since to you?

[Neo Industrium]

Well OP, it's all a matter of self identification. It all depends on the atheist.
If they think that their anti-religious zeal can qualify as a religion, then, yes.
If they think that atheism isn't a religion, then no.

This is why the Canadian census (and I think the American census as well) is based off self identification when they ask for your religion and nationality.

By asking such a general question, you are implying that atheism [just like any religion (and no, I don't think atheism is a religion)], can be qualified as one, monolithic thing, with is plain untrue. No religious tradition is only "one thing", and religions tend to be very diverse among their followers. Religion is a response to revelation, and everyone responds to revelation differently. Religion isn't just one set of practices with a single belief system. Therefore we can't assume that every atheist has the exact same views.

[Cannot think of a name]

Prepare to accept the possibility of Elbotor, the Funginator. No proof he doesn't exist, and that's all we need to accept the possibility, right? We don't weigh things on 'likely' or anything like that.

There is, as far as I'm aware, no proof that Elbotor the Funginator exists. So we shouldn't claim there is.

That would make sense, wouldn't it? You wouldn't start making accommodations in your moldy socks just in case Elbotor the Funginator exists just because someone asserted that he did, but apparently if you can't prove he doesn't exist...he might. It defies all reason, but this is what we are presented with. That's the crazypants principle that we're asked to accept.

[Wind in the Willows]

No, it is the complete opposite.

[EUstan]

...

It is just that most atheists are behalving like talibans and are so annoying that they want that normal people share their view because they think it is true. In other words atheism is a religion without theism.

Ireligious people dont.molest other people.

[Lost heros]

...

It is just that most atheists are behalving like talibans and are so annoying that they want that normal people share their view because they think it is true. In other words atheism is a religion without theism.

Ireligious people dont.molest other people.

Back up all of this with sources.

[EUstan]

It is just that most atheists are behalving like talibans and are so annoying that they want that normal people share their view because they think it is true. In other words atheism is a religion without theism.

Ireligious people dont.molest other people.

Back up all of this with sources.

I dont have too. Look for example the person that I quotet.

The most atheists even on this forum cannot debate.

[Chinese Regions]

Is abstinence a sex position?

No, but masturbation is a sex act.

The religious equivalent would be worshipping yourself.

[Lost heros]

Back up all of this with sources.

I dont have too.

Yes you do. You made the claim. You back it up. That's how debate works.

Look for example the person that I quotet.

Would you care to link to an example of when Dyakovo "behaved like the Taliban"?

The most atheists even on this forum cannot debate.

Says the person who refuses to back up his claims.

Also, "the most atheists even" doesn't make any sense.

[Seriong]

...

It is just that most atheists are behalving like talibans and are so annoying that they want that normal people share their view because they think it is true. In other words atheism is a religion without theism.

Ireligious people dont.molest other people.

I don't believe one can get from "A couple people on a website that represents a minority position" to "The majority"

[Seriong]

I dont have too.

Yes you do. You made the claim. You back it up. That's how debate works.

Look for example the person that I quotet.

Would you care to link to an example of when Dyakovo "behaved like the Taliban"?

The most atheists even on this forum cannot debate.

Says the person who refuses to back up his claims.

Also, "the most atheists even" doesn't make any sense.

He means "Most atheists, even on this website, cannot debate well"

[Curiosityness]

No no...no..no no no...aaaaaaaand no

/thread

[Cannot think of a name]

It is just that most atheists are behalving like talibans and are so annoying that they want that normal people share their view because they think it is true. In other words atheism is a religion without theism.

Ireligious people dont.molest other people.

I don't believe one can get from "A couple people on a website that represents a minority position" to "The majority"

Flopping for the refs. Can't make your point? It's because the 'other side' is full of meanie poopyheads.

[Xirtam]

Well, the definition of faith,

''complete trust or confidence in someone or something.''
"this restores one's faith in politicians"

Atheism is complete trust in the fact there is no God.

''strong belief in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual conviction rather than proof.''

There is no proof that there is no God, so it requires faith to believe that. Religion is belief in something, so Atheism is a religion.

What do you guys think?

Is disbelief in the flying spaghetti monster a faith based religion?

[Curiosityness]

...

It is just that most atheists are behalving like talibans and are so annoying that they want that normal people share their view because they think it is true. In other words atheism is a religion without theism.

Ireligious people dont.molest other people.

Yeah you know I don't recall strapping bombs to children and committing acts of terrorism, mind backing that up?