What does this statement mean? What faith is required? Is it more than a theist?
2007-05-14 04:48:32 · 22 answers · asked by Eleventy 6 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
They're trying to boost religion by claiming that it's scientifically sound, while discrediting science by claiming that it's "faith-based." Which is really amusing, because - obviously! - what they're tacitly admitting is that scientific method is legitimate while religious faith is not!
2007-05-14 04:54:23 · answer #1 · answered by jonjon418 6 · 5⤊ 1⤋
It means that they are unable to accept that there are not known answers to some questions.
Once you are willing to accept that there are certain things that we do not, as yet, know (what happened before the Big Bang, etc) then there is no faith required to be an atheist.
Remember all those believers out there are 99% atheist. They believe in a god, or group of gods, but have classed all the other hundreds of deities that have been and are being earnestly worshiped as myths.
Atheist just take that last 1% step too.
2007-05-14 04:59:33 · answer #2 · answered by Simon T 6 · 3⤊ 1⤋
I think it means not having enough "faith" that there really isn't a God, a heaven and a hell. It's back to Pascal's Wager. People would rather have the kind of faith with the power to save themselves, "just in case", than have faith that death is the end, only to be wrong and burn for their mistake forever.
As an atheist, I don't call it faith. Just.. not concerned :p
2007-05-14 04:55:40 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
It's a poorly thought-out attempt by a believer to belittle atheism.
If the writer had put any reasonable thought into it, he or she would have realized that it does not take faith to not believe in something.
The great irony here on R&S is that it appears that very few of the believers have any faith in their own religious beliefs. It's hard not to notice that the majority claim to have evidence or even proof for the existence of god, apparently unaware that in doing so, they're excluding faith from any role in religious belief.
That's particularly problematic because faith is the only intellectually honest, respectable rationale for belief in gods.
2007-05-14 04:55:16 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
I think it means they have been so indoctrinated and just so plain scared that they cant let go. I know I had so much fear in me that if I had the attitude I have toward religion I do today ten years ago I would have passed out from the fear. Luckily my intelligence slowly overpowered my superstition.
The two posts above me (Glitter Kitty and Living for JC) are exactly what I mean. Glitter said the same thing I did in different words and Living is just confusing the fear instilled by indoctrination with some magical force pulling at her
2007-05-14 04:54:09 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
When you believe in magic, then everything requires faith. When your child thinks there is a monster under their bed, you cannot convince them rationally that there is no monster there; even if you show them that it is empty there, they will believe that the monster is invisible, or will magically re-appear as soon as you leave. In those situations, only your child's trust and faith in you will convince them. Unfortunately, theists, like children, believe in magic.
2007-05-14 05:02:11 · answer #6 · answered by SvetlanaFunGirl 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
Back to Pascal and his Wager - however flawed. There are all kinds of possibilities other than the Christian God. Multiple god's, a god who takes pleasure in disbelief, etc.
Taking the position that there is no god is one of faith, because god / god's can't be disproved / proved. It is possible, no matter the current state of this world, science, political, economic, etc. There is no possible proof of no God.
An agnostic is the most sensible position if someone doesn't believe that there is a god, with this position at least holding that it is possible, which it is.
Atheism is chosen ignorance.
2007-05-14 05:18:55 · answer #7 · answered by super Bobo 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
Many (supposedly) theists refer to the "insurance" or "gambler's", or "safe bet" belief in a god:
When you die and you believe in a god then discover that there is not one you have lost nothing.
When you die and you do NOT believe in a god and there is one you lose everything.
When you die and you believe in a god and there IS a god then you have a slim chance it is the right god.
Therefore it is safer to believe in god. At least then you might have a slight chance of being right (like gambling).
2007-05-14 05:03:08 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
It means that the person making the statement either
a) has no idea what they are talking about
or
b) is trying to get a rise out of atheists
2007-05-14 04:54:16 · answer #9 · answered by rosbif 6 · 5⤊ 2⤋
Lack of belief is the default. It takes no faith at all to not believe something.
2007-05-14 04:57:36 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋