Do Atheists Have Faith?

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
The glow emenating from the atom is not the atom. It's just energy that the atom has absorbed from the source outside of it. Since the only thing you can see in the photograph is the glow, and since the glow is not the atom, you're not actually seeing any part of the atom itself.
We never see anything; all we ever see is the light bouncing off it. We see the atom to precisely the same extent that we see everything else.
 

Whateverman

Well-known member
I suppose so. Just like the photograph of the atom, I cannot actually see the sun's atoms, I can only see a glow.
Thank you for that, although my point was more generic: just because we can't see the fundamental essence of the thing we're observing doesn't mean we can't see it. Even though we only see photons and not the super-heated gas/plasma that makes up the sun, no one would ever argue that it takes "faith" to know that the sun exists some 93 million miles away from the Earth.

Christian apologists (and I don't know you well-enough to include you in this group) like to equivocate with the word "faith" around atheists. They pretend that all faith is the same. The reality is EVERYONE - atheists and Christians and store clerks and little league players and everyone else - employs epistemic faith. This is the trust we place in our senses. If I see a car hurtling towards me in the street, I don't need infallible knowledge of whether that car exists to KNOW that I need to get out of the car's way. I trust my eyes and brain to tell me when my life is in danger, and I react accordingly when they do so.

This trust isn't absolute. I know my eyes and brain are fallible, and that they both mislead me on occasion.

Religious faith, however, is altogether different. It's trust that many Christians work to prevent from being undermined or lost; they protect it. Unlike wanting to know if my eyes are misleading me, those with religious faith often preclude the possibility of being mislead by it; they reject the possibility that some other religion might be correct, and don't spend much time testing all the various religions to see how they compare. Religious faith is often "blind", in that sensory input doesn't have the authority / power to question it.

Religious faith and epistemic faith are related in the sense that they're both "trust". The former, however, is much more hostile to being tested.
 

Nouveau

Well-known member
The glow emenating from the atom is not the atom. It's just energy that the atom has absorbed from the source outside of it. Since the only thing you can see in the photograph is the glow, and since the glow is not the atom, you're not actually seeing any part of the atom itself.
Not what I asked. Try again: What do you think it means to see something? Please tell me what you think you can see that doesn't involve your eyes detecting light emitted or reflected by the object seen.
 

Electric Skeptic

Well-known member
WRONG - you need complete blind ignorant faith because you have no evidence god does not exist.
For any lurkers - this poster has been advised many, many times of what an atheist is. He has been referred to the dictionary (which he repeatedly demonstrates he does not know how to use) and shown how to use it and what it says the definition is. He continues to ignore the correction and argue against a strawman of his own creation.

Despite what he says, of course, atheism does not require a belief, much less faith.
 

ferengi

Well-known member
For any lurkers - this poster has been advised many, many times of what an atheist is. He has been referred to the dictionary (which he repeatedly demonstrates he does not know how to use) and shown how to use it and what it says the definition is. He continues to ignore the correction and argue against a strawman of his own creation.
Fore any lurkers this is known as avoiding the question
 

5wize

Well-known member
Again, one has to know what one is looking at before they can identity it. How does one identify a word which in many cases is defined to preclude the existence of a referent to begin with?
Isn't the referent a timeless disembodied mind with certain intrinsic characteristics and external capacities?

Easily exposed as nonsense via a simple examination of the characteristics and capacities, yes... but a conceptual referent none the less, true?
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Isn't the referent a timeless disembodied mind
Where are you getting that from?
with certain intrinsic characteristics and external capacities?
Again, no idea what you're talking about here either.
Easily exposed as nonsense via a simple examination of the characteristics and capacities, yes... but a conceptual referent none the less, true?
A conceptual referent doesn't actually exist as anything but a concept. A product of one's imagination is not God. The biblical authors strongly condemn those who objectively worship the product of one's imagination.
 

5wize

Well-known member
Where are you getting that from?

Again, no idea what you're talking about here either.
Those are some of the definitions of the characteristics of the Christian God you should be familiar with in order to have credible conversations about God on an evangelical forum whether you believe them or not.
A conceptual referent doesn't actually exist as anything but a concept. A product of one's imagination is not God.
Where do you get that a referent must exist?
The biblical authors strongly condemn those who objectively worship the product of one's imagination.

... which makes the bible self refuting.
 

shnarkle

Well-known member
Those are some of the definitions of the characteristics of the Christian God you should be familiar with
I am under no obligation to be aware of the imaginations of each and every Christian.
in order to have credible conversations about God on an evangelical forum whether you believe them or not.
There is no credibility in those pretending that their private interpretations are somehow mainstream.
Where do you get that a referent must exist?
I'm not claiming a referent must exist. I'm pointing out that if the referent is just a concept, then it doesn't actually exist as anything other than a concept.
... which makes the bible self refuting.
Not at all. Idolatry is strongly condemned.
 
Top