Comment from: Tim [Member] ? Edit
I would like to analyze the issues you raised in your quotes if I may:

“2) All religions have flaws. They all can be argued to the point where logic forces the proponent to claim “well, you just have to have faith”. Since Atheism never requires faith and cannot be disproven logically (despite countless tries), it has no flaws. Atheism is perfect.”

Ah, but Atheism does require faith, at least for those adherents who believe there is no God. They have faith in their own ability to discern the existence (or lack thereof) of other realms, such as unseen ones. Their faith is in themselves and they fervently believe something which cannot be proved or disproved in the scientific sense by relying on their human senses. There is an inherent assumption in this line of reasoning that if something exists, mankind has the capability to discern it, analyze it, and explain it. This is a leap of faith even Christians aren’t willing to make.

Therefor, Atheism shares much in common with Theism. Both require faith. Both require a belief, albeit on different ends of the spectrum.

“3) If there was ANY proof ANYwhere AT ALL that any god ever existed, I wouldn’t be an Atheist.”

I would simply say that there are things we accept as real that we cannot directly prove the existence of. For example, we accept that our planet is traveling through space and time and is part of a known universe. But can we prove the universe exists as we think we view and understand it? No. We can postulate various theories about the makeup and operation of our unverse, but it is an incomplete picture. Much is unseen that we simply accept on faith. We believe that we know certain things about the universe, but in reality we may never know or be incapable of understanding everything involved. Such is the nature of being human.

Atheists have “faith” in humanity (usually) but Atheism does not rely on “blind faith” at all.

Quick – why did an all-loving God put the tree of knowledge of good and evil in the Garden of Eden, KNOWING (since he is omnicient) that Adam and eve would eat the fruit and fall from grace? Because of his love? That makes no sense, but you have to have faith. Why didn’t God just start with Noah, since everyone was going to die anyway? Why didn’t he just forget the whole original sin, since it was actually God’s fault in the first place? Have faith?

Atheism doesn’t have anything like that, AT ALL. We never say “gee, that’s a major whole in my theology, but you shouldn’t think about it, just have faith that I’m right”

That’s what makes Atheism perfect. It has no holes, and you never have to bury your head in the sand.

The reason it is faith on their part is that unless they are willing to assert categorically that humans have the ability to discover, discern, analyze, and prove the existence of all things, then they must be taking certain things on faith. They must believe for there is no proof. They are placing faith in their own humanity.

When Atheists say there is or can be no God, they are expressing a belief and as such they share a lot in common with people who believe that there is a God. In the case of the Atheist in this example, he or she is taking it on faith that since the existence of God hasn’t been proven, God doesn’t exist. In the case of the Theist, he or she knows that the existence of God can’t be proven, but accepts the existence of God on faith.

Atheism is not a belief. It is the lack of belief — a philosophy which understands that physics and mathematics rule the universe, as opposed to mythology or superstition. We base our theories on evidence — not necessarily proof — and learn as the evidence grows.

And again, despite your glossy debate in the first post, there is neither proof NOR EVIDENCE that any of the gods to which any human has prayed has ever existed AT ALL. That’s the difference between the two meanings of “faith” you use we have faith in theories based on evidence. You have BLIND faith in mythology despite evidence.

How much convincing do you need for anything to be ABSOLUTELY TRUE in the example you cited? Indeed, since you do not know everything, are you willing to concede the possibility that we may be right? Do you have even the tiniest amount of doubt that your god exists? If you don’t say Yes, then you’re a hypocrite.

I understand that there are a number of different varieties of Atheism, just like there are differences between people who consider themselves Christians. I have been discussing Atheism from the standpoint of those adherents who believe fervently that there is no God, not from the viewpoint of those who simply have an absence of belief in a Deity.

Proof or evidence of God isn’t the issue, it’s whether one can say with any certainty at all that God doesn’t exist. As you say, some Atheists put their faith in human science. That is precisely my point. It is the belief in something, not a certainty.