Why Atheists Get the Idea of "Faith" Wrong

[steve_bank]

Faith is a belief without evidence to supportthe belief.

No religious group that I know of defines faith that way. You made that up. You've posted an example of the way atheists misrepresent religious faith. It's unfair and dishonest to do so.

Can you offer an alternative definition? Preferably with an illustration.

Here's the Southern Baptist statement of faith:

God as Father reigns with providential care over His universe, His creatures, and the flow of the stream of human history according to the purposes of His grace. He is all powerful, all knowing, all loving, and all wise. God is Father in truth to those who become children of God through faith in Jesus Christ.

Note that we read nothing here about believing without evidence.

There has been decdes of fprum debate on what Christians consider evidebxe and proofs, maybe you missed it.

As Dr Z pointed out Christian beliefs and theology begin with the forgone conclusion god exists and the bible is true.

I was having a convervation with a Cristian on creationism. He poined out the window and said 'Just look it is obvious god created everything.'

A rorm of the Teleological Proof, something like god must exist therefore god exists. Or the universe could not possibly exist without a god therefore god exists. Such is the Christian typical 'evidence'.

Christian proofs often rely on refuting science like evolution with bad science.

 

[DBT]

Faith is trusting in the truth of your belief without the support of evidence, which turns trust into faith.

Name one Christian sect that defines faith that way.

It is how faith is defined regardless of how any religion or sect cares to rationalize their theology.

Faith

noun
1. strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp without proof or evidence

2. a specific system of religious beliefs - Collins.

OK, you can find no Christian group that defines faith as "trusting in the truth of your belief without the support of evidence." You posted a straw man.

Not at all, Hebrews 11:1 essentially gives the same definition of faith. Theology is clearly not based on evidence, therefore any beliefs or teachings in relation to a God or gods are faith based.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Faith is trusting in the truth of your belief without the support of evidence, which turns trust into faith.

Name one Christian sect that defines faith that way.

It is how faith is defined regardless of how any religion or sect cares to rationalize their theology.

Faith

noun
1. strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp without proof or evidence

2. a specific system of religious beliefs - Collins.

OK, you can find no Christian group that defines faith as "trusting in the truth of your belief without the support of evidence." You posted a straw man.

Not at all, Hebrews 11:1 essentially gives the same definition of faith. Theology is clearly not based on evidence, therefore any beliefs or teachings in relation to a God or gods are faith based.

Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Were you hoping I wasn't going to look it up?

 

[abaddon]

Were you hoping I wasn't going to look it up?

Read the quote more carefully. It says there are things hoped for and things unseen, and faith makes up the substance or medium in which those hopes and 'invisibles' exist.

You highlighted the key words: "Faith is the evidence".

IOW, a feeling of "trust" is itself the evidence.

Do you think a feeling of sureness works as evidence? If so, then for what?

 

[DBT]

Faith is trusting in the truth of your belief without the support of evidence, which turns trust into faith.

Name one Christian sect that defines faith that way.

It is how faith is defined regardless of how any religion or sect cares to rationalize their theology.

Faith

noun
1. strong or unshakeable belief in something, esp without proof or evidence

2. a specific system of religious beliefs - Collins.

OK, you can find no Christian group that defines faith as "trusting in the truth of your belief without the support of evidence." You posted a straw man.

Not at all, Hebrews 11:1 essentially gives the same definition of faith. Theology is clearly not based on evidence, therefore any beliefs or teachings in relation to a God or gods are faith based.

Hebrews 11:1

Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Were you hoping I wasn't going to look it up?

I'm glad you did. Do you not understand that the verse does not refer to evidence, that it essentially says that faith is its own justification?

The verse essentially tells us that faith is its own assurance of truth; a belief held without the support of evidence, yet according to Paul, sufficient justification unto itself.

''Now faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see.'' - NIV

''Now faith is assurance of [things] hoped for, a conviction of things not seen.'' ASV

''Faith is the reality of what we hope for, the proof of what we don't see.'' CE

 

[DrZoidberg]

so why are there two words “faith” and “trust”? Are they identical terms to you? No distinction in meaning at all?

Faith is a special kind of trust--it is trust in the truth of a conclusion. That's what a Christian man told me regarding what he means by "faith." It's what I've repeatedly explained on this thread.

Christian theologians have always had a really bad habit of making up philosophical terms that describes a context with only one possible conclusion; namely Christianity, as defined by the ecumenical councils (Nicea and so on). The modern Western university system was created with this singular task. To train academics to think like Christians. This is why the pope (repeatedly) kept banning professors from teaching Aristotle. Ancient Greek philosophy isn't formulated to have a handy God shaped hole in it. Its language was formulated to allow for every possible philosophical conclusion. Which is why the universities kept teaching Aristotle anyway.

Protestant or Evangelical Christian theologians are in no way better. They're even worse.

Faith is one such word. It's a concept invented by Christians with the sole intent of having belief in the Christian God being the natural conclusion. And we don't need the term. If we're doing general philosophy, it's a useless term, because it only has a function within Christianity and Islam. The Jewish term for faith (Emunah) means something quite different.

Jewish principles of faith - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I think we're better off just scrapping the term all together because it's designed to lead us toward just one highly specialised conclusion. Yes, the Christian theologians who came up with it, did it on purpose. (side note: it was probably Paul who invented it. In His project to make his new form of gentile-facing Judaism, different from Pharisaic or Sadducee Judaism).

You're off topic. It isn't my intention to critique the idea of faith as it is used by the religious. Rather, I'm objecting to atheists claiming that the faith of the religious is something that the religious do not say it is. Let me clarify:

1. religious faith (according to theists) - that which results when one is convinced by trustworthy reasoning and evidence that various doctrines of the supernatural are true
2. religious faith (according to atheists) - an irrational tenacity to cling to supernatural beliefs that are unsupported by evidence

So atheists are swapping out what the religious mean by faith and replacing it with their own idea of faith claiming that it's the faith of the religious. It's a blatant straw-man argument on the part of atheists.

Then you clearly haven't read Kierkegaard. His life's work was on Christian faith. He's the one who came up with "the leap of faith". And yes, he also was a Christian. Number 2 is the correct definition of faith. Kierkegaard's conclusion is that life is a complicated mess with very few rock solid answers. In order to at all function we just need to have faith in something, and then just go for it. Leap into the darkness and hope for the best. He chose Christian faith because he lived in a Christian society. But he fully acknowledges that any leap of faith is as good as any other. Yes, this is true for atheists as well. We're taking the leap of faith that God doesn't exist. We don't have more evidence for this than theists have to work with.

Leap of faith - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

I'd say number 1, isn't Christian or Christian thought at all. It comes from David Hume, the Enlightenment, scientific thinking and scientism. Another powerful strand of Western thought. But not Christian at all. I think it's funny how you mention:

various doctrines of the supernatural

The supernatural isn't supposed to make sense or be able to be defined. It's supposed to be a mystery. The awe of God etc. I suggest you stop trying to make Christianity into a science. It's not, and never was.

It's important to realize that Christianity is a way of thinking as much as it is a religion. Most western atheists still think like Christians, in spite of trying not to. Secular Humanism is 100% Christianity. Just with the word "God" switched out for "Ideal humans". Escaping Christianity and Christian thinking is very very hard to do in the west. Only if we've lived on a long while in Asia do we understand just how deeply steeped in Christian thought most of the world is. That's why I think it is so funny that you're trying to ditch Christian thought and reformulate your Christianity in scientific terms.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Unknown soldier, if atheists get faith wrong, then what's Genesis 22 about? Isn't the entire point of that story to push for the value of taking a leap of faith? The whole point of that story is that Abraham knows better. He knows he shouldn't kill his son. But he trusts in God, ie the voices in his head.

 

[ideologyhunter]

John 20:27-9: Then he said to Thomas, "Put your finger here, and see my hands; and put out your hand, and place it in my side; do not be faithless, but believing." Thomas answered him, "My Lord and my God!" Jesus said to him, "Have you believed because you have seen me? Blessed are those who have not seen and yet believe."

 

[steve_bank]

God as Father reigns with providential care over His universe, His creatures, and the flow of the stream of human history according to the purposes of His grace. He is all powerful, all knowing, all loving, and all wise. God is Father in truth to those who become children of God through faith in Jesus Christ.

That defines a specific set of articles of religious faith. You can find the RCC catechism online.

Soldier, what you quoted is a belief in an unseen and unprofitable god and in the story of a 2000 year old dead Jew. Different sects have different ways of expressing and interpreting but it is all the same faith. There is no singular exression of Prioteant faith. A cosewnce of the Refrmation and rejection of the RCC as a sole Chrtian authority.

Individual independent Christians have individual expressions of faith.

Not all Christens, Muslims, and Jews agree on the exact expressions and interpretation of faith but they all have a fundamental set of principles.


The 5 Pillars Of Islam

The Five Pillars of Islam

The Five Pillars are the core beliefs and practices of Islam.

www.metmuseum.org

1. Profession of Faith (shahada). The belief that "There is no god but God, and Muhammad is the Messenger of God" is central to Islam. This phrase, written in Arabic, is often prominently featured in architecture and a range of objects, including the Qur'an, Islam's holy book of divine revelations. One becomes a Muslim by reciting this phrase with conviction.

I worked at an engineering company started by Iranian immigrants. They were Muslim of varying degrees.

I was having a conversation in the office of one of the owners. He insisted Mohammad appeared to him as real as I was standing there. We exchanged books my getting a history of Islam from him.

The Christian faith revolves around a belief in the resurrection of Jesus, the supernatural.

 

[T.G.G. Moogly]

But he fully acknowledges that any leap of faith is as good as any other. Yes, this is true for atheists as well. We're taking the leap of faith that God doesn't exist.

That strikes me as silly. At least call it an informed, calculated, reasoned, evidenced and rational leap of faith.

 

[bilby]

We're taking the leap of faith that God doesn't exist. We don't have more evidence for this than theists have to work with.

Only insofar as everyone is also taking the leap of faith that slood doesn't exist. You don't even know what slood is? That's OK, nobody else does either, including me.

We have the same evidence for the non-existence of God that we have for the non-existence of slood - literally ALL of the evidence for everything is evidence for the non-existence of both God and slood.

Literally every attempt to define what God is (or what gods are) has led to them being either demonstrably non-existent, or to the definition being demonstrably useless.

That's a whole big mountain of hard evidence that atheism is the appropriate position to take.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Unknown soldier, if atheists get faith wrong, then what's Genesis 22 about? Isn't the entire point of that story to push for the value of taking a leap of faith? The whole point of that story is that Abraham knows better. He knows he shouldn't kill his son. But he trusts in God, ie the voices in his head.

Nowhere did I say that atheists get faith wrong. What atheists do is deliberately use a different meaning of the word faith than what the religious do to misrepresent what the religious say about faith. Anybody can understand what I'm saying, and if you continue to twist my words, then I'll ignore it.

 

[ideologyhunter]

"Nowhere did I say that atheists get faith wrong", says the soldier whose thread is called Why Atheists Get the Idea of 'Faith' Wrong, and who starts the thread with "Atheists tend to see the idea of faith as weak, irrational..." and goes on to refute that characterization made by atheists. I'm losing faith in this thread.

 

[DBT]

Unknown soldier, if atheists get faith wrong, then what's Genesis 22 about? Isn't the entire point of that story to push for the value of taking a leap of faith? The whole point of that story is that Abraham knows better. He knows he shouldn't kill his son. But he trusts in God, ie the voices in his head.

Nowhere did I say that atheists get faith wrong. What atheists do is deliberately use a different meaning of the word faith than what the religious do to misrepresent what the religious say about faith. Anybody can understand what I'm saying, and if you continue to twist my words, then I'll ignore it.

Hebrews 11:1 tells us that faith is its own justification.

Which equates to "a belief held without the support of evidence."

 

[abaddon]

What atheists do is deliberately use a different meaning of the word faith than what the religious do to misrepresent what the religious say about faith.

Calling supernaturalist beliefs "blind faith" and claiming there's "no evidence" isn't 'switching out' the definition of faith, it's a critique of faith.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

What atheists do is deliberately use a different meaning of the word faith than what the religious do to misrepresent what the religious say about faith.

Calling supernaturalist beliefs "blind faith" and claiming there's "no evidence" isn't 'switching out' the definition of faith, it's a critique of faith.

Yes, faith is very bad. Can we now get back to the topic?

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Unknown soldier, if atheists get faith wrong, then what's Genesis 22 about? Isn't the entire point of that story to push for the value of taking a leap of faith? The whole point of that story is that Abraham knows better. He knows he shouldn't kill his son. But he trusts in God, ie the voices in his head.

Nowhere did I say that atheists get faith wrong. What atheists do is deliberately use a different meaning of the word faith than what the religious do to misrepresent what the religious say about faith. Anybody can understand what I'm saying, and if you continue to twist my words, then I'll ignore it.

Hebrews 11:1 tells us that faith is its own justification.

Which equates to "a belief held without the support of evidence."

Either address the topic, or I'll ignore you're posts. I'm not here to play games.

 

[DBT]

Which is: atheists do not get the idea of faith wrong.

 

[DBT]

Unknown soldier, if atheists get faith wrong, then what's Genesis 22 about? Isn't the entire point of that story to push for the value of taking a leap of faith? The whole point of that story is that Abraham knows better. He knows he shouldn't kill his son. But he trusts in God, ie the voices in his head.

Nowhere did I say that atheists get faith wrong. What atheists do is deliberately use a different meaning of the word faith than what the religious do to misrepresent what the religious say about faith. Anybody can understand what I'm saying, and if you continue to twist my words, then I'll ignore it.

Hebrews 11:1 tells us that faith is its own justification.

Which equates to "a belief held without the support of evidence."

Either address the topic, or I'll ignore you're posts. I'm not here to play games.

I wasn't playing games, only pointing out the meaning of faith as given in Hebrew 11:1, where it does not say that faith is justified through evidence, but just the opposite.

 

[steve_bank]

Soldier confuses form and content.

Faith is a form or category. Color is a form or category. Red is a particular kind of color. Religious beliefs are a particular kind form of faith.

Religigion does not define what faith means. Religion defines what particular things you must take on faith to be part of the religion.

So this is what philosophers do, nice work if you can get it.

Soldier, if you ignore us who are you goung to find to talk to?

You can't hide behind claming valid questions and crtitcisms are off topic'.

Your topi is that atheists get faith wrong. Us atheists have laid out the issues with your claims.

1. Grow and evolve your views.
2. Acknowledge there are issues with your positions.
3. Put us on ignore and post you views without seeing responses.
4. Stop posting.

Whatever you do I will not lose any sleep over it. Your schtik on other threads of yiurs is make a claim and deflect resposes by calling everybody stupid.