I am an atheist.

[Wanderer]

Believers who have come to faith, rather than being born to it culturally, have usually done so after being convinced by some kind of evidence.

Religion requires no burden of proof and this is the great thing about it. They simply rely on people having faith to believe that their deity exists. If they seek to provide "proof" (which cannot be given) then someone will find a way to refute it which would undermine their beliefs. The few religions which do attempt to rely on "proof" quickly find themselves to be exposed as a fraud.

Faith is the very essence of believing in something that there is no evidence for. If a person attempts to seek or present proof that their god exists then they lack faith. There is no more or less proof for the existence of any christian/muslim/hindu/sikh deity than there is for the Flying Spaghetti Monster.

[d000hg]

Religion requires no burden of proof and this is the great thing about it. They simply rely on people having faith to believe that their deity exists. If they seek to provide "proof" (which cannot be given) then someone will find a way to refute it which would undermine their beliefs. The few religions which do attempt to rely on "proof" quickly find themselves to be exposed as a fraud.

Faith is the very essence of believing in something that there is no evidence for. If a person attempts to seek or present proof that their god exists then they lack faith.

Faith is NOT defined as believing in something which has NO evidence. You quoted a bit of NAT's post but conveniently missed the part where he(?) talks about proof Vs evidence.

You are correct that faith means going beyond what can be proved, but it would be a poor kind of believer who did not see evidence supporting their faith. Of course what one person sees as evidence another may not but that's a different discussion.

Also I feel people are now just throwing around "burden of proof" without knowing what it means It's been used far too many times in this thread already!

There is no more or less proof for the existence of any christian/muslim/hindu/sikh deity than there is for the Flying Spaghetti Monster

I don't see hundreds of websites set up to share stories of miracles performed by the FSM. I don't see people attributing dramatic changes in their lives to the FSM. I don't see historical texts which allude to events described in the Pastafarian holy book.

[MyUserName]

Faith is NOT defined as believing in something which has NO evidence. You quoted a bit of NAT's post but conveniently missed the part where he(?) talks about proof Vs evidence.

You are correct that faith means going beyond what can be proved, but it would be a poor kind of believer who did not see evidence supporting their faith. Of course what one person sees as evidence another may not but that's a different discussion.

But you can see evidence for anything if you truely want to, it just take some logical twisting and a bit of confirmation bias. You can find it for the Christian God, I can find it for the invisible pink unicorn.

Also I feel people are now just throwing around "burden of proof" without knowing what it means It's been used far too many times in this thread already!

Sorry, how many is too many? Part of the conversation was about the burden of proof so, logically, it will get mentioned?

[Moscow Mule]

Most of you lot aren't atheists anyway, you're all strong agnostics.

[MyUserName]

Most of you lot aren't atheists anyway, you're all strong agnostics.

KUATB

It depends how far you want to push the definitions. I am as agnostic about the Christian God as I am about any other god as I am about the tooth fairy.

[d000hg]

Most of you lot aren't atheists anyway, you're all strong agnostics.

Atheists really love being told that. Nearly as much as they love being told atheism is a belief system

[Moscow Mule]

I have a question for any active believers who've done the Alpha course:

That speaking in tongues malarky - it's just bollocks isn't it?

[Moscow Mule]

KUATB

You can define it how you want, but there's an actual definition that everybody else uses that can be applied...

[d000hg]

Why the Alpha course specifically?

And no, I don't think so. I'm what you might call a cynical charismatic - I think supernatural stuff happens but that people are not above faking it or deluding themselves. Lot's of false positives so to speak.

[Moscow Mule]

Why the Alpha course specifically?

And no, I don't think so. I'm what you might call a cynical charismatic - I think all these things are real but I don't believe it's always real when you see people doing it.

Because I know people who have been on it, who I think are generally sane people, that believe it to be evidence of a god.

Being militantly agnostic, I find it to be evidence of anything but.

But, each to their own - so long as you don't go foisting your views on other people's way of life then I really couldn't give two hoots.