Stuck Between Agnosticism and Christianity

[Mempho]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I thought I cleared that up, that while atheism is not a religion "per se," it does require a certain amount of faith.

[/ QUOTE ]
What faith is required to not have a belief in god?

[/ QUOTE ]

Atheism, as used in common vernacular as opposed to the strict definition, uses supportive arguments that require a certain degree of faith in something.

In strict definition, atheism requires no faith. The "vocal atheists," as individuals, however, always show faith in something by their choice of supporting arguments.

A common belief held by atheists who use science, for instance, is that scienctific consensus can't be the result of biased, errant, or falliable science that created increasing levels of groupthink with weaknesses covered by justifications which are merely the result of confirmation bias.

[/ QUOTE ]

Science isn't for or against god. Actually god's existence is (as of yet anyway) a very uninteresting scientific question.

Any anyone who believes science can't be fallible is per definition not believing in science, because common scientific method is about falsifying and constantly developing new and improved theories. Absolutes are largely uninteresting. A point which I see seems to flyby completely unnoticed by theists.

It is also this method of seeing the world which the largest criticism against theism - fluidity of belief vs rigidity of belief - what we know will change.

Also you are indirectly proposing an = sign between atheism and science, which is itself interesting and reveals maybe a fairly big bias on your part.

[/ QUOTE ]

Thre reason that I use science in the example is that science gets used by atheists in apoletics as if it were an infalliable piece of truth. Believing this requires a certain degree of faith.