How does one distinguish faith from delusion?

It's a good question. An even better question is; "Is atheism a delusion?"Is it really logical and realistic to believe that organisms came from a soup and that natural processes are more mindful and clever than a mind with intelligence? Certainly counter-intuitive at the very least.Also, God is only an "absurdity" to one particular group of people, called "atheists".How do you distinguish between subjectively absurd and objectively absurd, when logic nor science favour either God nor Godlesness?I'm afraid it is not a simple topic.Do I hold that I might hold myself as delusional? No - only I can know whether I am subject to delusion. If I base my actions on my beliefs and the results match with them, am I not being practical? Wouldn't it be illogical to disregard a belief which is constantly proved as relevant to reality?

My point is that only one group of people believe I am deluded.Even people of other faiths don't believe I am deluded in the same way you do.But belief in God does not require delusion, as you can look at all of those billions of creative facts in creation, that show the Creator.Why should your group not ask yourselves the same question? Are you some kind of uber-group where it doesn't apply?

Hi 'moose.My closing statement is that claiming people with faith, are deluded, is nothing new, and it doesn't get any more impressive as a claim, but is not very relevant to real life.Mod' corrected my error, that only I can know if I am deluded. That is wrong, usually it is other people who see you are deluded, but it doesn't follow that this makes you deluded if they think that they perceive that you are deluded when you are not. It's an "EASY" dig at believers, usually used by folk like Dawkins.It is too easy to handwave away a particular belief system by claiming that all belief systems are generic delusions.It's bad logic to use a general argument to conclude something about a singular, a fallacy of composition pertaining to the units of a whole.You or Dawkins cannot detect whether I am deluded, therefore you have no basis to conclude that I am.(This post isn't aimed at you moose.. but the claimants.)