Neither a theist nor an atheist

Hello Faith,
Is that not the whole point of faith.? To believe in the absence of evidence? To accept, hope or trust despite the availability of evidence that would confirm?Who is demonstrating faith; someone who believes because they are moved to do so by their will?Or, someone who believes because they have a peer reviewed
scientific publication confirming the facts of the article in question?I always thought faith was believing something despite the complete lack of evidence. Which is why it is so difficult for so many skeptical scientific minded people.Many folks just can not bring themselves to accept extrordinary claims in the absence of reproducible, falsifiable evidence.
If this where not so, there would be no atheist or agnostics.

Precisimo!

Faith,
Not everyone has your version of faith.Some people see basing ones faith on the confirmed evidence of something is akin to saying I am going to take a gamble on a 100% sure thing. It is a contradiction. There is no risk in being wrong therefore there is no gamble.Edited by 1.61803, : No reason given.

Hi Faith, I meant it as a analogy or to illustrate. (Probably a poor example.)
Faith in the presence of confirmed facts is like gambling is in the presence of no risk.Is someone practicing faith if they have confirmed evidence?
Is someone gambling if they are 100% certain of sucess?In other words, how can you be gambling if you certain of winning?
How can you be basing your beliefs on faith if you know the article in questions is based on confirmed facts.Let me try another analogy.
The word predict. Means to correctly say or know what will happen before it happens.Now how can one predict something if it already has happened?
It is no longer prediction. Something that is 'after the fact' can not by definition be predicted.
Just as having faith in something that is already confirmed is superfulous.You say your faith is based on evidence of the thing that requires faith to believe. If something is completely evidenced then it no longer requires faith to believe it to be true.
At least as far as I understand the word faith to be used.So yes, depending on the source of the "evidence" the requirement how much faith imo is inversely proportionate to the quality of the evidence. Edited by 1.61803, : removed the word 'directley'