Faith, religious faith, is something like belief despite the lack of evidence. If there was enough evidence to reasonably believe in God, there would be no need for faith, or a leap of faith or whatever kids are saying these days...
Faith, as in 'trust', is based on observation. I trust that when I sit on a chair, I won't phase through it and fall to the center of the earth, because I have sat on chairs thousands of times and it hasn't happened before. Also, such phasing, without any amazing gadgets, is almost scientifically impossible. This "faith", which should really just be called trust, is evidence based.
So why do some religious people claim the two types of "faith" are the same? Why claim an atheist has "faith", when you damn well know they have nothing remotely like religious faith!?
(Note that if you claim they have something like "religious faith" explain how your answer satisfies my definition of religious faith above.)
2006-12-13 03:55:28 · 8 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
luvwinz said: " Atheists have faith that when they die they won't be greeted by an afterlife or diety. They don't know with 100% certainty because no one has returned to tell us otherwise .... it doesn't change the fact they are holding strong to something with no evidence."
No, atheists do not believe in the afterlife, because there is not sufficient evidence to believe in the afterlife. It is not reasonable to conclude, based on the evidence, that there is an afterlife. The religious person, makes a leap of faith that there will be an afterlife. One uses faith, the other doesn't.
As for 100% certainty, who said anything about that? Not having faith DOES NOT mean you are 100% certain. That's a strawman. Maybe 0.1% of atheists make foolish claims where they say "With 100% certainty, I know there is no afterlife." To pretend all atheists are like that, is to pretend that FRED PHELPS represents ALL CHRISTIANS.
2006-12-13 04:09:05 · update #1
themistocles said: "Why concern yourself, and get all bent out of shape? Let people believe what they prefer... Why quibble over semantics, or get caught up in circular forms of logic?"
First of all, you didn't answer my question.
Second, I am not bent out of shape, I am not telling people to have one religious belief over another. I am trying to understand why people purposely use words so imprecisely and vaguely that it comes across as dishonest.
2006-12-13 04:12:14 · update #2
thespillgood: "faith is belief atheiests believe that there is a world without creation. ... the evidence has always supported creation but frequently disproves evelution. ... it takes faith to believe somthing that has been proven false several times?"
First, I appreciate all of the time you spent on proper grammar and sentence structure. Second, how is evolution faith based? It based on evidence entirely! The conclusion is reasonable based on the evidence. No one needs to make a leap of faith as far as evolution is concerned. As for creation (as evolution does not explain where the first replicators came from), there are competing ideas... but there is strong evidence that organic components can arise from inorganic ones. Once the first replicators appear, evolution explains everything else.
Now, if you can prove evolution false, you should be able to win a Nobel Prize, along with some other prizes. Fame and fortune would be yours. So I look forward to seeing your disproof
2006-12-13 04:20:11 · update #3
Your "definition" aside:
Atheists have faith that when they die they won't be greeted by an afterlife or diety. They don't know with 100% certainty because no one has returned to tell us otherwise (except for Jesus). So, they have faith in something that they hope is true but don't have concrete evidence for. You can try to change the definition because you hate the word, but it doesn't change the fact they are holding strong to something with no evidence.
2006-12-13 04:01:41 · answer #1 · answered by luvwinz 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
faith is belief atheiests believe that there is a world without creation. to me this seems absurd. evolution being equally absurd after all how can a bird evolve wings what good is a part of a wing anyway. did the bird understand areodynamics? did it selectively kill off birds to fit its plan (much like hitler)? these questions need to be asked. people will believe what there told were basically sheep. evolutionist are some of the most angy narrow minded intolorant people. yet they preach openmindedness. the evidence has always supported creation but frequently disproves evelution. when it does they just tack somthing on to fit the evidence always changing = never right.
would you say it takes faith to believe somthing that has been proven false several times?
2006-12-13 12:09:41 · answer #2 · answered by thespillgood 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
They have constructed a vast framework of falsehoods and half truths about subjects like evolution and atheism and it becomes second nature to them to unthinkingly churn out the same lies time and time again. Christian websites help promote the mythology until what you have is a self perpetuating cycle of misinformation and deceit.
2006-12-13 12:01:05 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Maybe because faith and trust are two different things--they are definitely part of each other, but they aren't synonomous as you say.
2006-12-13 12:04:10 · answer #4 · answered by Crystal B 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
it don't, an atheist cannot have faith in a high power cause they have no belief, one has to be wit the other. JonJon
2006-12-13 11:59:23 · answer #5 · answered by jonwjonw 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Very few religious people study the Bible.
2006-12-13 11:59:08 · answer #6 · answered by Jeancommunicates 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
welcome to the world of christianity. they lie all the time to make their cult look good and to give it value in their own minds.
2006-12-13 11:58:25 · answer #7 · answered by Jeebus is my Rectum 3 · 1⤊ 2⤋
Because they are hipocrits
2006-12-13 11:57:05 · answer #8 · answered by ALEXA 1 · 0⤊ 2⤋