Atheists have faith???

Question

It seems to me that Atheists have just as much faith as Christians, and other such religions that believe in God. They can't prove that God does not exist, and no one can prove he/she does. They have faith (or in other words believe) that God does not exist...The only "religion" that seems to be based on logic is Agnosticism. They believe there is nothing to either prove or disprove the existence of a God. So unless you're Agnostic you have the burden of prove, and have faith. right??? And why do Atheists take offense to this?

P.S. Not trying to rag on anybody, just trying to see from different view points.Please do not bring up the "you can not disprove an imaginary thing" defense. I would like to here some other "arguments". Thanks :)

Answer 1

Yes, you're right. I normally consider myself an atheist because I feel very sure that there is no God, but maybe it would be more honest to call myself an agnostic because it's true that I can't be 100 % sure that there is no God.
However I don't think anyone really has a burden of proof. We don't need to proof we are right. I mean it's not so that you don't have the right to believe what you believe if you can't prove you're right. I don't demand people who believe in God that they have to give me really good reasons why they do so and I don't see a reason to argue on this issue. If I argue with religious people then it is about moral matters, i.e. if they believe something I consider morally wrong (e.g. if they believe they should push their faith on others).

I don't like it when atheists speak like they were smarter because they have understood that there is no God and write something about a purple elephant like the answerer above did, or something like that. It is just disrespectful to religious people and I don't think that the concept of God that most religious people have is as silly as believing in a purple elephant. So I would really wish we could all just respect each other.

Answer 2

Your argument is based on a simple logical flaw - you assume that if believing in something requires faith, then not believing in something requires faith.

Not believing is faith-free. Do you believe in Zeus? If not, does that require faith? This is not a defense as you call it. It's a very reasonable position.

Agnosticism is logical as well, but I believe atheism is more logical - the agnostic says its impossible to prove. That's a valid position to take.

However you have to question the need to prove something. We accept Einsteins' theory about gravity and Newton's 'laws' (actually theories) about force as being fact, but they cannot be proven. Most science is theory - this doesn't make it wrong. Just that most things in this universe are impossible to prove. So you take a position that is supported by the evidence and if you're being scientific you try to find ways to falsify your views.

This is why some people see agnostics as fence-sitters. They demand proof, when this is actually an illogical position. They should be demanding evidence. And there is no evidence for gods. No evidence and no need for faith to be an atheist.

Answer 3

I don't have faith, I have looked at the evidence and concluded that the God of the major religions can't exists. One thing you have to understand is that in science it is impossible to have absolute proof. An example of this is the relationship between the circumference of a circle and its diameter. You can't measure the circumference and diameter of every single circle in the universe to see if it the circumference always equals the product of Pi and the diameter. But after you a have measured a large amount of circles it is logical to make the conclusion that the circumference equals pi * diameter. So an Atheists does not have to rely on faith because we have made a logical conclusion based on the observation of the world. The fact that there is absolutely no evidence to support the existence of creature like God is enough to make a sound conclusion. Agnostic aren't logical because they have enough information to come to accurate conclusion but refuse to. Until actually evidence of God existent is discover it is logical to assume God doesn't exists.

Answer 4

as others have said it is not faith that we cant prove god doesn't exist. it is just that it is as factual that a deity exists as it is that a purple elephant with a duck bill and human ears does. i know you said you didnt want to hear this, but that is what it is.

you can't prove such an elephant does not exist. does that mean you have faith it doesn't exist, or just that you know b/c you have common sense?

and by the way as an atheist i take no offense to it, so you really shouldn't generalize in such a way. it is like saying "why do christians like to rape boys".

Answer 5

You are completely misunderstanding the meaning of the word "faith". NOT believing in something is not "faith" but a rejection of anything served to you as "real" or "factual" when the person or group doing their "Jesus Pitch" can't come up with the kind of clear, unequivocal, indisputable, unarguable, incontrovertible PROOF of the veracity of what they are selling. And you do have to remember that the overwhelming majority of "non-theists" don't give a tinker's toenail about trying to convince anybody else that god doesn't exist. They simply have come to that conclusion themselves, and get on with their lives. You aren't going to find any atheists standing on street corners preaching about what they DON'T believe. You don't find any atheists running T.V. prostelitizing shows dedicated to changing the minds of believers.
I'm a real health nut, but I guarantee you will never find me up on a soapbox down on Main Street on a Saturday afternoon, shouting through a megaphone about the virtues of Broccolli LOL.

Answer 6

Main Entry: 1faith
Pronunciation: 'fAth
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural faiths /'fAths, sometimes 'fA[th]z/
Etymology: Middle English feith, from Anglo-French feid, fei, from Latin fides; akin to Latin fidere to trust -- more at BIDE
1 a : allegiance to duty or a person : LOYALTY b (1) : fidelity to one's promises (2) : sincerity of intentions
2 a (1) : belief and trust in and loyalty to God (2) : belief in the traditional doctrines of a religion b (1) : firm belief in something for which there is no proof (2) : complete trust
3 : something that is believed especially with strong conviction; especially : a system of religious beliefs

---

So to definition 1.. Yup I have faith I am a very dutiful and loyal person. I am sincere and stick to my promises.

To #2.. I do not believe in something for which there is no proof, I only believe in things for which there is proof. One of the reasons I don't believe there is a God, no proof. I do however have complete trust in some people that have given me no reason to distrust them.

To #3.. I believe things which have been proven to me with strong conviction. Things such as Gravity..

Ok, yup I have faith.. But not faith in the way you are trying to make it sound. Not believing God does exist because there is no proof of his existence is by no means faith. The fact that there is more evidence to support his non existence also does not mean it requires me to have faith by believing he doesn't exist.

Answer 7

Atheists realize that humans can not know anything for sure. Agnostics just beat that horse a while after it's already dead. We all have faith in our senses and our logic. We have faith in the answers science provides because they are supported by sound logic and evidence. Scientific faith is defensible to that degree. Religious faith is not.

Answer 8

I believe you are trying to make an argument by using an ill-advised word. Faith, in general, means that something that is believed with strong conviction. However, the accepted use of the word (and another definition in the dictionary for it) is that it refers to the belief in God, religion or the firm belief that in something for which there is no proof.

So your argument appears to be one of semantics. You want to label our beliefs (meaning the lack of belief in god and/or the supernatural) as "faith" when it really does not fit the general accepted definition of that word.

Answer 9

Atheists do not have the burden of proof. It is impossible to prove a negative. Prove to me that leprechauns don't exist, or that there is not a china teapot floating somewhere in space.

They are not trying to prove anything. If you were to call anything proof, it would be the masses of scientific evidence we have accumulated over the years.

Many atheists were originally agnostics who converted when constantly pestered by theists about their beliefs.

Answer 10

Do you take a leap of faith by not believing in Santa Clause? No, you simply don't believe in Santa Clause. This is the same way it is when it comes to atheists and god(s).