Athiests: Why do you CLAIM to have no faith?

Question

Most athiests i have come into contact with side with science. Couldn't it be argued that this "scientific fact" is simply passed down from "educators" onto the students who are told to "know" it?

replace "scientific fact" with bible, "educator" with minister and "know" with "believe", and youve got yourself a Christian.

My argument is this> how do you know the earth is round? how do you know evolution isnt just a big sham? how do you know atoms exist? unless you have done the research yourself, have stood in space, or looked at an atom you are TRUSTING and BELIEVING those who have done the work for you, you therefore would have FAITH no? thereby negating the entire premise of athiesm? what say you?

ZC> no i have a problem with Athiests proclaiming the hypocritical ways of the Christians when maybe they should turn that finger of judgement on themselves

Apparently the point was missed, i am not claiming that the earth is Flat! i am simply asking you where your source of information is coming from, have you yourself been in space and seen it? if not my point is that you TRUST those who tell you so

I find it halarious those of you who refered to scientific text and the scientifically educated as proof, why is their proof more accecptable than the relegious text, and religously educated? simple> novelty

For those of you who were too busy taking offense and argument, my point was simple while i may perfer that the truth comes from "the pixie in the sky", as i believe one answerer so eloquently put it, as an athiest you prefer to put your faith not in a "big spaghetti ball" as said another, but some guy in a lab coat. thanks for nothing lost ones

Answer 1

I was thinking about this as well, but I find it to be a rather silly thing to try and talk to those with hard hearts. Do not cast your pearls before swine. Those who do not want to listen won't hear until it's too late to escape the tribulation. Only those who WANT to hear will listen, many who come here will simply bash us and in their bigoted ways fulfill the Lord's words. With or against, everyone is moving to fulfill the Lord's words one way or another, the question is which side are you on?

Answer 2

I am not an atheist, but your arguments don't make sense.

You can't replace "scientific fact" with "bible" because they are two totally different things. The first has been put up for repeated disproval and can't be disproved. The second one is a collection of old writings by people unknown, which have been badly translated and selected to seem good. Look up gnosticism.

You can't replace "educator" with "minister" as the first has an open mind and the second, however much they philosophise about their religion, will ultimately have the answer "it's god's will".

You can't replace "know" with "beileve" as the first has a certainty about it and the second is only pertinent to you.

I know the earth is a sphere because I can see the top of a ship disappearing last over the horizon.

I know that eveolution isn't a big sham because I have an appendix, which is not very useful and an opposable thumb.

I know atoms exsist because I have seen them in an electron microscope.

Answer 3

I think most christian replace 'believe' with 'know' when talking about god.

Most things can not be known absolutely, or are plain wrong when taken literally. for 'instance earth is round' it isnt.

Belief or faith is that what is most likely for a person.

This doesnt have to be based on proofs, if you are told by your parents that the earth-form is a triangle and all the people artound you are saying the same, you will think for a long while that this is ther case. ... but these are such trivial banalities ...

Dont you think that when someone say "I have no faith" that this person use a different definition than you do ?

Dont you think that any reasonable person will understand your claim that, when 'facts' or 'lies' are told to a child , that these 'facts' or 'lies' will persist in the faith of the person ?

Answer 4

by faith we usually mean we don't believe the magic spaghetti monster will come and save us from the wicked meatball monster not that we trust someone who has spent 40% of his life researching atoms the universe and life on earth the main thing is we admit we don't have all the answers but we do have prof all that scientist claim real prof which you can see for yourself even if you're not a scientist like evolution you can see all the signs even when we bred two different species of dogs and you can't deny the similarities between monkey and humans which indeed suggests that we have had a common ancestor

Answer 5

In useful phrases academia states that within the absence of evidence of the lifestyles of some thing it need to be deemed to not exist till verifiable evidence is located - for this reason god is held to not exist pending a few variety of verifiable proof. There isn't one unmarried point out of Jesus within the complete Roman list - that's correct - now not one!!! At the identical time as he was once meant to were round there have been a quantity of Jews claiming to be the messiah - all of whom are good recorded!! He was once meant to were a tremendous trouble to the Romans and produced uncommon miracles however nonetheless now not one modern-day list? Even the bible mentions of him like several different references weren't written till a long time after his meant loss of life!! At nice he was once an amalgam of the ones others!! As for faith and religion then please seem the ones up in a dictionary and you'll discover simply how incorrect you're approximately the ones too!!

Answer 6

I have 'faith' the world is round based on the fact that this assumption has been recorded and demonstrated to those in the know several times over thousands of years. I don't necessarily believe in the Big Bang theory. But, I will say, it has more testing behind it in it's support. My faith, belief and trust is in what scientists and researchers have studied and proven several times, over time.
'Faith' in the Christian version of God has had many books written ABOUT it but nothing supporting and/or confirming it. The book claimed to be authored by God, all-knowing and truthful, has shown itself to contain contradictions and errors. Not only that, but those who do believe it, still end up with different interpretations.
If something can be shown, and has. but not directly to you but you believe it to be true...you think it's the same as having 'faith' in something that has never been tested or shown to exist?

Answer 7

You have a point, but a weak one, I think.

I have evidence which is reproducible by multiple sources to support my understanding of the natural universe. Not all of these may prove to be ultimately 100% correct, however as any new evidence comes to light, I am prepared to change my position - that is where we differ. You cannot change your mind without that threatening your religious beliefs.

Religious belief survives only on faith. If you really start looking for it to make sense in the natural world, for proof of it through science, you might just be started on the path to enlightenment. If so, then welcome, brother.

Answer 8

Problem: Atheism isn't a position rejecting the use of "faith" (in this case, assumption) in all forms. Atheists refuse to have "faith" in the existence of deities.

"Faith" is something people should not try to have. To assume something is bad. Sometimes it's necessary to make assumptions, but this is never a good thing.

There is no reason to assume the existence of a deity, therefore Atheists will not assume the existence of a deity.

Is it that difficult to see this?

In short: Atheist proclaim to have no "faith" in the existence of deities, not no "faith" AT ALL.

Answer 9

I have been around the world so I know that it is round. People "tell" me that there is a heaven and a hell, but they have never been there and if anyone has ever been there they have not come back to tell anyone. I have seen electron microscope photos of atoms. I have never seen a picture of god or of heaven. My scientist friends have documentation for their statements. My preacher only says believe what he says and don't argue.

Answer 10

You can try as you might but you can't drag down the coherent framework of science (which enables you to write this inane nonsense and share it with the world at large) to the level of sky daddies.

If you claim everything must be seen to be believed, where does that leave your invisible magic sky pixie?

Answer 11

You are correct in a way. In Buddhism we believe in 3 types of "valid proof": Direct experience, by inference, and by reliable witnesses (which covers your last paragraph), however these concepts, including my atheism, are all provable by direct or analytical examination, therefore it's not "faith" in the "well we can't explain it, so it's gotta be some omnipotent creator being" thing.

_()_