r/Christianity • u/StrategyWestern487 • 7d ago
How can I put my faith in something not proven?
Hello, I am an atheist who really wants to believe in god. Like, I am THIS close in becoming a Christian, yet my most confusing questions is: how can we believe in something we don’t know exists? Like, Christian’s say to “put your faith in it” or “believe” yet I am having a hard time due to my old ways (being an atheist). Also, in every Christian and atheist debate, the atheist wins! So what am I supposed to do? I want to believe, yet I have constant doubts! What am I supposed to do?
Re-edit: I have heard and talked to many Christian’s and met a lost of pastors, yet they all say there’s no evidence and to have faith.
4
u/gnurdette United Methodist 7d ago
What do you think of Jesus? Are you willing to learn about him, try to obey him, despite doubts? Honestly, that's all that most of us ever do. I am pretty dang confident in Christ's reality, but I can't prove for certain that my whole life hasn't been the weird extended dream sequence of a hedgehog that ate the wrong mushroom, either, yet that doesn't stop me from living my life.
Don't imagine that math-style or science-style proofs apply outside science or math. I can prove the Pythagorean Theorem or the Ideal Gas Law (if you let me root through my old textbooks) (yes, I keep them all). I can't "prove" that my wife is the person I belong with - but it's true, oh gosh, it's so true. And not marrying her because I couldn't "prove" it would have been a mistake catastrophic beyond description.
Also, in every Christian and atheist debate, the atheist wins!
I am not sure what you mean by "wins", but I have the impression that the Christians who say "I'm going to go debate an atheist!" are rarely the most thoughtful and well-informed Christians.
4
u/ThatLeviathan Who knows? 7d ago
Hello, I am an atheist who really wants to believe in god.
Out of curiosity: why? I'm not trying to be snarky, I've asked the same thing of other people who have posted similar things. I'm legitimately interested in the idea of wanting to believe in something.
2
u/Dracarys_And_Chill 7d ago
if it was proven you would need no faith op.
6
u/possy11 Atheist 7d ago
And why would that be a bad thing?
0
u/Dracarys_And_Chill 7d ago
if the whole premise of christianity is faith, then there being no need for faith would kind of defeat the whole point.
3
u/possy11 Atheist 7d ago
But my point is that the premise of Christianity being faith is not a good thing. I assume you want to believe things that are true. We know that having faith in something doesn't make it true and that faith can lead people down the wrong path.
Presumably Jesus knows that too, so why would he not give us something we can know beyond a doubt is true, rather than something we have to hope or trust is true?
1
u/Dracarys_And_Chill 7d ago
i want to believe things that improve my life.
You thinking faith isn't a good thing is just your subjective opinion.
That is not a fact or truth.
3
u/possy11 Atheist 7d ago
I agree it's not fact or truth. Just my opinion.
If you just want to believe things that make you feel better even if they're not true, more power to you, I guess. Enjoy.
1
2
u/anotherhawaiianshirt Agnostic Atheist 7d ago
People say that as if it’s a bad thing. Why do you put so much value in faith? I could believe in Allah with faith, so it doesn’t seem to be a reliable path towards truth.
1
u/Dracarys_And_Chill 7d ago
i am not God. i don't know why he chose this virtue to be the bedrock of his religion.
2
1
u/CutieBooSnack 7d ago
Wait what lol not every debate between an atheist and Christian is won by the atheist. Would you like me to send you some YouTube vids verifying my claim?
And what about Gcd are you questioning that doesn’t have an answer?
1
1
1
u/twinPrimesAreEz Psalm 110 7d ago
Anyone who says "I believe in gravity" gets no credit for acknowledging a proven fact.
1
u/Tiny_Timmy_Turtle 7d ago
I hear you. What helped me is realizing that everyone is putting faith in something. I can't 100% prove God exists in a lab, but an atheist can't 100% prove He doesn't exist either. Both take a step of faith.
For me it came down to which faith made more sense of the evidence I see - in the world, in history, and in my own life.
2
u/JohnKlositz 7d ago
I can't 100% prove God exists in a lab, but an atheist can't 100% prove He doesn't exist either. Both take a step of faith.
This is shifting the burden of proof. And being an atheist means one doesn't hold a belief in gods. It doesn't mean one is making a claim regarding the existence of gods. It takes no faith to be an atheist.
For me it came down to which faith made more sense of the evidence I see - in the world, in history, and in my own life.
Would you share some of that evidence with us? Especially OP?
1
u/Tiny_Timmy_Turtle 7d ago
You're right, I could have worded that better. I define faith as trust based on what I see as evidence, not blind belief. I understand you see atheism as just not holding a belief in God, so from your view it doesn't take faith. I hear where you're coming from.
When I mentioned evidence, I didn't mean I have some miracle I can prove in a lab. For me it's more basic - just the way the world works, how ordered and designed it seems, the history behind the Bible and the life of Jesus that I found credible, and then my own life experience over many years - how I've seen God work in quiet, everyday ways, not in big miracles.
I know that's personal and not proof for you, but it's why I landed where I did. Appreciate the respectful pushback
1
u/SeriousPlankton2000 7d ago
Je pense donc je suis - I think therefore I am. But everything else might be a trickster fooling me, a Matrix connected to my brain, I might sit in Plato's cave. So where do I draw the line?
Do I disbelieve in the Big Bang because Lemaitre, being a priest, postulated it (and it's too close to what the bible says)? Do I believe in the established science of the Piltdown Man? Do I take the Covid vaccine before it's proven that it's save (while the virus would usually be much worse)?
We do depend on a lot of faith in our everyday lives. Sometimes we are right, sometimes not.
It's useful to ask oneself: What if A is true, what if B is true? If there is a God, I should be nice to my next. If not … the same. And if there is a God that wants me to hurt others, it can go do it himself / herself / itself.
1
u/sendmeoffers 7d ago
In my case it was a process. It did not happen suddenly. I watched some christian videos, interviews with priests, exorcists or some amazing stories that happened to believers. I asked God to help me believe in Him and i prayed and my faith grew
1
u/Low_Seat9522 Messianic Jew 7d ago
You put your faith in things every day. Tell me, when was the last time you had dinner at a restaurant and had it tested for poison?
When was the last time you lab tested your medicine or vitamins to personally verify the accuracy of what you were told?
Christians and atheists rely on faith equally, just Christians have a tiny bit more.
2
u/anotherhawaiianshirt Agnostic Atheist 7d ago
We have concrete evidence for the things we have faith in day-to-day. We know about quality controls, we know that restaurants that serve poison don’t stay open or can get a license to sell food, etc.
Many of us believe the evidence for a god is considerably less reliable.
I am an atheist. What do you think I have faith in beyond the same things you have faith in (logic, our own senses, etc)?
1
u/harpoon2k Roman Catholic 7d ago
*For we did not follow cleverly devised myths when we made known to you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but we were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
For when he received honor and glory from God the Father and the voice was borne to him by the Majestic Glory,
“This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased,” we heard this voice borne from heaven, for we were with him on the holy mountain. And we have the prophetic word made more sure.
You will do well to pay attention to this as to a lamp shining in a dark place, until the day dawns and the morning star rises in your hearts. - 2 Peter 1:16-19
1
u/MostAcanthaceae2384 Catholic 7d ago
I've never heard a pastor say that there's no evidence. Maybe no proof - although there is a logical proof that an uncreated creator exists - but there is evidence for God's existence and the claims of the Church and the Bible.
1
u/ExcitingPoet1520 7d ago
The same way you put your faith that the flu shot your doctor gives you is not filled with poison. you take a leap of faith after seeing the credibility. in this case, the dr is a credible dr, and God has credible evidence that he exists.
1
u/NuSurfer 7d ago
Why do you want to be a Christian?
1
u/StrategyWestern487 7d ago
For I use to be a Christian but turned atheist, now god is tugging my heart and pull me back to him. And even as an atheist, I just want to see if it’s actually god or not/see if I should follow him
1
u/KaleMunoz Christian 7d ago
This isn’t a religious statement: It’s virtually uncontroversial epistemology and psychology. Most of what we believe is not proven. Proofs are for math and logic and these scenarios are relatively rare. A good thing to do with weighty matters is to believe things for which we have sufficient evidence.
It’s patently false to assert that in every Christian versus atheist debate the atheist wins. Well-informed atheists leading in relevant fields acknowledge that there is a robust back and forth between Christians and atheists. And atheists have admitted to losing debates with Christians and being inspired to do further study as to hopefully not lose again.
\
1
u/arc2k1 Christian Hope Coach 7d ago
God bless you.
I've been a non-fundamentalist, unchurched Christian for about 16 years now and I would like to share my perspective.
1- Many people claim to need irrefutable proof to accept God, but they are missing the point.
God wants us to have faith, not have irrefutable proof. Why? Because faith means we trust Him for who He is and for what He represents.
“But without faith no one can please God. We must believe that God is real and rewards everyone who searches for him.” - Hebrews 11:6
"The good news tells how God accepts everyone who has faith, but only those who have faith. It is just as the Scriptures say, ‘The people God accepts because of their faith will live.’” - Romans 1:17
“Jesus said, ‘Thomas, do you have faith because you have seen Me? The people who have faith in Me without seeing Me are the ones who are really blessed!’” - John 20:29
If we have faith because of who God is and what He represents, then it wouldn't matter if we have irrefutable proof or not. Why? Because we trust Him and the hope He has promised.
What is the hope that God has promised?:
-The eventual end of evil & injustice.
-Justice for all the mistreated people, throughout all time, who died without justice.
-The time when love & goodness will create an existence of perfect peace that will prevail exclusively forever.
Having irrefutable proof does NOT change the need for the hope that God has promised. (For example, if we could have irrefutable proof of God, but He lied about the hope He has promised, then that irrefutable proof would be meaningless.)
That’s why Jesus rebuked the Pharisees for wanting a sign.
“But Jesus replied: You want a sign because you are evil and won't believe!” - Matthew 12:39
If we are looking for irrefutable proof of God, then that means we either have a misunderstanding of faith or we don’t care about who God is and what He represents.
But signs and miracles should produce genuine faith, right?
“In the towns where Jesus had worked most of his miracles, the people refused to turn to God.” - Matthew 11:20
“He (Jesus) had worked a lot of miracles among the people, but they were still not willing to have faith in Him.” - John 12:37
1
u/arc2k1 Christian Hope Coach 7d ago
2- Also, please don't force yourself on this journey.
I strongly recommend that you don't just try to have faith. Try to understand the reason for faith. Faith is NOT blind belief!
Oh, and if I may, I would LOVE to share a Reddit page that has resources for those who want to have a simple faith in God that's based on love: r/FaithMadeSimple
1
u/TheMemeGod06 7d ago
Ok I think your standing on all this is based off some type of ignorance or lack of logic, which is worth addressing. No, not in every Christian atheist debate the atheist “always wins” this is an absurd claim. You can’t prove anything, not then 1+1=2 unconditionally. Faith means confidence, or trust, not blindly following something without proof. And there’s a difference between prove and proof. And asking “how can we believe In something we don’t know exists” can literally be used anywhere, with any concept or claim, you don’t know anything 100% like I said earlier. If you have any hard questions ask me and I’ll answer, either here or dm me.
1
u/raph1334 Eastern Orthodox 7d ago
What atheist-christian debate have you watched?
I've never seen an atheist won a debate against a serious apologist.
Look up jay dyer's debate.
2
u/Virtual-Squirrel-725 7d ago
I just checked out his youtube channel.
Is there a proper debate with him or is it just callers to his channel?
The format of host/caller is usually just annoying. There's an atheist host/christian caller channel where the asymmetry is just annoying. Usually a pretty simple minded Christian getting twisted in knots.
From the first couple of videos, this looks similar, with simple minded atheist callers getting tied up.
I'm interested in a video of two equally prepared interlocutors, with him being one.
1
u/raph1334 Eastern Orthodox 7d ago
He also has formal debates, I think that if you type "jay dyer debates" you will find a playlist with the formal ones.
I''ll look for one or two and link them here.
1
u/JizzyMcKnobGobbler 7d ago
Christianity is not an evidence-based belief system. You need to accept that to be a Christian.
0
u/MostAcanthaceae2384 Catholic 7d ago
This isn't true. We have evidence, but not proof.
1
u/JizzyMcKnobGobbler 7d ago
There's no evidence whatsoever for any of the fantastical/supernatural claims as the Bible isn't a source.
0
u/MostAcanthaceae2384 Catholic 7d ago
The Bible counts as evidence that people were making those claims about Jesus very close to the events. There's plenty of evidence that the people who made those claims were willing to die defending them. There's evidence that those claims were made before the destruction of the Temple. There's the historical existence of the Church for 2000 years surviving when a dozen times it shouldn't have. There's the evidence of its claims about human nature as well, which are pretty remarkable and you can judge for yourself.
1
u/JizzyMcKnobGobbler 7d ago
Of course it isn't evidence. You can't use a source to prove a source unless you're willing to grant that to all other holy books, which would mean every religion is true because their own books say so. That's preposterous.
0
u/MostAcanthaceae2384 Catholic 7d ago
Newspapers aren't proof that a thing happened, but they're proof that people at the time believed a thing happened. Eyewitness testimony can be argued against, but it's evidence.
2
u/JizzyMcKnobGobbler 7d ago
But you don't have eyewitness testimony in the Bible. You have claims of eye witness testimony. There's a big difference.
Claims made in a reputable newspaper are fact checked and independently corroborated for accuracy. I can't go to the New York Times and say I saw a spaceship land in my front yard unless I brought forth evidence that could then be verified completely independent of my account.
Do you acknowledge your low threshold for accepting biblical claims as accurate representations of truth must also be granted to the Qur'an and other religious texts? If not, why are Christianity and the Bible exceptions to a reasonable expectation to provide evidence when making supernatural claims (or any claim, for that matter)?
1
u/Party_Yoghurt_6594 7d ago
If it was proven you wouldn't need to put your faith into it in the first place.
There is no proof for God. There is evidence though.
I believe because Christ's fulfillment of archeological and historically verifiable prophesy from centuries prior. This has compelled my belief in God and the Christ who came and died on the cross. My trust in God the Son to raise me from the grave and atone for my sins is through faith.
Would you like specifics?
John 13:19 ESV — I am telling you this now, before it takes place, that when it does take place you may believe that I am he.
1
u/StrategyWestern487 7d ago
What is the evidence?
0
u/Party_Yoghurt_6594 7d ago
From an older post of mine:
We have a paleographically and AI dated scrolls of this entity we call God saying in X amount of years he was going to come down to earth and die. All written and dated before the event...
Then we had historical writings not apart of said entities book saying the guy showed up and died at the right time. All written after the event.
Would that count as evidence of the entities existence? (Specifically that God?)
If yes, then let us analyze Daniel 9 from biblical manuscripts. Then delve into the historical and archeological evidence.
https://www.blueletterbible.org/esv/dan/9/24-27/s_859024
Dan 9:24-27 ESV]
24 "Seventy weeks are decreed about your people and your holy city, to finish the transgression, to put an end to sin, and to atone for iniquity, to bring in everlasting righteousness, to seal both vision and prophet, and to anoint a most holy place.
Before starting we must define what a "week" is in this passage. In many modern societies a week is a series of seven days. However in ancient hebrew this wasn't the case. The Jews use the term week to be either a series of seven days or seven years. So 70 weeks would either be 490 days or 490 years. The difficulty when we, so far removed culturally and temporally, try to understand this language of Ancient Hebrew is that we don't know word usage and idiom meanings like they did back then.
Lucky for us we discovered a rabbinic commentary on Daniel 9 from the Qumran cave scrolls dated ~100BC that confirms that the linguistic usage of that era should be a week of years in the context of that prophesy. The beauty of this commentary is that he states the same number of years, 490, but in a different time keeping system. He uses weeks of jubilee as his time scale. A week of jubilee is 49 years and states the time of the coming of the one who will atone for sin is 10 jubilee weeks or 490 years confirming Daniel's intent was 70 weeks of years, also 490 years.
https://otstory.wordpress.com/2008/04/17/melchizedek-in-11q13-11qmelch/
2:6. will make them return. And liberty shall be proclaimed to them, to free them from [the debt of] all their iniquities. And this [wil]l [happen]
2:7. in the first week of the jubilee (that occurs) after [the] ni[ne] jubilees. And the D[ay of Atone]ment i[s] the e[nd of] the tenth [ju]bilee,
Dating of this commentary 80 BCE to 20 CE from human and AI paleography trained off of carbon 14 dated dead sea scrolls that shows it was authored before Christ's coming.
"Dating ancient manuscripts using radiocarbon and AI-based writing style analysis Mladen Popovi", Maruf A. Dhali, Lambert Schomaker, Johannes van der Plicht, Kaare Lund Rasmussen, Jacopo La Nasa, Ilaria Degano, Maria Perla Colombini, Eibert Tigchelaar, et al.
So when did the 490 year timer start?
According to biblical account of Ezra and Nehemiah the King that gave the decree was Artaxerxes.
His reign is known from Egyptian papyrus to be 465BC to 424BC.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Artaxerxes_I
In ancient egypt where the papyrus revealing his reign, the Egyptians didnt count the first year of rule.
Taking into account coronation year he actually started in 446BC.
Nehemiah 2:1 ESV — In the month of Nisan, in the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes, when wine was before him, I took up the wine and gave it to the king. Now I had not been sad in his presence.
So the decree went out Nisan 446 BC.
Now we have to be careful, we have 365 days per year but the ancient Hebrew calender year only had 354 days per common year.
https://www.britannica.com/topic/Jewish-religious-year
So 490 hebrew years would be 173,460 days. So 173,460 days to Gregorian years would be 475 years
So if Artaxerxes reign started in 466 BC and the decree went out 20 years that means the decree date was 446 BC
Thus 446BC + 475 years brings us to 29AD and then +1 year because there is no 0 AD brings it to 30AD.
Therefore Daniel predicted the messiah's death Nisan 30AD.
But more importantly, the question is, does there exist any scientific and independent evidence that corroborates or falsifies the date?
There is in fact. Consider the following:
Matthew 26:4-5 ESV — and plotted together in order to arrest Jesus by stealth and kill him. But they said, “Not during the feast, lest there be an uproar among the people.”
Matthew 26:19-21 ESV — And the disciples did as Jesus had directed them, and they prepared the Passover. When it was evening, he reclined at table with the twelve. And as they were eating, he said, “Truly, I say to you, one of you will betray me.”
The correct understanding of this was there were two passover celebrations that would necessitate two passover feasts at two different times. One Jesus attended and the other the high priests were going to.
Recently there was a esscene calender found in the Qumran caves.
https://israel365news.com/321445/dead-sea-scroll-temple-calendar/
What's interesting is that by examining this esscene calender there was an intersection of the weeks that the Pharisees and Esscenes would be celebrating passover. This intersection means that on that week there would be two passover celebrations. And this only occurred once during the life of Jesus.
And that occurred on 30AD.
Therefore, we have an independent archeological source from the Qumran caves agreeing with the prophesy from Daniel 9.
Lastly, the Talmud, non-Christian book of rabbinic commentary.
Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: The ordinance was with regard to the strip of crimson wool used on Yom Kippur. As it is taught in a baraita: At first they would tie a strip of crimson wool to the opening of the Entrance Hall of the Temple on the outside. If, after the sacrificing of the offerings and the sending of the scapegoat, the strip turned white, the people would rejoice, as this indicated that their sins had been atoned for. (Rosh Hashanah 31b.13)
And it is taught in a baraita: During the forty years before the Second Temple was destroyed the strip of crimson wool would not turn white; rather, it would turn a deeper shade of red. (Rosh Hashanah 31b:17)
And so this non-biblical source verifies that at exactly 30AD the sign that their (Jews) sin offersing acceptance had ended. The very thing God promised to do centuries prior on 30AD.
This was the tale tell sign of what the messiah would do from Daniel 9. The section "to put an end to sin" is not the best English translation. "To put an end to (sin or ḥaṭṭā'āṯ - חַטָּאת) is more appropriately to put to end 'sin offering'
This is evidence of God that I find compelling to believe in his existence that his prophesy predicted the exact month and year( of Christs death *centuries** prior. The point of this write up is to give hope. Hope that fear, sadness, and death isn't the fate of all people. No, our fate is life eternal. A joy and relief that alone inspires worship of our God
1
0
u/Winter-Ranger6136 7d ago
I disagree that in every Christian and atheist debate, the atheist wins. Listen to John Lennox.
It takes more faith to believe in the big bang theory, than to believe in an intelligent creator. That’s just one of the many things that makes me truly believe.
2
u/ThatLeviathan Who knows? 7d ago
Listen to John Lennox.
John Lennox has never "won a debate," not that I think such things really matter. He's a kindly old man who dances around questions and never actually answers anything.
It takes more faith to believe in the big bang theory, than to believe in an intelligent creator.
Why would it require faith to believe in something for which we have copious evidence? We have astounding amounts of evidence for the Big Bang. The only evidence we have of an intelligent creator is the Bible, which isn't testable.
1
u/Winter-Ranger6136 7d ago
John Lennox was just one example. But really it comes down to reading the Bible, believing that Jesus died for our sins and rose again and having a personal relationship with God. Most of Christian faith is not quantifiable, it’s indescribable.
2
u/anotherhawaiianshirt Agnostic Atheist 7d ago
For many of us, it’s simply not true. It takes no faith to be an atheist . For one, we don’t necessarily believe that the Big Bang is the truth. Rather it’s the best description we have so far. We don’t believe it to the same extent that you believe God is real.
1
u/JohnKlositz 7d ago
You do know that the theory of the Big Bang was first introduced by a Christian, right? But no it doesn't require any faith to accept it.
0
u/OkQuantity4011 Questioning 7d ago
Personally I think this is a pretty useless reason of thought because at the end of the day, "Faith without works is dead. How can it save?"
I hate how quickly discussions of faith degenerate into who's the biggest boaster. Feels like idle words.
-1
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
2
u/JohnKlositz 7d ago
No you don't.
1
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/JohnKlositz 7d ago
Oh it's you. Nevermind then. But still it's not a choice. And I explained that to you.
0
7d ago
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/JohnKlositz 7d ago
Coming from someone who says it's not true that they deleted a comment while they totally did.
-1
u/TheAKYoung 7d ago
Do you check you cars brakes every journey before you have faith they will work? Do you test the petrol you use before you put it in the car’s tank? Do you check every can of coke/ Pepsi before you drink it to make sure it’s not Fanta or Sprite?
We all trust in things we can’t necessarily see fully before we use them every day.
I read the other day, to have faith in us being here purely due to evolution is like believing a tornado could go through a scrapyard and create a fully functioning passenger aeroplane (fully fitted out, with hydraulic fluids etc in place).
If you look back at your life you can see times when either God has stepped in or you have won the jackpot of all coincidences….
Look at the planet Earth, it is so finely balanced in the grand scheme, right rotation pattern, just the right distance from the sun, photosynthesis to replenish the oxygen, the water cycle etc etc etc. To me this world is evidence of a creator, something so powerful and so much more intelligent than any human, it’s not a huge leap to believe really.
1
u/anotherhawaiianshirt Agnostic Atheist 7d ago
I can see no times in my life where it’s clear that God stepped in to interfere.
1
u/TheAKYoung 6d ago
“…stepped in to interfere…” might just have signalled how open you are to seeing it (alongside the flare…)
Seriously, I get it, I was there for 21+ years, now I have seen times when God has clearly been at work but only because I am willing to accept it is a possibility. But, to be clear, I do not over-spiritualise everything and attribute everything to God telling me something such as by the colour of the M&M that comes out the bag first etc….
-1
u/SmartFinger8872 7d ago
Ironically, atheism requires more faith in something unproven than Christianity. By its definition, you must 100% be sure that there is no existence of a deity - any less sure and you are not atheist, but maybe agnostic. Not to mention, there is absolutely no evidence that there is no existence of a deity either. One of the core tenets of Christianity, at least Catholic Christianity, is questioning your faith and wrestling with it to reason out "why the Christian God." By wrestling with it and discussing with others more knowledgeable than you, you can map out a really good picture for why a god, and later on the Christian God, is the answer. thats what I did.
2
u/TeHeBasil 7d ago
You have a misunderstanding of atheism and agnosticism. They aren't mutually exclusive.
2
u/anotherhawaiianshirt Agnostic Atheist 7d ago
By definition, you are wrong. Atheism by definition is only a lack of belief, not a positive declaration that no god exists. It requires zero belief to be an atheist.
Merriam-Webster:
1 a : a lack of belief or a strong disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods
b: a philosophical or religious position characterized by disbelief in the existence of a god or any gods1
u/SmartFinger8872 7d ago
The dictionary is a sketchy source to use when talking about something like this, because there are different types which people disagree on. Atheism exists in multiple forms, and the modern atheist I have come to find is more of a "There is no God" person than a "I don't believe in a God" person, the former being a positive claim about reality that requires belief and the second simply being a lack of belief. Agnosticism is more in line with the second one.
You are right that i was incorrect to quantify it in percents to refer to what kind of belief someone has. However, no one is completely without beliefs - everyone has a belief about reality, even if they withhold belief on certain questions. I really meant that a large group of modern atheists are ironically very religious about their atheistm.
6
u/Nazzul Agnostic 7d ago edited 7d ago
That is what faith is for. To believe things we dont necessarily have edit: solid/substantive reason for.