Summary

The article critiques the Christian saying "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist," arguing that it is a misguided statement because atheism often involves a lack of belief rather than an affirmative belief requiring faith.

Abstract

The author of the article addresses the commonly heard Christian assertion that atheism requires a level of faith they do not possess. The article points out that the majority of atheists simply lack belief in a deity due to insufficient evidence, rather than holding a positive belief in the nonexistence of gods. It cites the definition of atheism by American Atheists, which emphasizes that atheism is not a belief system but a rejection of the claim that gods exist. The author uses the analogy of not believing in Bigfoot to illustrate that nonbelief is the default position, and it is the believers who bear the burden of proof. The article also questions the underlying assumption that having more or less faith is inherently good or bad, highlighting the confusion in valuing the amount of faith one has. It suggests that the focus should be on the object of faith rather than the level of faith. Ultimately, the author concludes that the statement "I don't have enough faith to be an atheist" is illogical and obfuscates the true nature of faith.

Opinions

The statement "I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist" is not only unintelligent but also confuses the concept of faith.
Atheism, as understood by the majority, is a lack of belief in gods due to a perceived absence of convincing evidence, rather than a belief system that requires faith.
The burden of proof lies with

Christians Say: I Don’t Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist

Let’s dissect this statement to see if it makes sense

I have heard this statement from time to time. Those Christians who say “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist” seem to think it’s a smart saying. There is even a book with that exact title. In this short article, I discuss why this statement is not smart at all, but actually pretty dumb.

(Read this article for free here)

In most cases, atheism requires no faith

There are some hard atheists who positively claim that there is no God. But this kind of atheism is in the minority nowadays. The majority of atheists would say that they just don’t have a belief in any god because they don’t see enough evidence to be convinced there is one. The following quote is how Amerian Atheists define the word “atheism”.

Atheism is not an affirmative belief that there is no god nor does it answer any other question about what a person believes. It is simply a rejection of the assertion that there are gods. Atheism is too often defined incorrectly as a belief system. To be clear: Atheism is not a disbelief in gods or a denial of gods; it is a lack of belief in gods.

As an analogy, most people do not believe that Bigfoot exists, for lack of evidence. They typically don’t think it takes faith to NOT believe in Bigfoot.

Nonbelief is the default position. The burden of proof is on the people who positively claim Bigfoot exists. It would not make sense for Bigfoot believers to say, “No, you prove Bigfoot does not exist. If you can’t do that, it is reasonable to believe it exists.” It would make much less sense for them to say, “I don’t have enough faith to be aBigfootist.”

So is having enough faith good or bad?

The underlying assumption in the statement “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist” seems to be that having too much faith is a bad thing. Atheists have too much faith in atheism, so that’s bad. Christians don’t have enough faith to believe in atheism, so that’s good.

But who decides how much faith is good, and how much faith is bad?

Christain apologists often strive to point out the irrationality of atheism to say that it requires more faith to believe in atheism than in God. Again, is having too much faith a bad thing or not? Believing in God supposedly requires less faith, so it’s good? How about having no faith at all, as in being an agnostic or soft atheist (see the definition of “atheism” by American Atheists above)? Still bad?

See how confusing it is?

Christianity’s Focus on Faith Makes No Sense

Faith is a poor criterion for judging whether a person goes to heaven or not.

medium.com

Christians might respond, “It’s not about the level of faith, but the object of faith.”

Well, in that case, why say “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist” or “it takes more faith to believe in atheism than in God” as if little or too much faith makes difference?

It would make more sense to say “I have no faith in atheism” or “faith in atheism is bad” to communicate the importance of the object of faith.

But if the statement is framed that way, another obvious question arises: Why is faith in God good, but faith in atheism bad (assuming atheism requires faith)?

Whatever reasons Christians give, they all boil down to this: Christianity makes more sense than atheism, so it is better to have faith in God than in atheism.

We circle back to the previous conundrum. So a belief system that requires less faith is better than a belief system that requires more faith? How about having no belief?

Oh, no, that’s bad too, according to Christians.

If anything, Christians are very skilled in driving me nuts.

You see why the statement “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist” is dumb now? It makes no sense and muddles the issue of faith.

If you are not a Medium member yet, please consider signing up using my referral link. I will get a small commission at no extra cost to you.