Atheism is based on "faith"

"The burden is not on atheists to offer proof that there is no such thing as God." Yes it is. It is ludicrous to say you do not have to prove something you openly claim. You claim there is no God. Atheism: the doctrine or belief that there is no God. You say there is no God? Prove it. You claim it, you have to prove it. Saying you are waiting for evidence for God's existence is more Agnosticism than Atheism. An Atheist, by definition, actively claims there is no god, and it is unfair to say that Theists have to prove there is a God, simply because they claim to believe in Him, but Atheists do not have to prove there is no God, when they claim he does not exist. It's a double standard. "suppose I told you there was a 600-ton invisible elephant sitting behind you. It is not a question of "faith" when you (hopefully) choose not to believe me. You do not believe in the nonexistence of the elephant, you simply chose to await proof before believing that it DOES exist. This is the logic behind atheism." This is not a suitable analogy, simply because there is no evidence, has not been any evidence, and will never be any evidence of there being an elephant behind me. Claiming that there is something that you cannot see, with nothing in the world relating to it is entirely ridiculous. There is, however, some proof in the physical world that there is a God. Not enough to prove anything, but enough to base faith on. Here are some examples of prophecies in the Bible that have been fulfilled. I am going to copy and past them to save myself some typing. Prophecies fulfilled before 1900: 1. Jesus prophesied that the Temple would be destroyed In Matthew 24:1-2, Jesus said that the Temple would be destroyed. The Temple was destroyed about 40 years after Jesus was crucified by the Romans. In 70 AD, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and killed an estimated 1.1 million Jews. During the destruction, fire was set to the Temple. The fire caused the gold-leaf ornamentation on the Temple ceiling to melt. The melting gold flowed down the walls and settled into crevices within the stones. The Romans pried apart the stones to remove the gold. This fulfilled Jesus' prophecy that not one stone would be left standing on another. 2. The exiled people of Israel would return to Israel In Jeremiah 32:37-41, the prophet said the people of Israel would return to their homeland. Jeremiah lived during a time when the Babylonians were forcing the Jews out of their homeland about 2600 years ago. Many Jews later returned but were forced out again, by the Romans, about 1900 years ago. During the past 200 years, millions of exiled Jews have returned to Israel from countries all over the world. 3. Daniel foretold the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple In Daniel 9:26, the prophet said that a future ruler over the land of Israel would destroy Jerusalem and the Temple. Daniel said this would happen after an anointed one (messiah) is "cut off," which means "rejected" or "killed." A few centuries later, the Romans had taken control of the land of Israel, Jesus announced himself as the Messiah, and the Romans crucified him. Forty years later, the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple. 4. The Bible foreshadowed Rome's destruction of Israel The Bible has several prophecies about various destruction of the land of Israel. Here is one from the Bible's book of Deuteronomy that foreshadowed the destruction caused by the Romans in the year 70 AD (about 1900 years ago): "The Lord will bring a nation against you from far away, from the ends of the earth, like an eagle swooping down, a nation whose language you will not understand … They will devour … until you are ruined. … They will lay siege to all the cities throughout your land until the high fortified walls in which you trust fall down." (Deuteronomy 28:49-52 NIV). And, here's what history says about what happened in the year 70 AD: The Roman Empire sent an army, which marched in a formation called the "flying eagle," and destroyed Jerusalem. Members of the Roman army came from many different countries, speaking languages that the Jews did not understand. (http://www.100prophecies.org... I copied them out of order, so number 4 on my page is not necessarily 4 on theirs.) This is pure evidence that the Bible is a reliable source for prophecies coming true, and some of them were made by Jesus Himself. There are far more then 4 prophecies that people in the Bible made that have been, and are being fulfilled. Another notable factor in this equation is the fact that no matter who the prophet speaking was, the prophets were always speaking on behalf of God. Many time they will even say "Thus saith the Lord". God is making prophecies, and they are being fulfilled. That is proof enough to base faith on. Atheists on the other hand have nothing to base there claims on. "I have never seen God, so He must not exist." Well, neither have I, but there is evidence that He is working in the world, so I can deduct from that, and from what I read in his word that he must exist. Even though I cannot see Him, then, I have something to base my faith on. THERE IS EVIDENCE FOR GOD. I guess I have been long winded in saying this: You analogy carries no weight because there is no evidence on earth that there is an elephant behind me. There is, however, evidence for God, so if you were waiting for it, wait no longer. "This is in essence the same argument as the one stated above. Before something is assumed to exist, its existence must be proved. Until then, it is assumed to not exist." Once again, you need to give proof for your claim. I have, now the burden of proof is on you. There is not enough physical evidence to prove or disprove God's existence, but there is enough for a person to base faith off of. Given the fact that there is no proof for God not existing other than the simple "I have never seen Him", you MUST have faith to claim that He does not exist. We have already established that faith is belief in something there is little or no proof for, and you have presented no proof for God not existing. Therefore, since there is really not any proof for you to present, YOU MUST HAVE FAITH. "And a person who does not believe in God does not necessarily believe everything came from nothing, either." Yes he does, he must. This would take a tremendous amount of faith. So if you don't believe the universe came from nothing, what do you think it came from? What you say is a self contradiction. You say it did not come from God, but it did not not come from nothing. What sense does that make? You have yet to say what it came from. If you think it did come from nothing, then I congratulate you, because you have far more faith then I will ever have, because there is no proof it came from nothing. If you don't think it came from nothing, then you have to say what you think it came from. "Not really. Unless you see some signs of Earth suddenly stopping dead in its orbit, you are perfectly justified in thinking the Sun will rise every morning." Well, you still haven't given a reason for the creation of the earth, other than a totally random course of events. If this is the case, then anything could happen. I mean, what if chemicals in the sun suddenly collided causing a massive explosion destroying the sun? You never know... "Hope is different from faith." You're right, and what I gave you was a bit of a flawed analogy, and therefore carries no weight in the rest of my arguments. I know what I was trying to say, but I obviously don't know how to communicate it correctly. Please don't hold this against me, because I have not hurt the rest of my argument in any way. "Nothing is "wrong" with faith, but atheism is not based on it." Is too! :-P Just kidding. Renzzy