It is not uncommon for Evangelical apologists to assert that atheism is a religion; that atheists put their faith in science. Apologists also claim that we all worship something, be it God, science, or self. Are any of these claims true?
Let me define atheism. Atheism is the lack of belief in the existence of God or gods. That’s it. From this starting point, atheists go on to believe all sorts of things. I am an agnostic atheist and a humanist. Atheism defines my view of God. Humanism defines the moral and ethical framework by which I govern my life. In no instance do I worship anyone or anything.
According to the dictionary, worship is the feeling of expression or reverence and adoration for a deity. The C.S. Lewis Institute defines worship this way:
Worship means respectful devotion—loving, honoring, and obeying someone who deserves our highest regard. Worshipping God means acknowledging and celebrating His power and perfection in gratitude.
Based on these definitions, do atheists worship? No.
Evangelical apologists also claim that we all put faith in something; that atheists put their faith in science. First, atheism and science are two different things. Atheism, as stated above, is the lack of belief in the existence of God, or gods. No faith is necessary to be an atheist. Either you believe God exists or you don’t. Many apologists wrongly connect atheism and evolution. Sure, most atheists accept evolution as a scientific fact, but accepting evolution is not required to be an atheist. Atheists believe all sorts of things, including woo. These beliefs, however, have nothing to do with atheism. Many Christians accept evolution as the best explanation for how our biological world operates. Should we then say that Christianity and evolution are connected? Of course not. So it is with atheism and evolution.
Faith: not wanting to know what is true.
Friedrich Nietzsche
Faith is defined as the trust or confidence in someone or something. Regarding science, I put my faith in men and women who have spent their lifetimes in various scientific fields. I lack the requisite education necessary to speak authoritatively on anything related to science. I know what I know, and, most importantly, I know what I don’t know. Some people have spent years getting advanced degrees in science, and after university, they have devoted their lives to specific scientific disciplines. I put my faith in their expertise; a reasoned faith that values expertise.
Religion is defined as the belief in and worship of a supernatural power or powers, especially a God or gods or a particular system of faith and worship. Based on these definitions, is atheism a religion? Of course not. Again atheism is the lack of belief in the existence of God, or gods. Nothing more, nothing less. Atheism doesn’t have clerics, church buildings, Bibles, hymnbooks, or prescribed modes of worship. Atheists don’t have shrines or collect offerings to support houses of godless worship. I can’t think of any meaningful way that atheism is a religion.
American Atheists define atheism this way:
While there are some religions that are atheistic (certain sects of Buddhism, for example), that does not mean that atheism is a religion. To put it in a more humorous way: If atheism is a religion, then not collecting stamps is a hobby.
Despite the fact that atheism is not a religion, atheism is protected by many of the same Constitutional rights that protect religion. That, however, does not mean that atheism is itself a religion, only that our sincerely held (lack of) beliefs are protected in the same way as the religious beliefs of others. Similarly, many “interfaith” groups will include atheists. This, again, does not mean that atheism is a religious belief.
Sadly, Evangelicals, either ignorantly or deliberately, spread the lie that atheism is a religion. Ken Ham and Bodie Hodge are liars extraordinaire; men who go to great lengths to disparage atheists. How else do we “defend” their explanation of atheism:
Almost all atheists claim that, because (supposedly) there is no God, their own worldview is not a religion. Many of them would argue that they have a “nonbelief.”
One of the definitions of religion in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary, however, is this: “a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith.”
Atheism certainly fits that definition, and many of its adherents are quite zealous about their faith system.
Atheists have an active belief system with views concerning origins (that the universe and life arose by natural processes); no life after death; the existence of God; how to behave while alive; and so much more. Honest atheists will admit their worldview is a faith. Atheism is a religion!
….
While atheism is a blind faith, its followers will still cry out, “We are not part of a religion!” Why do they plead this? First, if atheism were identified as a religion, atheists fear that their views might get kicked out of public places, like government-run schools. Second, these secularists will be less likely to be able to deceive children into thinking that their teachings (supposedly “neutral”) are not in conflict with the religious beliefs of students.
….
Anyone who claims that they are not religious and then makes judgments about religious topics (e.g., the deity of Christ, the existence of God, the morality regarding adultery, the truthfulness of the Bible, and so on) has made a religious statement. Though they may “claim” to be irreligious, they reveal that they are indeed religious when they attempt to refute another religious view.
….
Does atheism oppose the religious claim that God exists? Again, yes. Thus, atheism is religious.
I don’t have faith, faith is the excuse people give for believing something when they don’t have evidence.
MATT DILLAHUNTY
As Evangelicals often do, Ham and Hodge conflate evolution and atheism. They are two separate propositions/claims. No matter how many times Ham and Hodge say atheism is a religion or requires faith, their claims are false. They have been corrected numerous times, but Ham and Hodge continue to lie about atheism.
Let me conclude with an excerpt from an Atheist Alliance International article titled Is Atheism a Religion:
‘Theism’ means ‘belief in a god or gods’. Believers usually sign up to the values and principles of a godly belief system: it’s an ideology. Theistic ideologies are commonly known as faiths or religions. Many ideologies have the suffix ‘ism’; for example, liberalism, socialism, and communism but, in the case of ‘atheism’, the ‘ism’ ending has merely been inherited from its root: ‘theism’. The prefix ‘a’ turns the meaning around to the negative, that is, ‘not a belief in a god’, so ‘atheism’ is as far from a faith or religion as it’s possible to get.
Atheism is not a belief system so that should end this article right here, but theists will likely not be satisfied. They might point to the things atheists and religions have in common: religions form churches, atheists form associations; churches and atheist associations appoint members to formal roles such as bishop and president; church members give offerings, atheists pay subscriptions; churches hold services, atheist hold meetings. Churches and atheists both have literature they value and people they admire.
The problem is, these are superficial similarities and if they make atheism a religion, they make political parties and table tennis clubs religions too. That is obviously absurd.
There is one organization that makes it their job to decide which group is a religion and which is not, and that’s The Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the USA. Religions receive highly favorable treatment in the USA and the IRS wants to avoid giving these advantages to organizations that are not genuine religions. So the IRS has a set of criteria they apply to any group claiming to be a religion. The primary criteria are listed below with how atheist groups qualify [shown in parenthesis].
Distinct legal existence [Some atheist groups are legal entities.]
Recognized creed and form of worship [No creed or forms of worship.]
Definite and distinct ecclesiastical government [No ecclesiastical governance.]
Formal code of doctrine and discipline [No doctrine.]
Distinct religious history [No religious history.]
Membership not associated with any other church or denomination [Atheists may join any number of atheist groups.]
Organization of ordained ministers [No ministers of any kind.]
Ordained ministers selected after completing prescribed courses of study [No courses of study.]
Literature of its own [No literature reserved for one group.]
Established places of worship [No worship.]
Regular religious services [No religious services.]
Sunday schools for the religious instruction of the young [No instructing the young.]
Schools for the preparation of its members [No atheist schools.]
With only one criterion applicable to atheists (and that one all political parties and many clubs share), the IRS won’t be granting religious tax exemptions to atheist groups any time soon.
….
Why then do the religious so often claim atheism is a religion? We don’t know, you’ll have to ask religious people that question. Perhaps it is an attempt to drag atheism down to the level of a religion—a set of unsubstantiated beliefs, in a landscape where beliefs are held only on faith. If so, they would be completely wrong about that too.
Bruce Gerencser, 67, lives in rural Northwest Ohio with his wife of 46 years. He and his wife have six grown children and thirteen grandchildren. Bruce pastored Evangelical churches for twenty-five years in Ohio, Texas, and Michigan. Bruce left the ministry in 2005, and in 2008 he left Christianity. Bruce is now a humanist and an atheist.
Connect with me on social media:
Your comments are welcome and appreciated. All first-time comments are moderated. Please read the commenting rules before commenting.
You can email Bruce via the Contact Form.
Urgh, this old conflating argument. There’s at least one Evangelical/conservative Christian who has pedalled this argument at me, going to some lengths to justify that atheism is a religion, and that atheists worship. Of course, they cannot show that atheists worship by any standard definition of the term.
No, atheism is not a religion. It simply means we reject the notion of the existence of a deity or deities. Leave us alone.
i find it VERY interesting that the graphic at the top of the article, with the japanese kanji, says 無神論 (mushinron) which means “atheism” (literally, it means “no god argument”), but if you change the order of the characters so that it says 論無神 (ron mu kami) it means “of course, nothing is god.”
I suspect a lot of Evangelicals confuse atheism with Marxism and Communism, and for sure Communism can morph easily into religion. The leaders of such regimes expect to be treated as living gods. Which is why one can be arrested, sent to a labor camp, or even shot for criticizing the leader and their rules and policies. Putin, Xi and Kim Jong Il are all from this mold. The funny thing is Communism is officially atheist, but worship of the leaders is demanded of the regular citizen, and it used to be that if they gave a speech and you didn’t clap long enough, or show enough grief when they died, you again could be arrested and dragged off to a bad end. Trump worship certainly fits in with the above. lots of AI art to confirm this, too. What if Trump turns on the Evangelicals ? It can happen under Project 2025, because THEN there won’t be separation of Church and State. If they make HIM mad, guess what happens next. Don’t they ever wonder what God says about all this Trump deification ??
“Anyone who claims that they are not religious and then makes judgments about religious topics (e.g., the deity of Christ, the existence of God, the morality regarding adultery, the truthfulness of the Bible, and so on) has made a religious statement. Though they may “claim” to be irreligious, they reveal that they are indeed religious when they attempt to refute another religious view.”
So how does one refute any argument–religious or otherwise–but on its own terms? How can you, for example, refute capitalism without talking about it?
Yulya, you make a really good point about how atheism is often conflated with Communism, most likely because the only officially atheistic countries in modern times also happened to be Communist.
Good points Velovixen and Yulya.
I consider Communists/Marxists to be more anti-theist than atheist. George Orwell, who wrote the anti- Facist/Soviet classics “Animal Farm” and “1984” was reportedly an atheist. Joseph Stalin, Adolph Hitler, Pol Pot and Mao Tse Tung were anti-theist. Mussolini, also an atheist himself did not oppress the Catholic Church in Italy, but the Nazis did in Germany and their occupied countries, particularly Poland, and pretty much eradicated Orthodox Judaism in Eastern Europe. Stalin was notoriously destructive towards the Orthodox Church until he needed them to help rally the USSR during the German invasion. Mao instituted the Cultural Revolution which sought among other things to eradicate the “olds” particularly Buddhism and anything that looked religious. Pol Pot was a Maoist who also killed Buddhist leaders in Cambodia. Anti-theism in a sense can be almost a religion because it usually comes about because of a fanatical devotion to a cult-like leader, and an ideology that requires “concrete acts” from it’s citizens, usually taking the form of performative outrage and destruction of religious symbols and institutions that are seen as opposing socialist ideals. And don’t forget the “holy books” that the followers are expected to learn and follow (ex. Mao’s “Little Red Book”).
This is not the same as intellectual atheism, which usually comes about due to an individual honest realization of a personal nature. I find Bruce and everyone else’s commentary very enlightening and honest, and while I myself am Catholic, the points in particular about the abuse from religious institutions gives me alot of food for thought. From what I have read, the commenters (other than Revival Liars) on Bruce’s page are very ethical and actually embody the Constitutional ideals a lot more than so-called True Patriot Christians ®️, who the Founding Fathers would probably find disturbing for being so anti-enlightenment.