That there is no evidence of God doesn't mean that there is zero chance God actually exist. In fact, without defining God precisely, it's ridiculous to even ask the question "does God exist". As an atheist I have encountered a lot of faithful people all with a variety of deities with all sorts of characteristics. If you tell me your father is your God. Can I tell you that our God doesn't exist? You can easily prove or disprove the existence of your father. In fact, your father must have existed at some point thus your God exist. Does that mean I believe your father deserved the title of God or that I will suddenly start worshiping your father because you proved his existence to me? Certainly not. I would still be an atheist even though your father, your God, definitely exists and I can't reasonnably deny it.
On another note, depending on what you claim your God is or can do, it might be possible to "test" for its existence and come out with an answer, positive or negative, about the existence of such being. If you tell me your God is a magical blue djinn who invented the automobile and commanded the allied troops in WWII, we can easily show that there was no such magical blue djinn who did those things.
So epronovost, here we go!
This is what I will take for granted about you as non-religious. You are a typical product of your sub-culture of non-religious Westerner.
It mean in practice that you have a set of words, that you take for granted and don't doubt. In an everyday sense you have faith in practice as for this version of faith: Complete trust or confidence in someone or something. I am the same so it is not that we are different, but in practice you act with a psychological confidence in your experience, which you don't doubt because it works for you. The same for me.
The difference is that I have learned to apply the doubt I use towards other humans' experience as in effect as the same doubt for myself.
Now I have repeatedly been told by your sub-culture, that I must doubt everything using scientific skepticism. That is the game of your sub-culture, but the joke is that I took that to seriously and began doubting that. I learned to doubt scientific skepticism and learned to be another kind of skeptic.
So I can doubt evidence, existence and the test you use and I have figured out, I can do it differently. That is the game we are playing now. You doubt with scientific skepticism in effect and I doubt that it works for everything as in practice the only way with evidence, existence and testing that we as humans can do it all the way to what everything really is as it exists.
We are playing a game of metaphysics, ontology, logic, epistemology, ethics, politics, aesthetics and phenomenology rolled into one. And here it is for the end result. There is no single universal category for the likes of evidence, existence, test and so on. That includes religion, philosophy and science. We are in practice play a limited game of cognitive, moral and cultural relativism and that applies to us both. I just know it is so both for you and me.
In practice you have faith just like all other humans.
Regards and love
Mikkel
