Questions from Christians to Atheists

Here are some questions for those who call themselves atheists:

– Shouldn’t Atheism be classed as a religion too considering that one cannot possibly have evidence that disproves God (Physical laws are not testable in the spiritual world) and therefore any statements have to be based on faith not facts?

– Why are atheists so aggressively trying to disprove the existence of God? What is in it for anyone? Is it the fact that we can (assuming that there is no God nor law- giver) live however we like, without any need to conform to anything and, as they say, anything goes (as long as it’s not Christianity) and you and I decide what is right and wrong; one can kill, commit rape, steal, cheat or do whatever it is that our hearts desire because there are no higher standards than us and there is nothing to condemn us.

– Why is it that people can be atheists and still refuse even superficially to consider the possibility of the existence of God and yet according to them they claim to use critical assessments in everything when applying their judgments? Does this approach and uneven handedness not show that they apply double standards when considering this topic?

And finally why is it that proponents of atheism only tend to make statements and not provide us with real arguments as to why we should disbelieve the existence of God? Using arguments like millions of innocent people have been murdered by religious people, oppression and abuse are commonly cited as excuse to distance oneself from the possibility of existence of God. Please note that these are excuses and not arguments, statements rather than logical assessments of the situation.

Complected language and philosophical viewpoints are frequently used to distract and confuse not really help the debate. Learned argument rather than self discovered acquisitions are offered as answers, parrot fashion recitals rather than balanced argument is the prevalent part of the discussion. Statements of superior and greater understanding is frequently used to win the debate but without the substantiating this with supportive evidence.

If you would like to read more about this go to ”Ten questions for Christians” page of this blog

Kind regards

Defend the Word

Advertisements

About defendtheword

To contact us please send e-mail to defend.theword@ntlworld.com
This entry was posted in Apologetics. Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Questions from Christians to Atheists

  1. Scott Gardner says:

    An atheist with answers to your questions.

    1) I’m not sure why this question should deter someone from atheist beliefs. The question attempts to assert the assessment that no one can know for sure, and because of that atheism requires faith just as any other religion does. While this may remain true, I’m at a loss to see why it would be detrimentally to any set of beliefs.

    Any belief we possess may be doubted, and consequently requires some degree of faith or assumption. The best example I can give is a classic one, the method of doubt used by philosopher Descartes in his meditations, which leads him to come to the conclusion that everything, except his own existence, can be doubted. You can doubt the world around you, and doubt your senses just as easily as you can doubt a belief or nonbelief in a higher power. The act of assuming or placing faith is an unavoidable and necessary process.

    As humans, we are constantly acting out of trust upon the best evidence we are presented. It’s a human function that is necessary to progress. Almost any belief, however insignificant, requires some level of faith. Therefore the fact that atheism too requires faith doesn’t define it as a religion, or undermine its validity.

    I’m sure you would agree with the belief that, there are other humans on this earth (beside yourself) who also are conscious, thinking beings. However, can you, or anyone else, prove that belief? No. Therefore, by following your line of reasoning, that belief is religious too, correct?

    The only reason atheism would be classified as a religion is that it too has contains beliefs regarding the cause and nature of the universe. But by classifying atheism as a religion, you are doing nothing but, just as your religion’s ontological argument defines god into existence, defining religion to include atheism.

    By the way, this statement “physical laws are not testable in the spiritual realm” is also guilty of the fallacy of appealing to belief.

    2) This question is guilty of the slippery slope fallacy. It suggests that if we all believed in atheism, there would be no moral code, and consequently only chaos, so we should not allow the atheist beliefs to exist in the first place.

    This question is also guilty of the fallacy of emotional language. It calls atheists “aggressive”, and suggests that our beliefs will lead to a society where one is free to “kill, rape, steal, or cheat”. It attempts to persuade people with this emotional language rather than the actual thoughts and beliefs behind it. Probably because those beliefs can’t stand on their own.

    Although I would hesitate to call atheists aggressive in trying to disprove god, the only reason why we would do so is out of the great injustices that are constantly done in his name. This is why I’ve never understood the argument that religion is necessary to morality. Allow me to let Bertrand Russell take over from here, with an excerpt from Why I’m Not A Christian:

    “You find this curious fact, that the more intense has been the religion of any period and the more profound has been the dogmatic belief, the greater has been the cruelty and the worse has been the state of affairs. In the so-called ages of faith, when men really did believe the Christian religion in all its completeness, there was the Inquisition, with all its tortures; there were millions of unfortunate women burned as witches; and there was every kind of cruelty practiced upon all sorts of people in the name of religion.

    You find as you look around the world that every single bit of progress in humane feeling, every improvement in the criminal law, every step toward the diminution of war, every step toward better treatment of the colored races, or every mitigation of slavery, every moral progress that there has been in the world, has been consistently opposed by the organized churches of the world. I say quite deliberately that the Christian religion, as organized in its churches, has been and still is the principal enemy of moral progress in the world.”

    Atheists typically believe that our morality and laws should exist in order to promote human happiness. We find these morals through our reason as to what applies in the present, while you find yours through texts written over in a completely different age. That’s why currently; our morality typically encourages us to fight for the human rights of homosexuals and women, while your morality typically encourages your brothers in religion to fight to try to take away those rights.

    I would like to live in a world without religion, not because I want the chaos and human suffering your question claims I want, but because I long for equality and existence within a society that promotes human happiness.

    3)I’m offended that you’d suggest an atheist would approach the topic with such levity. Personally, I have seriously considered the existence of god, but have not found sufficient evidence. Most arguments I have heard for the existence fall into one of four categories: teleological, cosmological, ontological, and the argument from faith. I have heard these arguments and the arguments against them, weighed them in my mind and always ended up citing with the argument against. You may try to accuse me of approaching these topics with an “uneven” hand, but I ask you one question; If I saw sufficient evidence instill a belief in god, why would I deny it?

    From what I’ve seen, Christians are far guiltier of approaching the topic of religion with an uneven hand and double standards than atheists because Christians are taught the principle of religious faith. This principle not only encourages them to immediately dismiss any idea that may question the existence of their god but also encourages them to dismiss any doubt they themselves may have. How much more biased can you get? I, the apparently uneven atheist, on the other hand have researched many religions and the arguments for and against them, but have ultimately concluded my search with the belief in the lack of a higher power. Maybe I’m slow, but I fail to see how my research and internal search for god reflects any more double standards than someone who approaches the topic of religion with the principle of religious faith.

  2. Thanks Scott

    Thanks was some lengthy answer. First let me point out that your answer only serves to prove some of my points mentioned above.

    Your research on religions of the world seem to be confined to the sources that are readily available to anyone wishing to disprove the existence of God.

    Your understanding of religion may also be at fault and is significantly different to what I would call real faith in God.

    I say this as you make claims of faiths and history and religion. May I say that it sounds as if you are making some serious assumptions and have not checked all the sources available but have stopped your search presumably once you found the answer that suited your presupposition.

    My comments are not emotionally charged; they are taken from past experiences I have in dealing with others when debating religion.

    By the way “Cogito ergo sum” ( I think therefore I am) is not the center of all my beliefs. I leave this to those who wish to indulge in self obsession.

    I’m happy in the observation and testing that will confirm if things are what I think they may be.

    Your comment that you would like to live in the world without religion only confirms my first statement.

    You have also mentioned different types of evidence provided about the existence of God, I wonder if you checked section on “Prophesy” on this blog and see how many Old Testament prophesies have been fulfilled in Jesus. One would have to be completely blind to logic and reason not to except that hundreds of years before things happened were predicted and have come to pass. This is where God makes clear statement that he is in charge not you, not me as we are only his creatures and he is the creator. As for the use of “faith” in science I completely agree with you, that is how science works. This is precisely why we have to continue checking previous theories which have now moved up the ladder to the point of becoming a DOGMA and all are invited to worship at it’s feet.

    You only seam to wish to use “logic” to defend your view point. Your use of famous Atheist to prove your point only serves to prove what is that motivates and guides your in your “search”. Don’t you think that this information is equally available to people like me? Or am I not as “Bright” as others (Trying not to be personal here) who come to diametrically opposing views.

    Last thing to remember, no serious “apologist” would claim that Atheists are immoral, comment that I made has very valuable point that Atheist frequently ridicule and attempt to dismiss as irrelevant. It’s quite simple this “internal moral compass” which we all posses simply does not make sense, if we only use “selfish gene” to guide us, if self preservation is all that is, then oppressing others truly belongs to humanity. Difference between what the Bible is teaching and what people in a church are doing are two completely different things. You will also note that there have been many good Christian people who have strongly opposed, racism, (William Wilberforce (24 August 1759 – 29 July 1833) was a British politician, Christian a philanthropist and a leader of the movement to abolish the slave trade) sexism, and other injustice that you find today. This kind of logic is false as you would agree, I don’t say that all atheists are evil as Josef Stain was, who was responsible for murdering over 20 million Russians. Or the fact that Adolf Hitlers long term plan was to destroy all churches. What you need to do, is as I said before “be even handed”. We all as humans have this tendency to fight, to prove who is better, to dominate each other, sometimes even to humiliate. And here is the difference that Christ offers, it’s Peace, Love, Joy, etc. that is on offer. Question is what we want, freedom granted to us by him is in itself proof that God is good. Our decisions are always based on our corrupted nature. When the light of God’s word is shining, we have two choices, to run to it and revel things in us that need fixing, accept his offer of reconciliation or hide and remain opposed to God.

    I hope you again re read what you sent and hopefully make the appropriate rebuttal yourself as nothing you said here is new and there is plenty of material available that could help you.

    May I suggest you read

    The Reason for God: Belief in an Age of Skepticism (Hardcover)
    by Timothy Keller (Author)

    You can find this book on amazon under following link.

    http://www.amazon.co.uk/gp/offer-listing/0525950494/ref=sr_1_olp_1/203-8300137-6459130?ie=UTF8&s=gateway&qid=1213038224&sr=8-1

    Kind regards

    Defend the word

Comments are closed.