Aggressive and Illogical propositions of New Atheists

Aggressive and Illogical propositions of New Atheists

When you read some of the “enlightened stuff” on the internet penned in by the modern atheists you can’t help but ask yourself if the modern atheists either lack logic or if there is something worse, and more sinister at work there?

They will often mention “bad fascists Christians” of far right this is also accompanied by “bigots” who dare to call themselves Christians, they will also include “hyper charismatic crazy Christians” and not list of all everyone favourites “TV evangelists” who are always portrayed as people who are after your money and their insistence on the Prosperity Gospel rubbish”.

They then make a massive jump in logic by claims that this is a proof that All christens are evil and this should be taken as a great evidence and a proof, you will even hear them saying that this is the uncontrovertibly evidence that God is only in our mind, and that this disease of the mind should be cured by their lack of logic.

God never said that our ignorance and sin should not be examined in the light of his word. Neither did he say that Christians will never make any mistakes, even early New Testament records many discourses and incorrect teachings. Just look at the book of Galatians at the very beginning we see Apostle Paul as he warns them that they are too quick to forget and desert original teaching.

Galatians 1:6-7 I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting the one who called  you by the grace of Christ and are turning to a different gospel 7 which is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing you into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ.

Modern Atheists want you to be sterile

You should not be fruitful in your work, in your evangelism or even let others know that you are a Christian. All in the name of multiculturalism, they tell us we should just accept people for what they are. Yet they do their best to convert everyone else into their way of thinking. By claiming that you would not be a Christian if you were born in India, they forget that neither would they be Atheists if they wore born in Iran. These are not good and valid reasons, nether could not one legitimately use these to explain away Christian origins it is not logical to claim that our birth place will always have correct answer. Fact is that America and Europe have Christianity as imported cultural and religious idea. This kind of cultural relativism is good for Equality and Diversity in our politics but is of no relevance to our faith. Christianity is not intolerant just because it points to the truth. All truth is discriminatory against error, just look at any scientific study and you will understand what I’m talking about.

Modern Atheist deliberately deflect your attention from real issues.

By saying things like, God let my young child suffer so why should I believe, or Christians are bad people that proves ineffectiveness of God, or Religion was so bad for humanity and is responsible for many wars. They simply overlook the truth that their issues do not affect everyone in the same way. And also they are forgetting that this does not tackle the main question; that which they supposedly would want you to address with their disagreements grievances the very existence of God. So God end up being blames for all kinds of human sins. This is not only fallacious in their logic but clearly points that their disagreements are actually more personal in nature and not objective assertions.

They will lie and distort

They will refuse to accept that Christians should be allowed to make mistakes, so on the occasion that error is made and even when apology is made by offending Christian, they refuse to take any such retraction on board. Let me give you example Ray Comfort and his example of Banana with the complexity and design in nature is often used to ridicule Christians. Yet they will not tell you that Ray Comfort publicly apologised for that blunder. Piltdown man and many other fakes which were deliberate distortions are on the other hand overlooked as innocent attempts by evolutionist who were just keen to help us understand evolution better.

They want you to be ineffective and uneducated

Often they will point out that things of faith are separated from things of reason. And sometimes even recommend that faith may be good for you. This unfortunately came to us with the early liberalism at the beginning of the 19th century this was deeply rooted on humanistic philosophical world view. Biblical stories are suddenly to be interpreted allegorically and all miracles should be discarded as childish wishful thinking. Baffling people with science is common way of saying you don’t know anything I can show you that science supports my proposition even when he/she does not understand what they are talking about.

They don’t apply same rules to themselves

They will criticise Christians for claiming that we can know the truth, yet they will assert with great deal of certainty that “We can not know the truth” question is how did they know that? Such claim can only be made if one is to understand the meaning of the truth. They will tell us that the Bible is not reliable even when presented with much evidence, yet they will readily accept other ancient literature even when there is less than 1/100 of the evidence available when compared with the Bible. Cultural relativism does not apply to them as their truth is just as relevant for everyone, but this is not acceptable for Christianity. Murder and war are pined on Christians and religion but when pointed to the fact that atheism was just as bad if not worse when dealing with mass murder they will do their best to ignore these facts.

They use aggression and bullying in order to get you to agree with them

By calling Christians ignorant, referring to events that are 100 of years old, they will argue that this proves incompetence and ignorance of Christians. They will choose to use obscure references from King James Version to prove that Bible supports Unicorns, yet when you point out that this is rear anomaly that resulted from bad translation of the original text they will come back with some nonsensical arguments. Despite the fact that a King James translation is several hundreds years old, they insist that this translation should have been perfect from the outset.  Many straw man arguments are used in order to then destroy them and claim intellectual supremacy.

They will attempt to manipulate you

First you may receive compliment then they will demand of you to agree that all intelligent people “like us” must agree with what they say is true. Distorted figures are presented as if they prove or disprove some points that are completely disconnected to the ongoing debate. This is common use of methodology that magicians use when they distract our attention away from the real issues.

What is then needed for successful conversation?

I think what both sides need to do is be honest, be open about their presuppositions. Let the other side know your ideas and understand theirs, yes there are cultural and personal family influences that are evident with those who profess their faith in God, but this is just as relevant to those who are atheists. Their desire to be accepted by their intellectually oriented friends and piers is just as strong and there is clear evidence to this that does not any further explanation. What is needed is new approach, one that says if you demand tolerance then you should listen to the arguments that may not agree with your own. Neither side should claim victory until all evidence is examined. Christians should use love and acceptance, but Atheists should not emotionally blackmail Christians into obeying the Bible if they themselves do not adhere to it. Civility and friendliness can go long way, we can agree to disagree, if we are to influence one another we must be approachable. Finally let me end with the words from the good book. Romans 12:14-21 is teaching us the right attitude.

Romans 12:14 Bless those who persecute you, bless and do not curse. 12:15 Rejoice with those who rejoice, weep with those who weep. 12:16 Live in harmony with one another; do not be haughty but associate with the lowly.10 Do not be conceited.11 12:17 Do not repay anyone evil for evil; consider what is good before all people.12 12:18 If possible, so far as it depends on you, live peaceably with all people.13 12:19 Do not avenge yourselves, dear friends, but give place to God’s wrath,14 for it is written, “Vengeance is mine, I will repay,”15 says the Lord. 12:20 Rather, if your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him a drink; for in doing this you will be heaping burning coals on his head.16 12:21 Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

Kind regards

Defend the word


10 10 tn Or “but give yourselves to menial tasks.” The translation depends on whether one takes the adjective “lowly” as masculine or neuter.

11 11 tn Grk “Do not be wise in your thinking.”

12 12 tn Here ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) is used as a generic and refers to both men and women.

13 13 tn Here ἄνθρωπος (anthrōpos) is used as a generic and refers to both men and women.

14 14 tn Grk “the wrath,” referring to God’s wrath as the remainder of the verse shows.

15 15 sn A quotation from Deut 32:35.

16 16 sn A quotation from Prov 25:21–22.

Advertisements

About defendtheword

To contact us please send e-mail to defend.theword@ntlworld.com
This entry was posted in Apologetics, Archeology, Atheism, Bible, Christ, Christianity, Church, Church History, Discernment, Evangelism, Evolution, Faith, God, Hedonism, Jesus, News, Photography, Prayer, Prophecy, Religion, Stetement Of Faith, Theology. Bookmark the permalink.

8 Responses to Aggressive and Illogical propositions of New Atheists

  1. ..

    Nothing beats actual, real-life examples. Got any?

    OK, I expect you to produce actual examples of your claims.

  2. misunderstoodranter says:

    Firstly can I just say that this post seems to be an aggressive attack on Atheists – which contains many non-truths.

    [They then make a massive jump in logic by claims that this is a proof that All christens are evil]

    This is not true – I don’t think ALL Christian’s are evil – I think all religion is evil because it divides people into sets – and when you do that it starts wars.

    [Yet they do their best to convert everyone else into their way of thinking.]

    Actually, religion does its best to convert people – your site is called defend the word. Christians have church, and place the fear of god into children.

    [….Unicorns, yet when you point out that this is rear anomaly that resulted from bad translation of the original text they will come back with some nonsensical arguments….]

    You are missing the point – but since your thought is not free because it is enriched by dogma I can understand this – the point about Unicorns is translation – if the bible is translated then how can you believe in its literal word? How can it be flawless without errors…

    [Despite the fact that a King James translation is several hundreds years old, they insist that this translation should have been perfect from the outset. ]

    Wrong – this is exactly the point of Atheists – we have never demanded that it is a perfect translation – the argument is that it wasn’t perfect – i.e. it was manipulated by man to do mans bidding and not gods.

    [Baffling people with science is common way of saying you don’t know anything I can show you that science supports my proposition even when he/she does not understand what they are talking about.]

    I don’t get baffled by science – but then I read a lot, and do my best to understand living teachers – rather than dead ones that believed in ghosts and stuff.

    [They will refuse to accept that Christians should be allowed to make mistakes, so on the occasion that error is made and even when apology is made by offending Christian, they refuse to take any such retraction on board. ]

    Why should religion be treated any differently to anything else in life – it is an idea, if you are offended by what Atheists say, then this is your problem with your beliefs. I don’t get offended if Dawkins gets slated – I make my mind up as to whether there is a reason for dispute – this is called having an open mind free of dogma – I can decide, I am free as nature intended.

    [ Ray Comfort and his example of Banana with the complexity and design in nature is often used to ridicule Christians. Yet they will not tell you that Ray Comfort publicly apologised for that blunder.]

    Ray Comfort is a total joke – and yes he is worthy of a healthy dose of humiliation… he apologised because even he saw how ridiculous his example was. However, I thought Ray Comfort was ridiculous to start with – his banana theory only re-enforced this fact. It is a shame that you can not see what a con man he really is.

    [I think what both sides need to do is be honest, be open about their presuppositions. Let the other side know your ideas and understand theirs, yes there are cultural and personal family influences that are evident with those who profess their faith in God, but this is just as relevant to those who are atheists. Their desire to be accepted by their intellectually oriented friends and piers is just as strong and there is clear evidence to this that does not any further explanation. What is needed is new approach, one that says if you demand tolerance then you should listen to the arguments that may not agree with your own. Neither side should claim victory until all evidence is examined. Christians should use love and acceptance, but Atheists should not emotionally blackmail Christians into obeying the Bible if they themselves do not adhere to it.]

    Atheists do let their ideas be known and are honest – but we get accused of offending religion when we are – unfortunately honestly is brute truth.

  3. Firstly can I just say that this post seems to be an aggressive attack on Atheists – which contains many non-truths.”]

    Note that I did not say all atheists, I have specifically said “New” atheists, and clearly from our conversations I’m more than happy to indorse you as an OK guy.

    [“This is not true – I don’t think ALL Christian’s are evil – I think all religion is evil because it divides people into sets – and when you do that it starts wars.”]

    I didn’t say Atheist clearly think all Christians are evil, there is clear evidence that they like some strongly liberal Christians.

    [“Actually, religion does its best to convert people – your site is called defend the word. Christians have church, and place the fear of god into children.”]

    Let me start with saying that defending means we are on defence not attacking. Secondly it would be immoral to know that there is a cure for some disease and then keep this a secret.

    [“You are missing the point – but since your thought is not free because it is enriched by dogma I can understand this – the point about Unicorns is translation – if the bible is translated then how can you believe in its literal word? How can it be flawless without errors…”]

    Literal word is in the original text, translation can never be literal word, I leave that kind of thing to fundamentalists who fail to understand basic principles of Textual Criticism. This does not mean I don’t believe Bible to be inspired, accurate word of God. Only that minor changes for which we have plenty of evidence have crept in. But the good news is that due to so many manuscripts that are available to us we can know we great deal of certainty I would say about 99% what the original text is teaching us. And we should learn from it. Like you I’m anti dogma after all I am a protestant that means rebel at heart.

    [“Wrong – this is exactly the point of Atheists – we have never demanded that it is a perfect translation – the argument is that it wasn’t perfect – i.e. it was manipulated by man to do mans bidding and not gods.”]

    No I would say that you are wrong on several accounts here. First how do you know what it should be in original, to believe that there is an original that is God would demand that you should also believe in the inspired word which God give us which you don’t? Secondly when any manipulation was done in history of humanity this was done during the time when the Bible was not made available to average Jo blogs. So the opposite is true, when the Bible was made available to everyone then the revolution happened and rebellion against established church and dogma began with the rise of Protestantism.

    [“I don’t get baffled by science – but then I read a lot, and do my best to understand living teachers – rather than dead ones that believed in ghosts and stuff.”]

    You will note that I was actually taking a dig at ignorant Christians who only want to believe and not bother to learn. So no need to get offended there, I don’t point finger at anyone it is just statement that is derived from my experiences whilst reading other wordpress blogs.

    [“Why should religion be treated any differently to anything else in life – it is an idea, if you are offended by what Atheists say, then this is your problem with your beliefs. I don’t get offended if Dawkins gets slated – I make my mind up as to whether there is a reason for dispute – this is called having an open mind free of dogma – I can decide, I am free as nature intended.”]

    Actually I was talking about retraction and apology, which is not what you hear from Atheists, is it? Usually the atheist that apologises is the ex atheist who starts believing.

    [“Ray Comfort is a total joke – and yes he is worthy of a healthy dose of humiliation… he apologised because even he saw how ridiculous his example was. However, I thought Ray Comfort was ridiculous to start with – his banana theory only re-enforced this fact. It is a shame that you can not see what a con man he really is.”]

    Whilst I would not use Rays theological teachings on ID for this blog, I do like his honesty when it comes to his dealings with modern church, his criticism can be very severe. Which I’m guessing you would probably agree with, if you spent time listening to what he is saying.

    [“Atheists do let their ideas be known and are honest – but we get accused of offending religion when we are – unfortunately honestly is brute truth.”]

    Actually you are somewhat of an rarity, most of the time you get hit with something, intellectual pride, accusation of Ignorance, desire to manipulate, desire to benefit from atheists etc. Now I would agree that there are plenty of unscrupulous so called Christians who do not know the meaning of what the Bible is teaching about holy living yet they pretend and they desire to be leaders of the churches. But this does not disprove God, or his love or his desire to save humanity. It is dirty trick that evil people use to take advantage of vulnerable and gullible people. But as I keep on saying fact that you have fake Rolex only points to the fact that somewhere out there must be the original that this copy was based upon.

  4. I don’t think this is needed on this blog, you just go to wordpress.com and type “Atheism” atheists or any such thing and you will find all the examples you need or google it. But don’t take my word for it by all means, if you want to disprove me just give me 10 open, friendly interested in Christianity atheistic web pages and I will retract my statement and apologise to you. If you want more information you can always ask other Christians, I had people call me names, they swore at me, they have tried manipulating me and I have even had attempts by people who wonted to take over this blog. Good enough reasons to be sceptical I think.

  5. “I don’t think this is needed on this blog, you just go to wordpress.com and type “Atheism” atheists or any such thing and you will find all the examples you need or google it.”

    No, I want YOU to back up what YOU’VE said. I certainly don’t have to do the work to back up what YOU’VE said, that’s YOUR job.

    So far, you’ve given ZERO examples.

  6. Actually Brian, I don’t have to do anything for you, do I? There is no requirement on my part to act on anything? Secondly I give you my personal examples which you chose to ignore. I am not writing for scientific journal your insistence that I should give you examples is totally unnecessary. Prove me wrong by the challenge I give you and you will see that you can’t. Any actively involved atheists who are bloging today will simply spew hatred, show arrogance, ignore logic and insist that he/she is right regardless of what evidence you point out to them. And you know that this is true, as you would otherwise point me in the direction of the web page where Christians are welcomed to share their views without being ridiculed and you will not find all the worst examples which are being used to paint all Christians with the same brush.

  7. “Actually Brian, I don’t have to do anything for you, do I?”

    You’ve certainly done nothing so far, yes.

    “Prove me wrong by the challenge I give you and you will see that you can’t. ”

    Sorry, genuine arguments don’t work that way. YOU made accusations, YOU support them with real examples.

    “Any actively involved atheists who are bloging today will simply spew hatred, show arrogance, ignore logic and insist that he/she is right regardless of what evidence you point out to them.”

    Yet you still offer no examples; you keep insisting that’s MY job for some bizarre reason.

    You aren’t arguing, you’re just spewing your hatred.

  8. Rather than reuse my work why not come up with some of your own original ides? I can turn your claims around but I don’t as I consider myself to be grown up.

    First of all I did give you my personal experiences about being bullied, attempts to take over my blog, abusive language and attempts to tell me that I should separate my faith and “facts of life”. Note that we see your refusal to use reason is yet another useful example accompanied with your accusation of my hatred to which you have no evidence.

    I love atheists this is why I try to engage them rather than demonise them. I think they need Christ as much as anybody else; it is my charitable action of bloging that has caused you to come here not the other way around. Secondly you refuse to accept that I am not writing for scientific journal, and therefore these are personal opinions based on my personal experiences.

    Lastly I do not want to give any advertising space to any other atheists, (Just look at the blog by the guy who calls himself “doctore” on word press.com) if you don’t know the work of Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Chris Hitchin’s then you should not call yourself an atheist. Any of their work would be full of supporting evidence on claims made in this blog. If you are after academic work then can I suggest something written by people like Dr Tim Keller, his reason for God would be good place to start or number of books by Dr Alister McGrath in his response to Prof Richard Dawkins books?

    You have also chosen to ignore examples that I give in the blog!!!

    None of your replies are inspiring me to change my opinion on modern young atheist that blog today.

    Fact is we need to start communicating with little bit more maturity otherwise there will be no communication.

    I have included this article for you so you can see that I am not alone in believing this there are other atheists that believe I am correct.

    from: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=113889251&ps=cprs

    Last month, atheists marked Blasphemy Day at gatherings around the world, and celebrated the freedom to denigrate and insult religion.

    Some offered to trade pornography for Bibles. Others de-baptized people with hair dryers. And in Washington, D.C., an art exhibit opened that shows, among other paintings, one entitled Divine Wine, where Jesus, on the cross, has blood flowing from his wound into a wine bottle.

    Another, Jesus Paints His Nails, shows an effeminate Jesus after the crucifixion, applying polish to the nails that attach his hands to the cross.

    “I wouldn’t want this on my wall,” says Stuart Jordan, an atheist who advises the evidence-based group Center for Inquiry on policy issues. The Center for Inquiry hosted the art show.

    Jordan says the exhibit created a firestorm from offended believers, and he can understand why. But, he says, the controversy over this exhibit goes way beyond Blasphemy Day. It’s about the future of the atheist movement — and whether to adopt the “new atheist” approach — a more aggressive, often belittling posture toward religious believers.

    Some call it a schism.

    For the rest of the article go to the above link.

Comments are closed.