Changes

Another limitations of the terms implicit/explicit atheism is that they merely address conscious thinking and not unconscious thinking.  

Another limitations of the terms implicit/explicit atheism is that they merely address conscious thinking and not unconscious thinking.  

''Science Daily'' reported that "Death anxiety increases [[Atheism|atheists]]' unconscious belief in God".<ref>[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120402094322.htm Death anxiety increases atheists' unconscious belief in God], ''Science Daily'', Date: April 2, 2012</ref>  In a ''Psychology Today'' article, Dr. Nathan A. Heflick reported similar results in other studies.<ref>[http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-big-questions/201205/atheists-death-and-belief-in-god Atheists, Death and Belief in God The Effects of Death Reminders on Atheists' Supernatural Beliefs], ''Psychology Today'', Published on May 25, 2012 by Nathan A. Heflick, Ph.D. in The Big Questions</ref>

''Science Daily'' reported that "Death anxiety increases atheists' unconscious belief in God".<ref>[http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/04/120402094322.htm Death anxiety increases atheists' unconscious belief in God], ''Science Daily'', Date: April 2, 2012</ref>  In a ''Psychology Today'' article, Dr. Nathan A. Heflick reported similar results in other studies.<ref>[http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/the-big-questions/201205/atheists-death-and-belief-in-god Atheists, Death and Belief in God The Effects of Death Reminders on Atheists' Supernatural Beliefs], ''Psychology Today'', Published on May 25, 2012 by Nathan A. Heflick, Ph.D. in The Big Questions</ref>

=== 20th century and 21st century global desecularization ===

=== 20th century and 21st century global desecularization ===

''See also:'' [[Desecularization]] and [[Growth of global desecularization]] and [[Global atheism]]

''See also:'' [[Desecularization]] and [[Growth of global desecularization]] and [[Global atheism]]

[[File:Birkbeck College, Woburn Square.jpg|left|thumbnail|200px|[[Eric Kaufmann]], a professor at [[Birkbeck College, University of London]], using a a wealth of demographic studies, argues that there will be a significant decline of [[global atheism]] in the 21st century which will impact the [[Western World]].<ref name="sneps.net"/>]]  

[[File:Birkbeck College, Woburn Square.jpg|left|thumbnail|200px|[[Eric Kaufmann]], a professor at [[Birkbeck College, University of London]], using a wealth of demographic studies, argues that there will be a significant decline of [[global atheism]] in the 21st century which will impact the [[Western World]].<ref name="sneps.net"/>]]  

Furthermore, Smith's terms implicit atheism and explicit atheism were a product 19th century and 20th century mindset among atheists. The latter part 20th century and 21st century have seen a time of global [[desecularization]] and a time of the growth of conservative, religious immigrants to the [[Western World]].<ref name="sneps.net"/> To a greater and greater degree, irreligious people are coming in contact with religious people and therefore having to make repeated conscious choices between [[theism]] and irreligion. Furthermore, the growth of global communications/travel causes irreligious societies and subcultures to be less insular.  

Furthermore, Smith's terms implicit atheism and explicit atheism were a product 19th century and 20th century mindset among atheists. The latter part 20th century and 21st century have seen a time of global [[desecularization]] and a time of the growth of conservative, religious immigrants to the [[Western World]].<ref name="sneps.net"/> To a greater and greater degree, irreligious people are coming in contact with religious people and therefore having to make repeated conscious choices between [[theism]] and irreligion. Furthermore, the growth of global communications/travel causes irreligious societies and subcultures to be less insular.  

The current [[Atheist Population|atheist population]] mostly resides in East Asia (particularly China) and in secular Europe/Australia among whites.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/23/a-surprising-map-of-where-the-worlds-atheists-live/ A surprising map of where the world’s atheists live], By Max Fisher and Caitlin Dewey, ''Washington Post'', May 23, 2013</ref> See: [[Western atheism and race]]

The current [[Atheist Population|atheist population]] mostly resides in East Asia (particularly China) and in secular Europe/Australia among whites.<ref>[http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/worldviews/wp/2013/05/23/a-surprising-map-of-where-the-worlds-atheists-live/ A surprising map of where the world’s atheists live], By Max Fisher and Caitlin Dewey, ''Washington Post'', May 23, 2013</ref> See: [[Western atheism and race]]

In recent times, due the religious immigration and the higher fertility rate of religious conservatives, there has been a growth of [[evangelicalism|evangelical Christianity]] and and a growth of [[Islam]] in  secular Europe (see: [[Secular Europe]] and [[Atheism vs. Islam]]).  

In recent times, due the religious immigration and the higher fertility rate of religious conservatives, there has been a growth of [[evangelicalism|evangelical Christianity]] and a growth of [[Islam]] in  secular Europe (see: [[Secular Europe]] and [[Atheism vs. Islam]]).  

Additionally, there is a very rapid growth of Christianity in China (see: [[Growth of Christianity in China]]).

Additionally, there is a very rapid growth of Christianity in China (see: [[Growth of Christianity in China]]).

{{cquote|Secular leaders and scholars have been surprised by the resurgence of religion, because they put their faith in the assumption that modernization would lead to secularization and to the decline of religion. This idea—the so-called "[[Secularization thesis|secularization theory]]"—is widely accepted in academic and political circles. It assumes that as societies modernize and become more secular, religion will wither away as an archaic and useless branch of knowledge. Their assumption was that if religion became irrelevant, and human beings became more reasonable, they would dwell together in peace and happiness in a modernized world.

{{cquote|Secular leaders and scholars have been surprised by the resurgence of religion, because they put their faith in the assumption that modernization would lead to secularization and to the decline of religion. This idea—the so-called "[[Secularization thesis|secularization theory]]"—is widely accepted in academic and political circles. It assumes that as societies modernize and become more secular, religion will wither away as an archaic and useless branch of knowledge. Their assumption was that if religion became irrelevant, and human beings became more reasonable, they would dwell together in peace and happiness in a modernized world.

However, human history did not follow this "reasonable" path to a secular utopia. The closing decades of the 20th century "provide a massive falsification of the idea" that modernization and secularization will lead to a decline in religion. Instead, we are witnessing a massive upsurge in religion around the world (The [[Desecularization]] of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics, Berger, p. 6). This resurgence of religion has also played a part in an increasing number of violent conflicts around the world. Secular intellectuals and elites have been shocked by this development, because it is proving that their fundamental assumptions about human beings and human society are absolutely wrong! The modern secular notion that religion is archaic and irrelevant has caused many to overlook the importance of religion in human affairs. As a result, they have been taken by surprise by the return of religion. As Peter Berger, one of the world's leading sociologists of religion, wrote: "Those who neglect religion in their analysis of contemporary affairs do so at great peril" (Berger, p. 18). But what has spawned the modern revival of religion, and the spreading rejection of secular society?<ref>[http://www.tomorrowsworld.org/magazines/2005/november-december/the-return-of-religion The Return of Religion]</ref>}}

However, human history did not follow this "reasonable" path to a secular utopia. The closing decades of the 20th century "provide a massive falsification of the idea" that modernization and secularization will lead to a decline in religion. Instead, we are witnessing a massive upsurge in religion around the world (The Desecularization of the World: Resurgent Religion and World Politics, Berger, p. 6). This resurgence of religion has also played a part in an increasing number of violent conflicts around the world. Secular intellectuals and elites have been shocked by this development, because it is proving that their fundamental assumptions about human beings and human society are absolutely wrong! The modern secular notion that religion is archaic and irrelevant has caused many to overlook the importance of religion in human affairs. As a result, they have been taken by surprise by the return of religion. As Peter Berger, one of the world's leading sociologists of religion, wrote: "Those who neglect religion in their analysis of contemporary affairs do so at great peril" (Berger, p. 18). But what has spawned the modern revival of religion, and the spreading rejection of secular society?<ref>[http://www.tomorrowsworld.org/magazines/2005/november-december/the-return-of-religion The Return of Religion]</ref>}}

=== Growth of Christian apologetics ===

=== Growth of Christian apologetics ===

[[Image:Bahnsen.jpg‎|thumb|170px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man [[atheism|atheists]] fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s cancellation of their scheduled debate.<ref name="Bahsen at the Stein debate">[http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm Bahsen at the Stein debate] by John Frame</ref><ref name="simpleapologetics.com">[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>]]

[[Image:Bahnsen.jpg‎|thumb|170px|Dr. [[Greg Bahnsen]] became known as "the man atheists fear most" due to [[Michael Martin]]'s cancellation of their scheduled debate.<ref name="Bahsen at the Stein debate">[http://www.frame-poythress.org/frame_articles/Bahnsen.htm Bahsen at the Stein debate] by John Frame</ref><ref name="simpleapologetics.com">[http://simpleapologetics.com/thegreatdebate.html The Great Debate: Greg Bahnsen vs Gordon Stein]</ref>]]

''See also:'' [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]] and [[Rebuttals to atheist arguments]]

''See also:'' [[Christian apologetics websites|Evidence for Christianity]] and [[Rebuttals to atheist arguments]]

In addition to more and more irreligious people coming in contact with religious people, another reason why irreligious people are often increasing confronted with having to make a conscious choice between irreligion and Christianity/religion, is the proliferation of [[Christian apologetics]].  Christian apologetics is the defense of the Christian faith through logic/evidence based arguments.  

In addition to more and more irreligious people coming in contact with religious people, another reason why irreligious people are often increasing confronted with having to make a conscious choice between irreligion and Christianity/religion, is the proliferation of [[Christian apologetics]].  Christian apologetics is the defense of the Christian faith through logic/evidence based arguments.  

In 1990, the [[atheism|atheist]] philosopher [[Michael Martin]] indicated there was a general [[Atheism and apathy|absence of an atheistic response]] to contemporary work in the [[philosophy]] of religion and in jest he indicated that it was his "cross to bear" to respond to [[theism|theistic]] arguments.<ref>''Open Questions: Diverse Thinkers Discuss God, Religion, and Faith'' by Luís F. Rodrigues, page 201</ref>  Yet, in 1994, Michael Martin was criticized for his eleventh hour cancellation of his debate with [[Greg Bahnsen]] (see: [[Greg Bahnsen and debate]] and [[Press release after Michael Martin pulled out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|Bahnson-Martin debate press release]]).<ref name="Bahsen at the Stein debate"/><ref name="simpleapologetics.com"/>  

In 1990, the atheist philosopher [[Michael Martin]] indicated there was a general [[Atheism and apathy|absence of an atheistic response]] to contemporary work in the [[philosophy]] of religion and in jest he indicated that it was his "cross to bear" to respond to [[theism|theistic]] arguments.<ref>''Open Questions: Diverse Thinkers Discuss God, Religion, and Faith'' by Luís F. Rodrigues, page 201</ref>  Yet, in 1994, Michael Martin was criticized for his eleventh hour cancellation of his debate with [[Greg Bahnsen]] (see: [[Greg Bahnsen and debate]] and [[Press release after Michael Martin pulled out of Martin-Bahnsen debate|Bahnson-Martin debate press release]]).<ref name="Bahsen at the Stein debate"/><ref name="simpleapologetics.com"/>  

The majority of philosophers of religion, or those who have extensively studied the issue of the [[Arguments for the existence of God|existence of God]], are [[theism|theists]] (72 percent).<ref>[http://www.strangenotions.com/atheist-scientists/ Does it matter that many scientists are atheists?]</ref>

The majority of philosophers of religion, or those who have extensively studied the issue of the [[Arguments for the existence of God|existence of God]], are [[theism|theists]] (72 percent).<ref>[http://www.strangenotions.com/atheist-scientists/ Does it matter that many scientists are atheists?]</ref>

Creation apologetics is a subdiscipline of Christian apologetics and this field has seen a large amount of growth in the last fifty years.<ref name="brethrenassembly.com">[http://www.brethrenassembly.com/Ebooks/Apol_001A.pdf Introduction To Integrated Christian Apologetics, Dr. Johnson C. Philip & Dr. Saneesh Cherian]</ref>

Creation apologetics is a subdiscipline of Christian apologetics and this field has seen a large amount of growth in the last fifty years.<ref name="brethrenassembly.com">[http://www.brethrenassembly.com/Ebooks/Apol_001A.pdf Introduction To Integrated Christian Apologetics, Dr. Johnson C. Philip & Dr. Saneesh Cherian]</ref>

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs [[methodological naturalism]] have been [[Atheism|atheists]] and [[agnosticism|agnostics]].<ref>

Since [[World War II]] a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs [[methodological naturalism]] have been atheists and agnostics.<ref>

* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.

* Dr. Don Batten, [http://creation.com/a-whos-who-of-evolutionists A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32, December 1997.

* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]

* [[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creation.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]

</ref> The atheist philosopher of science [[Michael Ruse]] said "[[Evolution]] is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."<ref>Ruse, M., How evolution became a religion: creationists correct? National Post, pp. B1,B3,B7 May 13, 2000.</ref>   

</ref> The atheist philosopher of science [[Michael Ruse]] said "Evolution is a religion. This was true of evolution in the beginning, and it is true of evolution still today."<ref>Ruse, M., How evolution became a religion: creationists correct? National Post, pp. B1,B3,B7 May 13, 2000.</ref>   

For more information, see:  

For more information, see:  

In 2010, the worldwide atheist community was challenged to a debate by [[Creation Ministries International]] as prominent atheists were speaking at a 2010 global atheist convention in [[Australia]].<ref name="truefree">Ammi, Ken (May 2010). [http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown "Richard Dawkins the cowardly clown"].  True Freethinker.  Retrieved on July 30, 2014.</ref> [[Richard Dawkins]], [[PZ Myers]] and other prominent atheists refused to debate Creation Ministries International.<ref name="truefree"/>   

In 2010, the worldwide atheist community was challenged to a debate by [[Creation Ministries International]] as prominent atheists were speaking at a 2010 global atheist convention in [[Australia]].<ref name="truefree">Ammi, Ken (May 2010). [http://www.truefreethinker.com/articles/richard-dawkins-cowardly-clown "Richard Dawkins the cowardly clown"].  True Freethinker.  Retrieved on July 30, 2014.</ref> [[Richard Dawkins]], [[PZ Myers]] and other prominent atheists refused to debate Creation Ministries International.<ref name="truefree"/>   

A majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the naturalistic evolutionary position since [[World War II]] have been [[Atheism|atheists]].<ref>Multiple references:

A majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the naturalistic evolutionary position since [[World War II]] have been atheists.<ref>Multiple references:

*Batten, Don (December 1997).  [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/737/ "A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists"]. ''Creation'', vol 20, no. 1, p. 32.  Retrieved from Creation.com [Creation Ministries International] on May 15, 2015.  See [[Don Batten]]

*Batten, Don (December 1997).  [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/737/ "A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists"]. ''Creation'', vol 20, no. 1, p. 32.  Retrieved from Creation.com [Creation Ministries International] on May 15, 2015.  See [[Don Batten]]

*Sarfati, Jonathan, Ph. D. (1999).  [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 "Chapter 1: Facts and bias"].  ''Refuting Evolution''.  Retrieved from Creation.com [Creation Ministries International] on May 15, 2015.  See [[Jonathan Sarfati]]</ref> Creation scientists tend to win the Creation-Evolution debates and many have been held since the 1970's particularly in the [[United States]].<ref name="AnkerFraser">Multiple references:

*Sarfati, Jonathan, Ph. D. (1999).  [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 "Chapter 1: Facts and bias"].  ''Refuting Evolution''.  Retrieved from Creation.com [Creation Ministries International] on May 15, 2015.  See [[Jonathan Sarfati]]</ref> Creation scientists tend to win the Creation-Evolution debates and many have been held since the 1970s particularly in the [[United States]].<ref name="AnkerFraser">Multiple references:

*Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John (1998).  [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC0104W1E.htm "Truth in advertising: damaging the cause of science"].  ''Darwin's Leap of Faith'' (Harvest House).  Retrieved from The John Ankenberg Show website on May 15, 2015.

*Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John (1998).  [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC0104W1E.htm "Truth in advertising: damaging the cause of science"].  ''Darwin's Leap of Faith'' (Harvest House).  Retrieved from The John Ankenberg Show website on May 15, 2015.

*Fraser, William A. (2003). [http://web.archive.org/web/20091024005313/http://members.shaw.ca/mark.64/hcib/whowins.html "Who wins the debates?"]  Mark64's webpage.  Retrieved from October 24, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on May 15, 2015.</ref>  

*Fraser, William A. (2003). [http://web.archive.org/web/20091024005313/http://members.shaw.ca/mark.64/hcib/whowins.html "Who wins the debates?"]  Mark64's webpage.  Retrieved from October 24, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on May 15, 2015.</ref>  

Robert Sloan, Director of Paleontology at the University of Minnesota, reluctantly admitted to a ''Wall Street Journal'' reporter that the "creationists tend to win" the public debates which focused on the creation vs. evolution controversy.<ref name="AnkerFraser"/>  In August 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”<ref>Fraser, William A. (2003). [http://web.archive.org/web/20091024005313/http://members.shaw.ca/mark.64/hcib/whowins.html "Who wins the debates?"]  Mark64's webpage.  Retrieved from October 24, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on May 15, 2015.</ref>  Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John (1998).  [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm "Voices for evolution"].  ''Darwin's Leap of Faith'' (Harvest House).  Retrieved from the John Ankerberg show website on May 15, 2015.</ref>

Robert Sloan, Director of Paleontology at the University of Minnesota, reluctantly admitted to a ''Wall Street Journal'' reporter that the "creationists tend to win" the public debates which focused on the creation vs. evolution controversy.<ref name="AnkerFraser"/>  In August 1979, [[Henry Morris|Dr. Henry Morris]] reported in an [[Institute for Creation Research]] letter the following: “By now, practically every leading evolutionary scientist in this country has declined one or more invitations to a scientific debate on creation/evolution.”<ref>Fraser, William A. (2003). [http://web.archive.org/web/20091024005313/http://members.shaw.ca/mark.64/hcib/whowins.html "Who wins the debates?"]  Mark64's webpage.  Retrieved from October 24, 2009 archive at Internet Archive on May 15, 2015.</ref>  Morris also said regarding the creation scientist [[Duane Gish]] (who had over 300 formal debates): “At least in our judgment and that of most in the audiences, he always wins.”<ref>Ankerberg, John, and Weldon, John (1998).  [http://www.ankerberg.com/Articles/science/SC1200W1.htm "Voices for evolution"].  ''Darwin's Leap of Faith'' (Harvest House).  Retrieved from the John Ankerberg show website on May 15, 2015.</ref>

Generally speaking, leading evolutionists generally no longer debate creation scientists because [[creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]].<ref>Morris, Henry, Ph. D. (1996). [http://www.icr.org/article/811/ "Reason or rhetoric"].  ''Acts and Facts'', vol. 25, no. 11. Retrieved from Institute for Creation Research website on May 15, 2015.</ref> In addition, the [[atheism|atheist]] and evolutionist, [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]].  In an article entitled "Are Kansas Evolutionists Afraid of a Fair Debate?" the [[Discovery Institute]] states the following:

Generally speaking, leading evolutionists generally no longer debate creation scientists because [[creation scientists tend to win the creation vs. evolution debates]].<ref>Morris, Henry, Ph. D. (1996). [http://www.icr.org/article/811/ "Reason or rhetoric"].  ''Acts and Facts'', vol. 25, no. 11. Retrieved from Institute for Creation Research website on May 15, 2015.</ref> In addition, the atheist and evolutionist, [[Richard Dawkins]] has shown inconsistent and deceptive behavior [[Richard Dawkins' public refusal to debate creationists|concerning his refusal creation scientists]].  In an article entitled "Are Kansas Evolutionists Afraid of a Fair Debate?" the [[Discovery Institute]] states the following:

{{cquote|Defenders of Darwin's theory of evolution typically proclaim that evidence for their theory is simply overwhelming. If they really believe that, you would think they would jump at a chance to publicly explain some of that overwhelming evidence to the public. Apparently not.<ref>West, John G. (February 23, 2005).  [http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/02/are_kansas_evolutionists_afraid_of_a_fai.html "Are Kansas evolutionists afraid of a fair debate?"]  Evolution News and Views.  Retrieved on May 15, 2015.</ref>}}

{{cquote|Defenders of Darwin's theory of evolution typically proclaim that evidence for their theory is simply overwhelming. If they really believe that, you would think they would jump at a chance to publicly explain some of that overwhelming evidence to the public. Apparently not.<ref>West, John G. (February 23, 2005).  [http://www.evolutionnews.org/2005/02/are_kansas_evolutionists_afraid_of_a_fai.html "Are Kansas evolutionists afraid of a fair debate?"]  Evolution News and Views.  Retrieved on May 15, 2015.</ref>}}

[[Image:PH2006022801720.jpg‎|right|thumb|150px|[[Henry Morris]]]]

[[Image:PH2006022801720.jpg‎|right|thumb|150px|[[Henry Morris]]]]

==== Summary of why implicit/explict atheism have diminished in importance ====

==== Summary of why implicit/explict atheism have diminished in importance ====

First, the attempt of some atheists/agnostics to make the definition of atheism broader unnecesarily broadens the historic definition of atheism (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).  

First, the attempt of some atheists/agnostics to make the definition of atheism broader unnecessarily broadens the historic definition of atheism (see: [[Definition of atheism]]).  

Next, given the: [[Christian apologetics websites|abundance of evidence]] for the existence of God and for Christianity; God's creation testifying to His existence; the complete [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|lack of evidence]] for atheism; many atheists/agnostics often having difficulty suppressing theistic thoughts; and the growth of global desecularization,  atheism and its nomenclature has become increasingly irrelevant.

Next, given the: [[Christian apologetics websites|abundance of evidence]] for the existence of God and for Christianity; God's creation testifying to His existence; the complete [[Attempts to dilute the definition of atheism|lack of evidence]] for atheism; many atheists/agnostics often having difficulty suppressing theistic thoughts; and the growth of global desecularization,  atheism and its nomenclature has become increasingly irrelevant.