| Line 14: |
Line 14: |
| | | | |
| | "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse..." - Romans 1:20 (KJV) | | "For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, [even] his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse..." - Romans 1:20 (KJV) |
| − | | + | ==Criticism== |
| − | ==Atheism is Illogical== | + | ===Atheism is Illogical=== |
| | Proponents of atheism, most notably atheist debaters, have been attempting to dilute the definition of atheism to a mere lack of belief there is a God or gods.<ref>http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm</ref> This definition, however, is not in accordance with how encyclopedias of philosophy define atheism which state that atheism is a denial of the existence of God or gods.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/</ref><ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1998</ref> | | Proponents of atheism, most notably atheist debaters, have been attempting to dilute the definition of atheism to a mere lack of belief there is a God or gods.<ref>http://www.thedivineconspiracy.org/athart3.htm</ref> This definition, however, is not in accordance with how encyclopedias of philosophy define atheism which state that atheism is a denial of the existence of God or gods.<ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/</ref><ref>http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/1998</ref> |
| | One of the reasons why some proponents of atheism have been attempting to dilute the definition of the term atheism is to shift the burden of proof since atheism is inherently a illogical position. | | One of the reasons why some proponents of atheism have been attempting to dilute the definition of the term atheism is to shift the burden of proof since atheism is inherently a illogical position. |
| Line 26: |
Line 26: |
| | This means that you would have to be [[omnipresent]]. You would also have to know everything about every part of the universe, so you would be [[omniscient]]. Then, just at the point when you proved that there was no God, you would also have proven that you were one.<ref>http://www.kennedycommentary.org/default.asp?pg=topicmessage&id=1419</ref>}} | | This means that you would have to be [[omnipresent]]. You would also have to know everything about every part of the universe, so you would be [[omniscient]]. Then, just at the point when you proved that there was no God, you would also have proven that you were one.<ref>http://www.kennedycommentary.org/default.asp?pg=topicmessage&id=1419</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | Atheists would rightly respond to this line of argument by simply pointing out that in the debate over whether something does or does not exist, in the absence of any scientific proof one way or the other, the burden of proof would lie with the person arguing for the existence of that something. In the above example, the atheist would win the day. Simply claiming that you know god exists carries no weight--in the words of founding father and Deist Thomas Paine, writing in the ''Age of Reason'', “ ... it is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and consequently they are not obliged to believe it.” | + | Atheists would respond to this line of argument by simply pointing out that in the debate over whether something does or does not exist, in the absence of any scientific proof one way or the other, the burden of proof would lie with the person arguing for existence. Simply claiming that you know god exists carries no weight--in the words of founding father and Deist Thomas Paine, writing in the ''Age of Reason'', “ ... it is revelation to the first person only, and hearsay to every other, and consequently they are not obliged to believe it.” |
| | | | |
| − | ==Tenuousness of Atheism== | + | ===Tenuousness of Atheism=== |
| | [[Image:Sartre1.gif|thumb|150px|right|[[Jean-Paul Sartre]]]] | | [[Image:Sartre1.gif|thumb|150px|right|[[Jean-Paul Sartre]]]] |
| | Atheism seems to be very tenuous in some of its more notable adherents. For example, [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] was one of the leading atheist of the 20th Century. Yet Jean-Paul Sartre made this candid confession: | | Atheism seems to be very tenuous in some of its more notable adherents. For example, [[Jean-Paul Sartre]] was one of the leading atheist of the 20th Century. Yet Jean-Paul Sartre made this candid confession: |
| Line 38: |
Line 38: |
| | In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilisation of [[Orchid]]s, and upon The [[Earthworm]]s, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away.”(Argyll 1885, 244] <ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref>}} | | In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilisation of [[Orchid]]s, and upon The [[Earthworm]]s, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature—I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away.”(Argyll 1885, 244] <ref>http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/teleological-arguments/notes.html</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | ==Atheists in America Are Generally Less Charitable== | + | ===Atheists in America Are Generally Less Charitable=== |
| | [[Image:112006top.jpg|thumb|Atheists in America generally give significantly less to charity than [[theism|theist]] Americans.]] | | [[Image:112006top.jpg|thumb|Atheists in America generally give significantly less to charity than [[theism|theist]] Americans.]] |
| | The [[Barna Group]] found the following in regards to atheist population in America and charitable giving: | | The [[Barna Group]] found the following in regards to atheist population in America and charitable giving: |
| Line 53: |
Line 53: |
| | "Actually, the truth is that they're giving to more than their churches," he says. "The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities."<ref>http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2</ref>}} | | "Actually, the truth is that they're giving to more than their churches," he says. "The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities."<ref>http://abcnews.go.com/2020/Story?id=2682730&page=2</ref>}} |
| | | | |
| − | ==Atheism and Immoral Views== | + | ===Atheism and Immoral Views=== |
| | The Barna Group found that atheists/agnostics in America were more likely than theists in America to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: illegal drug use; getting drunk; having a sexual relationship with someone of the opposite sex to whom you are not married; having an [[abortion]]; living with someone of the opposite sex without being married; using profanity; gambling; looking at pictures of nudity or explicit sexual behavior; and engaging in [[homosexuality]]/[[bisexuality]].<ref>http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152</ref> Despite these findings, it is noteworthy that in the United States, for 2004, the most recent year with available data, all of the states that exhibit the highest teenage birth rate (between the ages of 15-19, inclusive) reside within the Bible Belt, the most conservatively religious part of the country. Texas (63 births per 1000 females) has the dubious distinction of having the highest teenage birth rate, followed in order by Mississippi, New Mexico, Arizona, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Georgia, and South Carolina. All of these states have rates above 50. For comparison, in New England, Connecticut (24), Maine (24), Massachusetts (22), New Hampshire (18), Rhode Island (33), and Vermont (21), have teenage birth rates significantly less than half that.<ref>http://www.kidscount.org</ref> | | The Barna Group found that atheists/agnostics in America were more likely than theists in America to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: illegal drug use; getting drunk; having a sexual relationship with someone of the opposite sex to whom you are not married; having an [[abortion]]; living with someone of the opposite sex without being married; using profanity; gambling; looking at pictures of nudity or explicit sexual behavior; and engaging in [[homosexuality]]/[[bisexuality]].<ref>http://www.barna.org/FlexPage.aspx?Page=BarnaUpdate&BarnaUpdateID=152</ref> Despite these findings, it is noteworthy that in the United States, for 2004, the most recent year with available data, all of the states that exhibit the highest teenage birth rate (between the ages of 15-19, inclusive) reside within the Bible Belt, the most conservatively religious part of the country. Texas (63 births per 1000 females) has the dubious distinction of having the highest teenage birth rate, followed in order by Mississippi, New Mexico, Arizona, Arkansas, Oklahoma, Louisiana, Georgia, and South Carolina. All of these states have rates above 50. For comparison, in New England, Connecticut (24), Maine (24), Massachusetts (22), New Hampshire (18), Rhode Island (33), and Vermont (21), have teenage birth rates significantly less than half that.<ref>http://www.kidscount.org</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | ==Atheism and the Existence of Evil== | + | ===Atheism and the Existence of Evil=== |
| − | Atheists often claim that the existence of evil is a problem for [[theism]] which holds to a good and powerful God.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/evil.html</ref> [[Theodicy]] is the branch of study in theology and philosophy that defends the goodness of God despite the existence of evil. <ref>http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861719540/theodicy.html</ref> In traditional Christianity and Judaism the book of Job is used to explain the existence of evil. <ref>http://apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/doctrinal_apologetics/bowman-job.html</ref> In recent times [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologists]] often cite [[Alvin Plantinga]]'s free will defense in regards to the existence of evil. <ref>http://www.xenos.org/essays/evilpo.htm</ref><ref>http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/handouts/free_will_defense.html</ref> The work of [[St. Augustine]] is also cited in regards to theodicy. <ref>http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5124</ref> | + | Atheists state that the existence of evil is a problem for [[theism]] which holds to a good and powerful God.<ref>http://www.leaderu.com/orgs/probe/docs/evil.html</ref> [[Theodicy]] is the branch of study in theology and philosophy that defends the goodness of God despite the existence of evil.<ref>http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_1861719540/theodicy.html</ref> In traditional Christianity and Judaism the book of Job is used to explain the existence of evil.<ref>http://apologetics.com/default.jsp?bodycontent=/articles/doctrinal_apologetics/bowman-job.html</ref> In recent times [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologists]] often cite [[Alvin Plantinga]]'s free will defense in regards to the existence of evil. <ref>http://www.xenos.org/essays/evilpo.htm</ref><ref>http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/handouts/free_will_defense.html</ref> The work of [[St. Augustine]] is also cited in regards to theodicy. <ref>http://www.str.org/site/News2?page=NewsArticle&id=5124</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | ==Atheism and Communism == | + | ===Atheism and Communism === |
| | [[Karl Marx]] coined the saying "[Religion] is the opium of the people".<ref>http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/texts/Marx_Opium.html</ref> Karl Marx also wrote: "Communism begins from the outset (Owen) with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism; indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction."<ref>http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/comm.htm</ref> | | [[Karl Marx]] coined the saying "[Religion] is the opium of the people".<ref>http://www3.baylor.edu/~Scott_Moore/texts/Marx_Opium.html</ref> Karl Marx also wrote: "Communism begins from the outset (Owen) with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism; indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction."<ref>http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1844/manuscripts/comm.htm</ref> |
| | | | |
| | [[Vladimir Lenin]] similarly wrote: "A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could."<ref>http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1909/may/13.htm</ref> | | [[Vladimir Lenin]] similarly wrote: "A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could."<ref>http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1909/may/13.htm</ref> |
| | | | |
| − | ==Atheism and Questions of Origins == | + | ===Atheism and Questions of Origins === |
| | Atheism provides no useful input in regards to origins. [[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists state that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and the [[Second Law of Thermodynamics|second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe or a universe created by natural processes and argue for a universe created by [[God]]. <ref>http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php</ref> <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329</ref> <ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref> A majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the naturalistic evolutionary position since [[World War II]] have been atheists.<ref>Dr. [[Don Batten]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/737/ A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32 | | Atheism provides no useful input in regards to origins. [[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists state that the [[First Law of Thermodynamics|first law of thermodynamics]] and the [[Second Law of Thermodynamics|second law of thermodynamics]] argue against an eternal universe or a universe created by natural processes and argue for a universe created by [[God]]. <ref>http://godevidences.net/space/lawsofscience.php</ref> <ref>http://www.apologeticspress.org/articles/2329</ref> <ref>http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/AstroPhysicalSciences14.html</ref> A majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the naturalistic evolutionary position since [[World War II]] have been atheists.<ref>Dr. [[Don Batten]], [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/737/ A ''Who’s Who'' of evolutionists] ''Creation'' 20(1):32 |
| | December 1997.</ref><ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]</ref> [[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also assert the [[theory of evolution]] is an inadequate explanation for the variety of life forms on earth. <ref>http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/</ref> | | December 1997.</ref><ref>[[Jonathan Sarfati]], Ph.D.,F.M., [http://www.creationontheweb.com/content/view/3830 ''Refuting Evolution'', Chapter 1, Facts and Bias]</ref> [[Creationism|Creationist]] scientists also assert the [[theory of evolution]] is an inadequate explanation for the variety of life forms on earth. <ref>http://www.icr.org/home/resources/resources_tracts_scientificcaseagainstevolution/</ref> |
| − |
| |
| − | Creationists also state that the [[origin of life]] is not possible though natural processes and the origin of life is the result of God. <ref>http://www.christiananswers.net/q-eden/origin-of-life.html</ref> <ref>http://www.trueorigin.org/abio.asp</ref> <ref>http://www.macrodevelopment.org/library/meyer.html</ref>
| |
| | | | |
| | == Atheist Population as a Percentage of Various Countries Populations== | | == Atheist Population as a Percentage of Various Countries Populations== |