107
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 1:
Line 1: − How about you start being smart and realize you can't blame atheism on all the world's problems. Religious nut jobs cause just as many issues or more.+ + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Undo revision 994818 by Verysaneperson (talk)
In the [[Western world]], the most common assertion used by [[militant atheism|militant and proselytizing atheists]] to support their position and discredit religion, [[Christian|Christianity]] or otherwise, is that [[atheism]] is ''factual'' or a ''knowledge system'', supported by evidence, whilst [[religion]]s are ''beliefs.’’ In asserting this, atheists attempt to tie atheism to verifiable [[science]]. In fact, rather than knowledge, '''''atheism is a belief,''''' a fact which has been acknowledged for centuries.
== Atheism and Belief - Belief and Knowledge ==
In order to fully comprehend the issues surrounding atheism and belief, a fundamental understanding of the terms "belief" and "knowledge" is necessary to understanding atheists’ claims, and how they fail.
Within [[epistemology]], [[knowledge]] is understood to be [[propositions]] that are backed up by [[data]].<ref>Fred I. Dretske, Perception, Knowledge, and Belief, 18.</ref>
'''For example:''' the proposition of [[gravity|universal gravitation]], that all bodies accelerate towards each other, is backed up by endless amounts of data and experience.
What’s more, the proposition makes predictions that are testable: if an apple is held above the ground and released, it will fall. Thus, the knowledge is understood to be [[scientific]].
[[belief|Beliefs]] within the realm of Christian faith are understood to propositions which are supported sufficiently but not exhaustively. [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologist]] Dr. [[William Lane Craig]] contends the for the reasonableness of the Christian faith in his classic work ''Reasonable Faith''. <ref>http://www.bethinking.org/resurrection-miracles/intermediate/the-evidence-for-christianity-reasonable-faith-lecture-all-souls-church-london-.htm</ref> [[Christian apologetics|Christian apologists]] assert there are multiple lines of evidence pointing the validity of the Christian faith. For example, the [[Apostle]]s of Christ appealed to being eyewitnesses of his resurrection.<ref>http://www.tektonics.org/guest/truthfulness.htm</ref> Also, Christian apologists contend that Christian faith not contradicted by evidence.<ref>http://books.google.com/books?id=bTwhLq9Xzm8C&pg=PA72&lpg=PA72&dq=christian+faith+and+law+of+non+contradiction&source=web&ots=9VefHmucvQ&sig=KbuFlFmRO2IqNH363pI5BYxNqH8&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=4&ct=result</ref>
The above criteria can apply to any number of social, political, or even economic beliefs, but is very important in Christian religion. There is no ''absolute'' method of proving or disproving the existence of the Christian God, and Christianity relies on faith itself for salvation.<ref>Acts 16:30-31</ref> (Note, however, the existence of powerful evidence of biblical truth, unearthed by [[biblical archaeology]] plus Christian legal scholars have effectively argued that [[Christian legal apologetics|Western legal standards point to the resurrection of Christ when one examines the historical evidence]]. )
== Atheism and lack of knowledge ==
Less militant agnostic and atheist philosophers have acknowledged for centuries the impossibility of disproving God’s existence. Ex-atheist Alister McGrath, in Beyond Opinion, states that "all atheist philosophers concede that the nonexistence of God cannot be proved."<ref>Alister McGrath, "Challenges from Atheism," in Beyond Opinion: Living the Faith we Defend, 97.</ref>
Even [[T. H. Huxley]], one of [[Darwin]]’s chief supporters, acknowledged this. Huxley invented the term [[agnosticism]], literally meaning "without knowledge." While Huxley was utterly without Christian faith, the term agnosticism was indicative of the impossibility of proving or disproving God, as he noted “In matters of the intellect, do not pretend that conclusions are certain which are not demonstrated or demonstrable. That I take to be the agnostic faith…"<ref>Bernard Lightman, ''The Origins of Agnosticism: Victorian Unbelief and the Limits of Knowledge,'' 47.</ref> Thus any view of the universe, be it theism, atheism, or fence-sitting agnosticism entailed a sort of belief.
Contemporary atheist philosopher Kai Nielsen noted "All the proofs of God's existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists." <ref>Alister McGrath, “Challenges from Atheism,” in Beyond Opinion: Living the Faith we Defend, 97.</ref>
== Unscientific nature of atheism ==
[[Image:Newton.png|right|thumb|Newton could not explain gravity without an appeal to God]]
Atheists claim that scientific knowledge has replaced the need for appeals to God to explain the universe. This is easily demonstrated to be false, as countless legendary scientists found it necessary to invoke God to explain [[First cause|First Causes]] in the universe. [[Isaac Newton]] could explain what gravity ''did'' but not what ''caused it,'' and believed God kept the universe in motion.<ref>Ayval Leshem, ''Newton on Mathematics and Spiritual Purity,'' 2.</ref> While [[Albert Einstein]]'s theistic views were complex, he too could not explain the universe without God, and famously derided chaos in the universe by stating "God does not play dice."<ref>Hans Urs von Balthasar, ''Science, Religion and Christianity,'' 215.</ref> Even in the 21st century, no scientific theory attempts to replace appeals to God in explaining the universe's existence.
Indeed, atheists have merely usurped the mantle of "science" to disguise unevidenced assertions. They claim that [[evolution]] has been proven as scientific valid, that evolution necessarily proves [[abiogenesis]], and that abiogenesis precludes God and [[intelligent design|design]].<ref>For example, Dawkins, ''The God Delusion,'' 134.</ref> The first claim is refuted by numerous theistic scientists, the second is a belief, and the third is a philosophical absurdity. Atheists ''believe'' the universe can be explained without recourse to God, but have no actual evidence to back up their assertions.
== Belief and atheistic arguments ==
More militant atheists have denied that their belief system is just that, belief, and instead have attempted to paint atheism as logical and evidence based. However, their arguments invariably on [[axioms]] and [[assumptions]] which they cannot prove.
Belief in some of the simplest and most common atheist arguments follow:
=== Argument from ignorance ===
# We have no absolute evidence of God’s existence.
# [[Occam’s razor]] tells us that a Godless universe, being simpler than a universe with God, must be true.
# Therefore, God does not exist.
'''Problems:''' This argument relies on an [[Argument_from_ignorance#Argument_from_silence|appeal to ignorance]] (also known as an appeal from silence), a logical fallacy which states that since we do not have evidence of something, it must be false. It also misuses Occam’s Razor, which states that the argument with fewest ‘’assumptions’’ is most likely to be true. In truth, a designed universe only assumes a creator, while an atheistic universe assumes countless perfect items of blind natural forces improbabilistically occurring. (see: [[Origin of life]] and [[universal constants]] ).
=== Problem of evil ===
Responding to perhaps the oldest theological question, atheists claim that the existence of evil proves that if God existed, he would not allow suffering. As suffering exists, God must not. <ref>Barbara Omolade, “Faith Confronts Evil,” in Christian Faith and the Problem of Evil, 278-9.</ref>
'''Problems:''' This argument relies on an atheist ''belief'' that God cannot allow suffering, though Christian theologians and apologists have addressed the question for centuries. [[C. S. Lewis]] pointed out that suffering is a necessary result of human [[free will]], which God granted out of love, that humans might reach their full potential for virtue.<ref>C. S. Lewis, The Problem of Pain, 574.</ref>
See [[Atheism and the Problem of Evil]] for a larger discussion.
=== Paradox of omnipotence ===
Atheists bring up the [[paradox of omnipotence]], which asks if God can create a stone so large he cannot lift in, in attempt to portray the notion of God as contradictory and thus absurd.
'''Problems:''' This argument relies on atheists’ ''belief'' that if God exists, his power is comprehensible to human reason, and is limited by our laws of logic and ideas of paradoxes.
== See also ==
*[[Resources for leaving atheism and becoming a Christian]]
* [[Atheism and beliefs]] for a list of commonly held beliefs of [[Western World]] atheists
* [[Atheism and the suppression of science]]
* [[History of Atheism]]
* [[Atheism videos]]
* [[Creation vs. Evolution Videos]]
* [[Epistemology]]
* [[Atheism and the Problem of Evil]]
* [[Agnosticism]]
{{Nb_Atheism}}
== Reference ==
<references />
[[category: atheism]]
[[category: philosophy]]
[[category: religion]]