What is

Publish in

Documents

5 views

Please download to get full document.

View again

of 41
All materials on our website are shared by users. If you have any questions about copyright issues, please report us to resolve them. We are always happy to assist you.
Share
Description
Atheism?. What is. Examining the Truth Claims of Atheism. A Brief Definition of Atheism. Atheism is a faith / worldview that denies the existence of any supernatural deity. “A” (no) “theism” (god). From the Oxford English Dictionary.
Transcript
Atheism?What isExamining the Truth Claims of AtheismA Brief Definition of AtheismAtheism is a faith / worldview that denies the existence of any supernatural deity. “A” (no) “theism” (god)From the Oxford English Dictionary“To believe nothing of a designing Principle or Mind, nor any Cause, Measure, or Rule of things, but Chance . . . is to be a perfect atheist.” Objection!“Atheism is not a ‘faith’ but is a fact based on evidence…!”Really? Let’s see…The Impossibility of Atheism’s Truth Claim“An affirmative existential proposition can be proved, but a negative existential proposition – one that denies the existence of some thing – cannot be proved.” - Dr. Mortimer AdlerThe First / Foremost Problem of AtheismWhen a negative existential truth claim is put forward, the one making the claim has shot themselves not in the foot, but in the head. Unless the person can be in all places of the entire universe at the same time, they have no way of confirming that whatever they claim does not exist, in fact, does not exist. This is conundrum the atheist finds him/herself in. Atheism Takes One Step BackRecognizing their predicament, atheists such as Richard Dawkins counter such an argument by saying that, while they cannot prove a flying spaghetti monster does not exist, it is highly improbable such a thing actually exists, so the wiser intellectual position to hold is one that says such a thing does not exist. Two Problems with “FSM” ArgumentFirst, comparing God with a flying spaghetti monster commits the logical error of faulty analogy.Second, just because something is improbable does not rule out its existence. For example, all scientists admit that humanity’s very existence is inordinately improbable. Scientific scholars acknowledge that it is against all mathematical odds that all of the universe’s cosmic constants and biological mechanisms necessary for life would come to be. And yet, humanity does exist. The Real Question…The question is not whether the existence of God is improbable, but rather is there logical, reasonable evidence that moves one toward a conclusion that God exists. Atheism Takes Another Step BackAtheists answer that question negatively, so the next move they make is to take another step back and say that God “probably” does not exist. Problem Number OneProbably safe to flyAll Aboard…?This is not the way human beings live most every other area of their life they consider important. Problem Number TwoThe seriousness of a truth claim dictates the amount of evidence necessary to support it. The atheist truth claim carries with it enormous, irreparable and eternal consequences if it is wrong. That being the case, it is intellectually and morally incumbent upon the atheist to produce weighty and overriding evidence to support his/her position, but they provide nothing to substantiate their limp assertion that God “probably” does not exist. Problem Number TwoAtheism simply cannot meet the test for evidence for the seriousness of the truth claim it makes. Instead, using a supposed argument from silence, the atheist and those whom he/she convinces of their position slide into death with their fingers crossed hoping they do not face the unpleasant reality that eternity is an awfully long time to be wrong.  Atheism’s ‘Evidence’? Science!Some atheists recognize the gravity of their situation, and therefore when pressed for evidence, they take a stand that can be boiled down to “Science has disproven God”.Really? Let’s see…Why Science?After the events of 9/11, a branch of atheism – militant atheism (sometimes referred to as hatetheism) – aggressively rose up and demanded that society must get rid of all religion. Rather than focusing on religious extremists who use religion to justify violent and murderous actions, the militant atheists lumped all peoples of faith into the same basic bucket and labeled religion as a whole dangerous.Why Science?But the question facing the militant atheists was, “How will we get rid of religion?” The apparent agreement was to use science as its bedrock and tool to replace the need for religion. This tactic is nothing new and was the same position put forward by Thomas Huxley in the 1800’s when he sought to install scientists as the new priests for humankind. This “faith” in science is not science at all, but scientism, which says that science and science alone is the singular way to discover truth. Science vs. ScientismWhile science has indeed delivered many great gifts to humankind, the hopes atheism has that scientism will replace religion are ill founded. Why? Let see…Scientism is self-refutingThe statement “We should only believe what can be scientifically proven” itself cannot be scientifically proven (because it is a philosophical statement), and so based on its own criteria, it should be rejected.Scientism Ignores Valid EpistemologyScientism ignores other much-respected and used methods for obtaining knowledge. For example, the legal/forensic/historical method of discovering truth is used every day and is very well respected. The legal method does not ignore testimony or facts because they are not empirically reproducible or testable. By a process of elimination and corroboration, the legal method allows history and testimony to speak for itself until a verdict is reached beyond a reasonable doubt and the balance of probability is achieved.Scientism is a moral disasterMilitant atheism asserts that if religion can be banished, then humankind will have peace and harmony. But even a cursory look backwards at history since the Enlightenment says otherwise. Instead of resulting in peace, the Enlightenment ushered in one secular bloody revolution after another climaxing in the twentieth century, which produced the largest mass grave in history.Scientism is a moral disasterIronically, one of atheism’s chief heralds – Nietzsche – predicted (correctly) that, because he and others had supposedly killed God in the nineteenth century, the twentieth century would be the bloodiest ever. Real Science Points Toward a CreatorThe death of the steady state theory and the near universal acceptance that the universe as we know it exploded out of nothing into existence (cf. Genesis 1:1) points to a transcendent cause.Real Science Points Toward a CreatorThe incredible fine tuning of the universe for human life to exist on earth points to a cosmic Mind and Designer.Real Science Points Toward a CreatorThe confirmation of specified complexity like DNA that in a single strand contains digital information equivalent to 600,000 pages of intelligence and is mathematically identical to a language points to an intelligent source.The Irony of Science and God“It is rather ironical that in the sixteenth century some people resisted advance in science because it seemed to threaten belief in God; whereas in the twentieth century scientific models of a beginning were resisted because they might increase the plausibility of belief in God.” - Dr. John LennoxAtheism’s False DilemmaAtheism’s position on science commits the logical fallacy of the false dilemma. Atheism demands that a person choose between science and God, where in fact, no such division need occur. Such a requirement can be likened to a person being forced to choose between:1. The laws of internal combustion 2. Henry Ford, as to why a car exists. The fact is the two choices are not contradictory, but complementary.Atheism’s False DilemmaThe atheist misses the important difference between agency (Henry Ford) and mechanism (internal combustion). In the same way, God is the intelligent agency and efficient cause behind everything, with his natural laws and mechanisms carrying out His intentions to produce His desired end result. The Conclusion of Atheism & ScienceIn the end, the atheist cannot rely on science to disprove the existence of a transcendent Creator and is forced into the admission that atheism itself is not a fact, but instead a belief system that relies on faith. The real clash is not between science and religion but between the atheistic/naturalistic and the theistic worldviews. Atheism and FaithThis being the case, the atheistic worldview must address two fatal mistakes it makes regarding the concept of faith: (1) that faith is only a religious concept; (2) that faith means believing in something where there is no evidence. Neither is true…Atheism and Faith“I am an atheist. My attitude is not based on science, but rather on faith. . . . The absence of a Creator, the non-existence of God is my childhood faith, my adult belief, unshakable and holy.” - George KleinFaith in Everyday LifeAs to faith being defined as a belief that lacks evidence, nothing could be further from the truth. Science has faith in logic, mathematics, natural laws, and the intelligibility of the universe and believes all such things are firm and will never change. People also act on faith every day from meals they eat in restaurants, medicine they take from doctors, and marriages they participate in with their spouse. Faith as defined in The BibleIn the Bible’s New Testament, the word “pistis” is used for “faith”. It is a noun that comes from the verb “peitho”, which means “to be persuaded”. The best lexicons (e.g. BDAG) show the meaning of “pistis”, to be: “a state of believing on the basis of the reliability of the one trusted, “trust, confidence”, “that which evokes trust”, “reliability, fidelity pertaining to being worthy of belief or trust”. In other words, the idea that faith means blind belief in the face of opposing evidence is foreign in Scripture. Conclusion – Two Possible RealitiesIn conclusion, then, both atheism and theism make statements on faith that concern ultimate reality. Both must refer back to something that is eternal because each recognizes that everything that exists depends upon and owes its existence ultimately to something other than itself.The Atheist Reality – an Eternal UniverseTo the atheist, that ultimate reality is an eternal universe where only physical matter exists. Atheism’s struggle is to explain how the universe is eternal when all scientific discovery shows it had a beginning. The Atheist Reality CheckAtheism must confront a key issue with their ultimate reality. Science says that an effect always represents it cause in essence. Therefore, atheism must answer how an impersonal, non-conscious, meaningless, purposeless, and amoral universe accidentally created personal, conscious, moral beings who are obsessed with meaning and purpose. The Theist Reality – A Better AnswerThe theist has no such problem because it holds that a personal, conscious, purposeful, intelligent, moral, eternal God created beings in His likeness and established the universe and its laws to govern their existence. The Reality of Atheism“A long, hard, cruel business.” - John Paul SartreThe Reality of God“The heavens are telling of the glory of God; and their expanse is declaring the work of His hands. Day to day pours forth speech, and night to night reveals knowledge. There is no speech, nor are there words; their voice is not heard” (Psalm 19:1–3)In the End – Two Choices“There are not many options – essentially just two. Either human intelligence ultimately owes its origin to mindless matter; or there is a Creator. It is strange that some people claim that it is their intelligence that leads them to prefer the first to the second.” - Dr. John LennoxFor More Informationwww.confidentchristians.orgAtheism?What isExamining the Truth Claims of Atheism
Related Search
We Need Your Support
Thank you for visiting our website and your interest in our free products and services. We are nonprofit website to share and download documents. To the running of this website, we need your help to support us.

Thanks to everyone for your continued support.

No, Thanks