The Alleged Troubles With Atheism

[Unknown Soldier]

According to some religious apologists I'm acquainted with, atheism is a problematical way of looking at reality and living one's life. Here is a list of some of the criticisms of atheism and atheists I've heard:

1. Atheism offers no hope.
2. Atheism cannot explain existence.
3. The amazing complexity of living things cannot be explained by atheism.
4. Atheists are responsible for close to 100 million deaths during the twentieth century alone.
5. Hitler was an atheist, and his atheism led him to commit his "final solution" resulting in the deaths of six million Jews.
6. If one is an atheist, then there is no objective basis for that person's morality.
7. Atheism is illogical because it is impossible to know that God doesn't exist.
8. Atheism is a ruse because there are no true atheists: Supposed atheists do believe in God but don't recognize God's authority because they would rather sin.
9. Atheists have created ideas like evolution and the multiverse to avoid the fact that God created the cosmos and life.
10. Atheism is a mental illness brought on by childhood trauma regarding one's father which leads a person to reject her Heavenly Father.

Questions? Comments?

 

[atrib]

The appropriate response to such nonsense would be that "atheism is not a worldview or a guide to living one's life, it is merely a lack of belief in the gods that some people assert exist. My daily life is no more influenced by my lack of belief in gods than your life is by your lack of belief in the tooth fairy". However, the people making the claims you have listed are unlikely to understand what you are saying; they are likely saying these things to express their discomfort at the thought that their deeply cherished beliefs may be baseless, and they are usually not open to discussion and honest introspection in my experience.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

The appropriate response to such nonsense would be that "atheism is not a worldview or a guide to living one's life, it is merely a lack of belief in the gods that some people assert exist.

That's my basic understanding of atheism although I recognize that there are other definitions for atheism.

My daily life is no more influenced by my lack of belief in gods than your life is by your lack of belief in the tooth fairy".

I think that yes, people who have no beliefs in God(s) live lives much like the lives of theists. Theism is largely irrelevant to everyday living. In fact, I know an atheist who didn't know what an atheist is until I told him! For him, religious issues had no relevance to his life.

However, the people making the claims you have listed are unlikely to understand what you are saying; they are likely saying these things to express their discomfort at the thought that their deeply cherished beliefs may be baseless, and they are usually not open to discussion and honest introspection in my experience.

Actually, I think there is at least some truth to most of the items on my list. However, those criticisms are misplaced. For example, criticizing atheism for offering no hope is like criticizing the milkman for failing to deliver the mail. As I see it, atheism was never meant to offer anything except freedom from theism, so I don't expect atheism to offer hope any more than I expect the milkman to deliver my mail.

 

[steve_bank]

My usual response is that atheist is a rejection of the belief in god. The tern does not profess or affirm any beilef, morality, or behavior.

1. Atheism is not a belief or a way of life.
2. Atheism is not a cosmology.
3. Atheism is not a scientific or phi;philosophical enquirurey into the nature of reality.
4. Where does 100 million come from? The 20th century conflicts were about race, ethnicity, and nationalism.
5. Initially Hitler was anti religion but realized he could make use of it politically. German Christianity jumped on the Nazi bandwagon. In Mein Kemph he said 'Jews killed Christ' to gain Christian support.
6. I agree, but then historically neither is religion. One interprets scripture saying 'I know what god wants'.
7. See the agnostic thread. If I am ahteist by definition I do nor think god exists in the first place. There is nothing to know.
8. An old theist rationalization.
9. If this were a court romm drama ' I object, facts not n evidence!'. As atheist creationism has no truth.
10. The relationship between male Christians and god can only be called homosexual. RCC Jesuit priests marry Jesus.

 

[couch_sloth]

I haven’t heard #10 in a while….
If I remember correctly this comes from a Christian psychology professor in New York. The idea is that atheism comes from having a father who is too strict (too much of a disciplinarian) or from having a father who is too soft (not enough of a disciplinarian).
It’s too easy to put fathers into one or the other category, so it’s basically BS.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

My usual response is that atheist is a rejection of the belief in god. The tern does not profess or affirm any beilef, morality, or behavior.

1. Atheism is not a belief or a way of life.
2. Atheism is not a cosmology.
3. Atheism is not a scientific or phi;philosophical enquirurey into the nature of reality.

Is this the only view of atheism, or are there other understandings of atheism that might allow it to be a way of life, a cosmology, or a scientific or philosophical inquiry into the nature of reality?

4. Where does 100 million come from? The 20th century conflicts were about race, ethnicity, and nationalism.

I'm not sure where the 100 million people killed figure comes from, but it's probably based in part on Stalin's acts. He is responsible for millions of deaths.

5. Initially Hitler was anti religion but realized he could make use of it politically. German Christianity jumped on the Nazi bandwagon. In Mein Kemph he said 'Jews killed Christ' to gain Christian support.

Why do you say Hitler was initially opposed to religion? It appears to me that Hitler opposed anything or anybody whom he thought opposed him. So he may have had no problem with any religion that didn't oppose him.

6. I agree, but then historically neither is religion. One interprets scripture saying 'I know what god wants'.

Personally, I don't want objective morality. I prefer to think and choose what seems right to me.

7. See the agnostic thread. If I am ahteist by definition I do nor think god exists in the first place. There is nothing to know.

I suppose it's possible to know that God doesn't exist. After all, it's possible to know that married bachelors don't exist.

8. An old theist rationalization.

I have known atheists to fake Christian beliefs, but I've never known a Christian to fake atheism aside from some people I've seen on discussion boards.

9. If this were a court romm drama ' I object, facts not n evidence!'. As atheist creationism has no truth.

As far as I'm concerned God can be stuffed into evolution and the multiverse. Almost anything can have God involved.

10. The relationship between male Christians and god can only be called homosexual. RCC Jesuit priests marry Jesus.

When I was a Christian I felt funny believing that some day I would marry Jesus. I stressed to myself that it was merely a metaphorical marriage. Anyway, I got along fine with my "real" father, or at least I did the last twenty years of his life.

 

[steve_bank]

I read Mein Kemph and Nazism was covered in a political science class along with documentaries I saw.

When Hitler came along Christinity in Germany was in decline. Christian leaders, not all to be sure, jumped on the Nazi political platformway to get back to relevance. No differnt than Trump.Conservative Christians back him believing he represents their transitional values.

In the day Hitler was pushing deep German cultural buttons. 'Blod and eartyh. A return to traditional ways. He was very popular.

You can watch the Nazi propaganda film Triumph Of The Will on line. It was not released to the public until the 70s. It is considered the greatest propaganda documentary ever.

In it you can see religious symbology.

There eare Nazis politucal posters from the day using religious symbols like a cross. Like Hitler Trump plays to the Christians.

Hitler was a brilliant politician.

To me atheist is black and white, either or. Then comes things like agnostic atheist and so on. Hard atheist vs weak atheist.

When somebody on FOX uses the word atheist it is a boogeyman, a pejorative.

Staring in the 90s there was manstrem Chrtian shift to saying evolution may be part of god's plan. Including the RCC.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My preferred retort is that Atheists are usually only 1 god more Atheist than Monotheists, who have chosen to believe all the other gods are false. Every single one that was worshipped, except the one they follow, false gods. Probably more accurate to called Theists "Almost Atheists".

 

[skepticalbip]

My preferred retort is that Atheists are usually only 1 god more Atheist than Monotheists, who have chosen to believe all the other gods are false. Every single one that was worshipped, except the one they follow, false gods. Probably more accurate to called Theists "Almost Atheists".

So the difference between a devout Christian and an atheist is that a Christian doesn't believe that an untold number of proclaimed gods exist and an atheist doesn't believe that an untold number of proclaimed gods plus one doesn't exist.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

I haven’t heard #10 in a while….
If I remember correctly this comes from a Christian psychology professor in New York. The idea is that atheism comes from having a father who is too strict (too much of a disciplinarian) or from having a father who is too soft (not enough of a disciplinarian).
It’s too easy to put fathers into one or the other category, so it’s basically BS.

That professor's name is Paul Vitz. In his Faith of the Fatherless he argues that atheism results from a person's resentment against their (biological) father. Since that father let them down, they have no trust in any Heavenly Father either. Vitz's hypothesis obviously is a reaction to Freud's idea that a person's unfulfilled desire for a powerful, loving earthly father causes them to desire a Heavenly Father to play the role that their real father never lived up to.

Both ideas suffer from cultural bias. The concept of a Heavenly Father is peculiar to Christianity. Most other religions have no such concept. So even if Freud or Vitz are right (or both), their ideas do not explain most other brands of religiosity.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

My preferred retort is that Atheists are usually only 1 god more Atheist than Monotheists, who have chosen to believe all the other gods are false. Every single one that was worshipped, except the one they follow, false gods. Probably more accurate to called Theists "Almost Atheists".

I agree with what you're saying, but over the years I've found it's best not to retort when dialoguing with the religious. An emotional reaction to religious claims on the part of the skeptic can result in the religious person's seeing it as an unreasonable denial. I suggest that instead you carefully and calmly listen to what the religious person has to say and concede any truths or possible truths in their claims. Very often those bits of truth in religious rhetoric can defeat their arguments. Take 6 for example. Concede that atheists do not have an objective basis for morality. Then ask what objective morals the religious person has. They probably won't be able to think of any! If they come up with some presumably objective moral tenet, then ask them what makes that tenet objective. Again, they probably won't know. So the truth that atheists have no objective morality results in a truth that the religious have no such morality either.

Try it!

 

[Unknown Soldier]

My preferred retort is that Atheists are usually only 1 god more Atheist than Monotheists, who have chosen to believe all the other gods are false. Every single one that was worshipped, except the one they follow, false gods. Probably more accurate to called Theists "Almost Atheists".

So the difference between a devout Christian and an atheist is that a Christian doesn't believe that an untold number of proclaimed gods exist and an atheist doesn't believe that an untold number of proclaimed gods plus one doesn't exist.

Here's an outline of the way to approach common unbelief in some God(s). Say there are two Gods some people believe in: God A and God B. An atheist is listening to an evangelist making a case for God A, and the atheist is aware of that evangelist's unbelief in God B. A good approach for the atheist is to argue that he's skeptical about God A for the same reason the evangelist doubts God B. The evangelist then realizes that he's special pleading arbitrarily believing in God A yet doubting God B when the reasons to doubt both Gods are the same!

 

[bilby]

My preferred retort is that Atheists are usually only 1 god more Atheist than Monotheists, who have chosen to believe all the other gods are false. Every single one that was worshipped, except the one they follow, false gods. Probably more accurate to called Theists "Almost Atheists".

So the difference between a devout Christian and an atheist is that a Christian doesn't believe that an untold number of proclaimed gods exist and an atheist doesn't believe that an untold number of proclaimed gods plus one doesn't exist.

Here's an outline of the way to approach common unbelief in some God(s). Say there are two Gods some people believe in: God A and God B. An atheist is listening to an evangelist making a case for God A, and the atheist is aware of that evangelist's unbelief in God B. A good approach for the atheist is to argue that he's skeptical about God A for the same reason the evangelist doubts God B. The evangelist then realizes that he's special pleading arbitrarily believing in God A yet doubting God B when the reasons to doubt both Gods are the same!

They're wise to that.

You will almost certainly be told that God B is God A, but seen incorrectly or without adequate guidance to reach that full understanding.

"There's only one God - my God - and all of the others are Him, too!"

 

[abaddon]

nm

 

[steve_bank]

Out in the real world I do not debate religion. I say as simply and plainly as possible I am atheist and say nothing else.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

My preferred retort is that Atheists are usually only 1 god more Atheist than Monotheists, who have chosen to believe all the other gods are false. Every single one that was worshipped, except the one they follow, false gods. Probably more accurate to called Theists "Almost Atheists".

I agree with what you're saying, but over the years I've found it's best not to retort when dialoguing with the religious. An emotional reaction to religious claims on the part of the skeptic can result in the religious person's seeing it as an unreasonable denial.

My statement isn't emotional, it is analytical. Bilby is right... the response would generally be that their god announced themself to everyone, so it is all the same god. This doesn't remotely address polytheism, but that isn't important. All a theist needs to do is think they have countered the point. And nothing in evangelism is new, except Metacrock's "Arbitrary Necessity", one in a long line of terrible attempts to try and use grammar to prove their god exists. So all the debunking is known before hand, their answers pre-scripted. You could put it into a computer program these days and let that play out and save yourself the time.

Very often those bits of truth in religious rhetoric can defeat their arguments. Take 6 for example. Concede that atheists do not have an objective basis for morality. Then ask what objective morals the religious person has. They probably won't be able to think of any!

Most religious people can BS something on the spot. And if they can't they evade or do the Evangelical Ball routine... "I know in my heart there is a god... *rage quit*" I remember one person evangelizing to me, while at work, logging a boring outdoors. I told him that I couldn't follow a god that found favor in Jacob over Esau after all the bad Jacob did to his own brother. The guy literally had to pull out a page or two of notes to try and counter. The funny thing was I don't think he knew what I was talking about.

If they come up with some presumably objective moral tenet, then ask them what makes that tenet objective. Again, they probably won't know. So the truth that atheists have no objective morality results in a truth that the religious have no such morality either.

Try it!

I'm so well beyond trying to convince theists they are wrong. All I care about is proving they are wrong if they try to insert their faith into the private lives of others.

 

[Unknown Soldier]

Here's an outline of the way to approach common unbelief in some God(s). Say there are two Gods some people believe in: God A and God B. An atheist is listening to an evangelist making a case for God A, and the atheist is aware of that evangelist's unbelief in God B. A good approach for the atheist is to argue that he's skeptical about God A for the same reason the evangelist doubts God B. The evangelist then realizes that he's special pleading arbitrarily believing in God A yet doubting God B when the reasons to doubt both Gods are the same!

They're wise to that.

Religious apologists do seem adept at avoiding sticky situations.

You will almost certainly be told that God B is God A, but seen incorrectly or without adequate guidance to reach that full understanding.

I'm not too familiar with that apologetic, but it's not difficult to see how some evangelists might use it. I do remember one Christian apologist telling me that it's possible that pagan gods exist.

"There's only one God - my God - and all of the others are Him, too!"

Come to think of it, I have heard Christians say that all religious people including pagans have an inkling of God's existence. Those members of other religions are just getting some of the details wrong, and of course the particular sect the Christian belongs to is perceptive enough to get the details right.

Anyway, I still think my approach to countering apologetics can be effective. There are Gods that almost all theists don't believe in, and it's not difficult to explain that the reasons to believe in those Gods are the same as the religious person's God.

 

[abaddon]

We had a theist member who several times posted a drawing of the blind men and the elephant. One or another variation of this:



Often when an atheist would wonder why he thought the other religions were wrong and his was right, he'd trot out this parable.

The point was God's a mystery and humans, due to their limited abilities, never get the full knowledge (at least not while in this world). Apparently for him, believing something about that elephant (God) is better than "believing in nothing".

The notion that a monotheist can extend their skepticism of other gods to one more god assumes they're using a methodological skepticism at all. They're not. Their goal is to believe "in something" rather than "in nothing". This fellow thought the lack of a god-belief would leave him with nothing but materialistic hedonism. IOW the lack of belief is a lack of the possibility for transcendence. So, getting all the facts exactly right and the logic perfectly correct isn't the concern. Accessing "something more" than the total mundanity of the "just chemicals" material world is.

 

[Eldarion Lathria]

Where is 'If you're a non believer you will feel all empty inside.' 'You need Jesus to make you feel full.'? And those other gods are just Satan pretending. You need the god of my church.

Eldarion Lathria

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Where is 'If you're a non believer you will feel all empty inside.' 'You need Jesus to make you feel full.'? And those other gods are just Satan pretending. You need the god of my church.

Eldarion Lathria

~I feel sorry for you. You can't possibly know peace.

Got that one before.