10 Quick Replies to Atheist Arguments (part 1).

 

10

See Part 2.

Argument Contents.

1.The God of the Bible is the most vindictive, hateful, egotistic character in all fiction.

2. Which god? Look at all those other silly gods people have invented! Your Christian god is no different!”

3. The Bible is so backwards! It’s nothing but an invention by backward thinking men.

4a. Look at all those contradictions! The Bible can’t be inspired.

4b. Look at all those myths in the Bible!

5. Really? You believe in talking donkeys, that a sea was really divided, that a man lived inside the belly of a fish, and a virgin birth? Christianity is such nonsense!

6. Reading the Bible made me an atheist.

7. Look at how much evil has been done in the name of Christianity! Christianity is such an evil religion.

8. Science has explained everything! Who needs a god?

9. Evolution makes a god irrelevant.

10. Evolution explains why people believe in a god. Belief in a god is simply a by-product of evolution!

1. The God of the Bible is the most vindictive, hateful, egotistic character in all fiction.

Accusing any god of moral atrocities simply does not warrant the conclusion that a god is a fictional character. That must be argued on other grounds. Hypothetically speaking, If I enjoy hurting and abusing people to accuse me of being vindictive, hateful etc. does nothing to nullify my existence! In this way a god could be a cosmic bully; but that does nothing to argue against its existence. However, in the context of Christianity, there is far more to this question that needs to be considered. Some apologists (notably Paul Copan and William Craig) defend the biblical violence perpetuated by God via certain considerations and arguments. In order to be charitable, and intellectually honest, a skeptic would need to consider these arguments. Moreover, other apologists have forwarded their views that not all of the moral atrocities recorded in the Bible were actually commanded by God. For example, Peter Enns, Thom Stark, and Randal Rauser have argued that the conquest of the Canaanites was not actually commanded by God, but that the Israelites used their god, Yahweh, as divine justification for their actions.

2. Which god? Look at all those other silly gods people have invented! Your Christian god is no different!”

This does not warrant one to conclude that the Christian conception of a god is false. Granted the imaginary existence of Apollo once worshiped by the Romans and Greeks it does nothing to disprove the Islamic, Judaic, or Christian conception of God. Such a conclusion needs to be argued on other grounds.

Secondly, the atheist’s claim that my “Christian god is no different!” to, say, Zeus or Horus would need to be backed up & supported. It is no good merely making claims about things.

Thirdly, the atheist believes in the non-existence of God. Considering that I wonder if this atheist has researched all the other allegedly human invented gods in history, and then come to the informed conclusion that God does not exist. He probably hasn’t, and therefore he would be  holding to a double standard. He exempts his own worldview from having to answer the challenge that he forwards to Christians.

For more of my writing on this challenge see here.

3. The Bible is so backwards! It’s nothing but an invention by backward thinking men.

Accusing any religious book of being backwards does nothing to prove that it is false. Instead, this would prove that a reader simply disagrees with what the book presents.

Perhaps one day a presently unknown 15 000 year old holy book will be discovered in some cave in Samoa. This book belonged to cavemen and was allegedly inspired by the god Shuki. This god allegedly instructs humans to live in caves and eat cattle. This would seem “backwards” to us looking through a 21st century lens. However, it may be that this holy book was really inspired by the one and only true God, Shuki. If Shuki expects us to live in caves, then it would be wise to live in caves. And that Shuki wants us to live in caves (which we’d think is backwards) does nothing to disprove Shuki and his divinely inspired holy book. The same would go for the Book of Mormon, the Koran, and the Bible.

4a. Look at all those contradictions! The Bible can’t be inspired.

If one can successfully demonstrate a contradiction in the biblical texts it is at most an argument against biblical inerrancy, not against Christianity that is grounded upon the resurrection of Jesus. The Bible could be full of contradictions yet still be true, therefore the argument does not follow. Nick Peters explains: “We could even for the sake of argument grant contradictions in the Bible and still demonstrate that Jesus rose from the dead. After all, we do believe in a great miracle, [and] God [has] left great evidence. Indeed He did, even if it was through fallible men who made mistakes” (1).

Further, this would also depend on what a Christian means when he says that the Bible is “inspired” by God. Some Christians believe every single word is inspired by God, while others believe the Bible is a product of both God and man. Even inerrancy itself is split into several views that all view the inspiration of the Bible differently. These views ought to be considered by those claiming that contradictions disprove Christianity or the Bible’s inspiration. I try to put this challenge into some more perspective here.

4b. Look at all those myths in the Bible!

This is another argument against biblical inerrancy and not against the truth of Christianity.

Granted the existence of myth within the Bible, some Christian biblical scholars believe that “myth” does not necessitate falsity. That myth is taken to mean that something is false or unhistorical is a modern idea and not one shared by our ancient authors. What needs to be considered here is how an ancient biblical author intended for his writing to be read by his audience. For example, Christian Old Testament scholar Peter Enns explains that myth is a genre that God worked through to reveal himself to his people. If that is possible then this challenge doesn’t falsify the Bible, its inspiration, or Christianity itself.

5. Really? You believe in talking donkeys, that a sea was really divided, that a man lived in the belly of a fish, and a virgin birth? Christianity is such nonsense!

Again if these alleged miraculous, historical events can be demonstrated to be unhistorical it is an argument against biblical inerrancy. In that case Christianity would still be true.

Secondly, the Christian might show that his worldview holds to the existence of an all-powerful God. Not only that but this God he believes in created the entire physical universe from nothing. If this is so, then not a single miracle in the Bible is impossible for him. It’s clearly seen that God’s power is demonstrated throughout the Bible via dramatic miracles; this is part and parcel of Christianity, namely that Christianity’s God can perform miracles through intervening in his creation.

Thirdly, this is testimony to the atheist’s a priori rejection of the supernatural. The atheist places his faith in the hope that no supernatural reality exists for he cannot prove that. Thus, if one a priori rejects the supernatural then of course these dramatic miracles in the Bible would seem absurd. But a Christian needn’t let the atheist’s worldview dictates what is possible on her theistic worldview.

Fourthly, I believe that there is good evidence supporting the existence of the supernatural. If one is open to the supernatural then she may also be open to God’s dramatic miracles as recorded within the Bible.

And finally there is far more analysis that needs to be done. For example, many scholars argue that the book of Jonah was not intended to be a factual historical account like one might find in a historical biography. This is because the author intended on creating a polemical tale, also known as a “fictional story.” The fictional story is one that is imbued with significant lessons about God, human nature and so on. One scholar explains that “the fictional short story was an established genre among Jewish sacred writings… to say that it is fictional is not to discredit it or deny its status as inspired scripture. It is simply a matter of recognizing its proper genre, and treating it as such.” If so, then it would be pointless debating about the actual miracle of Jonah being in the belly of a fish. This is because the author didn’t intend for it to be read as literal history.

6. Reading the Bible made me an atheist.

Many believers will note that this is a common claim made by atheists. It is also a claim that one could show doesn’t prove anything. Rejecting the Bible as God’s inspired word needs to be demonstrated on other grounds.

Other than being a non-sequitur, one could also show that it isn’t an argument that the atheist shouldn’t champion about. Why? Simply because many Christians have read the Bible from cover to cover multiple times, and they still remain Christians. Should one use that to argue for the Bible’s inspiration? Probably not. Also see here.

7. Look at how much evil has been done in the name of Christianity! Christianity is such an evil religion.

This is non-sequitur. Many Christians have argued that this argument is weak since what it does is judge a philosophy by its abuse. How a religion, worldview, or philosophy has been interpreted and applied in the lives of followers says nothing about the truth claims of that specific worldview. Again, the truth of a worldview needs to be argued on other grounds.

It would also be a stretch to believe that Christianity is evil. In fact, Christianity has changed the world (both within the 1st century, throughout history, and within our modern era) for the better in many ways that other worldviews, including atheism, haven’t. Would that somehow mean that Christianity has never been abused or hijacked by radicals or extremists with ill intentions? Of course not. However, it is very easy to show that that does nothing to discredit all the good that it has brought to the world through those who are obedient to Jesus’ message.

8. Science has explained everything! Who needs a god?

Science by definition cannot explain (or empirically verify) certain realities such ethical, aesthetic, metaphysical, philosophical and logical truths. These realities exist outside of the realm that science operates within; they are also unverifiable truths that we believe that we are all rational to hold to. For instance, scientist Deborah Haarsma informs us that “Many questions related to morality, ethics, love and so on, are questions that science simply isn’t equipped to answer on its own. Science can provide some important context, but religious, historical, relational, legal, and other ways of knowing are needed” (2).

Secondly, the belief that science can explain everything is what philosophers of science call scientism; namely the view that science is the only way to learn about the world, and that only through science can reality be explained. This is an irrational view very popular among atheists. I critique this view here.

Thirdly, this claim asserts that science and the Christian God is somehow mutually incompatible. But this is false for a Christian conception of God no more competes with a scientific theory than Henry Ford would compete with the laws of internal combustion of the Ford motor engine. Many believing scientists also would not agree that science and God are incompatible; in fact, many would argue that science strengthens their belief in God.

9. Evolution makes a god irrelevant.

Evolution no more makes a god irrelevant than does the theory of general relativity. Why? Simply because scientific theories cannot provide answers on the existence or non-existence of a god.

Secondly there is something known as evolutionism which is a philosophical doctrine atheistic in nature. Evolutionism has been noted to be “a kind of secular religion” where the atheist uses evolutionary theory to speculate about all sorts of philosophical questions such as the existence of God, objective moral values and duties, and purpose. The point is that evolutionism isn’t evolution and nor should atheists masquerade it as such. The Christian may combat evolutionism on its own philosophical turf. But as far as evolutionary theory goes it doesn’t comment on anything supernatural.

10. Evolution explains why people believe in a god. Belief in a god is simply a by-product of evolution!

This commits what philosophers term the Genetic Fallacy.

For example, it is a fallacy to argue that the manner through which a person inherits a belief somehow nullifies that belief. The fact that a girl is brought up in Syria and is thus indoctrinated into becoming a Muslim says nothing about the truthfulness of the Islamic religion. The same applies here for this challenge assumes that God could not create his creatures via an evolutionary process. It’s also true that many devout Christians (especially Christians involved in science related fields) believe that evolution was God’s mechanism for creating sentient biological life. If this is true then we should expect that God would endow mankind with knowledge of his existence somewhere within the process.

In fact, I’d turn this challenge on the atheist’s head. The atheist has to have faith that a non-theistic evolutionary process that cares only for survival somehow produced his rational cognitive faculties. If this is true then why should the atheist, or anyone else, trust his beliefs? Evolution doesn’t care for true belief, so why believe that evolution would produce true belief over false belief? (especially if a false belief may assist in the survival of a species). This line of thinking is known as the Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism, as proposed and defended by philosopher Alvin Plantinga. Essentially, the argument says that given naturalistic evolution the probabilities are overwhelmingly stacked against our cognitive faculties being reliable. If so then how can the atheist use evolution to not only support his atheism but also combat religion?s

Moreover, the Christian can point out that a non-theistic, naturalistic evolutionary worldview has serious ramifications; consider these words from  the atheist biologist William Provine:

“‘Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either” (3).

Of course Provine deals far more in philosophy than he does in science. But the point is that the Christian can affirm that he sees no reason to doubt much of his conclusion should a god not exist, and that what produced us and our cognitive faculties were non-rational, physical forces of nature. Essentially the atheist has to sit with a life that is purposelessness (other than the illusory purpose one creates for himself) and hopeless (life stops at the grave).

References.

1. Peters, N. 2012. Is Evolution a problem? Available.

2. Interview with Dr. Deborah Haarsma in: Religion, Science and Society. 2015.

3. Provine, W. 1994. Origins Research. p.9.

25 responses to “10 Quick Replies to Atheist Arguments (part 1).

  1. Would love to give you my thoughts. Some excellent answers there. Insightful analysis.

    Atheists rely on circular reasoning and emotional pleas. They are no calm and reasonable, although they try to present themselves as such and can appear so at times.

    But the Bible tells us they are blinded to the truth by the “god of this world” due to their unbelief, and they don’t believe because they love sin. They are in darkness and love their darkness.

    And then want to blame God for their misunderstanding and ignorance.

  2. I have 7 answers for atheist (and work on other 7) but I must translate them from Romanian. We need a DISCIPLINE named “Combat of Atheism” in every Theologic Institute, no matter the confession and a brochure to be teach in every Church, very few Christians are able to fight this cancer. I will translate the answers and post them here. We need to stay togehther and open the eyes of every Church on this Earth. Keep in touch. God Bless ypu.

  3. In my opinion, the atheists making these arguments are not making them to disprove god but rather to show the nonsense that is Christianity. Science does not prove or disprove the existence of a god, but I think it has very clearly disproved the existence of the Judaic/Christian god.

    • @ Karen King

      Since what you claim is very clear to you could you provide us with a couple of very clear examples of how science has disproved the existence of the Judeo Christian God?

      Because it is not at all clear to me that it does .. in fact the exact opposite is true in my view ..that many current observations from science regarding the natural world make the Judeo/Christian worldview far more plausibly true than false.

      Merely claiming science has clearly done what you claim is just that … an unsupported claim.

  4. @ Karen King

    Since what you claim is very clear to you could you provide us with a couple of very clear examples of how science has disproved the existence of the Judeo Christian God?

    Because it is not at all clear to me that it does .. in fact the exact opposite is true in my view ..that many current observations from science regarding the natural world make the Judeo/Christian worldview far more plausibly true than false.

    Merely claiming science has clearly done what you claim is just that … an unsupported claim.

    • Yes, I’d gladly do that.

      1. The earth is 4.5 billion years old, not 6,000 years old as the bible shows through genealogies and events. And this is actually proven via radiometric dating.
      2. We see in both Genesis accounts that humans were created by god a few days after he created the earth which would mean humans are also about 6,000 years old. However, the modern form of humans evolved around 200,000 years ago and civilization as know it came about 6,000 years ago. The oldest discovered fossil from our ancestors is approximately 1.3 BILLION years old. In other words, the people that wrote the bible were trying to describe the world as they knew it.
      3. You would think that if those accounts are not to be taken literally but theologically. However, they were borrowed from ancient Mesopotamian myths, which would mean they’re not inspired by Yahweh at all.
      4. There is a huge lack of proof of a worldwide flood the bible suggests. There’s also nothing to be found geologically. Additionally, the size of the ark doesn’t match with all existing species on earth. In fact, if the flood really happened then how are lemurs only limited to Madagascar? Or why aren’t there any wallabies in western Indonesia? There are approximately 10 million KNOWN species of animals on our planet. The ark wasn’t even as big as the titanic, so how did Noah fit all those species? And at this point you could argue that maybe it’s not to be taken literally but theologically, like, how god only was showing he wanted to get rid of wicked people, but did it work? If it’s to be taken literally, then Christians are actually asking for a micro evolutionary process that is bigger than what atheists believe and would have to account for approximately 7 million species evolving from 20,000 species in only a few hundred years. As an aside, Ken Ham, in trying to prove the flood story true, is actually showing that the machinery and expertise needed to create such an ark could not possibly have been back then.
      5. How in the world did the human population rebound so fast after the flood? Genealogies in Genesis put the Tower of Babel about 110 to 150 years after the Flood (Gen 10:25, 11:10-19). How did the world population regrow so fast to make its construction (and the city around it) possible? Similarly, there would have been very few people around to build Stonehenge and the Pyramids, rebuild the Sumerian and Indus Valley civilizations, populate the Americas, etc. If you are to take the story of the flood theologically, does that mean that you have to take all the stories that follow it theologically as well?
      6. Joshua mentions the sun stopping. We now know that the sun doesn’t move, the earth does. And if the earth stopped moving, the atmosphere would still be in motion and all land masses would be scoured clean of anything not attached to bedrock.
      7. Morality is shown in animal behavior and they haven’t been given objective morality by Yahweh, have they?
      8. The bible offers many explanations to many things. For example, it explains the rainbow as a sign of a covenant between god and man but we now know that the rainbow is actually a prismatic effect of raindrops. Another example is childbirth. They needed to know why it was so painful and they came up with a reason. We now know it’s actually because the size of our heads.
      9. Proverbs 6:6-8 supposedly the wisest man alive wrote that ants don’t have a leader. They have a queen.
      10. In Leviticus 11 Yahweh, the supposed creator of all species, tells his people they can only eat flying insects with four legs and gives examples. Every example actually have six legs, not four.
      11. Jesus, supposedly god in flesh tells his people in Matthew 13 that the mustard seed is the smallest of all seeds. But there are smaller seeds than that. He also says in John that a kernel of wheat must die to produce more seeds, we now know if it dies, it dies.
      12. Prayer doesn’t work based on scientific findings. Jesus tells us that if we ask in his name it will be given to us. But many scientific tests show us that prayer has absolutely no effect on anything. They have shown that it doesn’t matter who prays, it doesn’t matter if the prayer is directed to Yahweh, Allah, Vishnu, Zeus, Ra, or any other god, and it doesn’t matter what we pray about. It works just as much as chance.
      13. All of this doesn’t even touch on how other historical and geological records annihilate the factual reliability of the exodus account, the Canaanite slaughter, and much of the birth story for Jesus amongst other things. And arguing that all of the inconsistencies and contradictions of the bible are due to theological purposes, only shows that you come to the bible with presuppositional apologetic and not a true analytical mindset. Ultimately, the bible studied deeply is the greatest tool in dismantling Christianity itself and showing it to be great fiction. Science only proves the possibility of a creator. To make the jump from a possible creator to an obviously fictional god is an illogical jump.

      • YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with Christmas
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with Jesus
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with the 10 commandments
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with the things I post on Facebook
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with God in school
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with God in the workplace
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with creation
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have a problem with faith
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You have to protest holidays
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You’re steering children away from a God you don’t believe in
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You make it your job to mock people about their faith in Christ
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You got a problem with religion
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You got a problem with God in general
        YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
        You believe in EVILution (it’s a religion based on faith)

        You’re making True Atheist look bad.

        I applaud the True Atheist, none of these things bother you!!

        For the so-called true atheist or new atheist, it sounds to me that your hurt is deeply rooted. You can remove God from wherever you want but you can’t really remove God.
        Just because you make it so that He is out of sight then out of your mind doesn’t make Him any less real.

        Society is doing away with anything Christlike.
        They are taking away our rights to worship our God so that you can worship yourselves and be accountable to no one.

        I pray that you would stop being mad at God. Soften your heart.
        Turn away from your sins.
        Call out to God and be forgiven.
        He will put peace in your heart.

        • By your logic it seems to reason that all of the Americans fighting in World War 2 were actually Nazis. I on the other hand think there were brave men and women that saw an evil group of people carrying out great injustice against a mass group of innocent people, and they decided that they would fight against it. Not because they believed in what Hitler was selling, but precisely because they didn’t. Your logic is so fundamentally flawed. As atheists, we’ve seen in just the past five years alone a group of innocent people called names, had their American rights trampled, been fired, been refused service by doctors and restaurants, and so much more because they didn’t line up with your holy book. Was Abe Lincoln a racist because he fought against slavery? Did he believe slavery had reason and purpose? Or did he think that people owning other people were in fact propogating a lie?
          Our desire to do away with a religion which is constantly hurting others does in no way mean we believe in the reason why you are doing what you are doing (i.e. Yahweh). It actually makes a better point that we don’t think it’s real. If it was reality, we wouldn’t fight it.

        • First of all, I apologize if any of my comments came across as offensive or as me mocking your religion. I came across this blog post by searching through the “atheism” hashtag here on WordPress, then posted my opinion, and then 7 days later someone asked me a question and I responded, that’s all. Second, I disagree with most of what you’re saying, I think that if a true atheist would stand up for most of those things he wouldn’t be an atheist, he would be a Christian. Additionally, if you live in the USA then let me tell you something: nobody wants to take your religious right from you. Not me, not my husband, not my friends, and not any atheist/non religious person I know or have come across with. What your religion is doing is actually taking away basic rights from people that don’t actually believe what you believe, now that’s injustice isn’t it? You should really know your politics. Also, I think you should consider the way you approach others, it doesn’t look like you’re trying to convert anybody/evangelize by the way you speak, and definitely not bring anybody back to the faith. And lastly, I’m not going to reply to any of your further comments as I don’t feel like we can have an open minded, friendly discussion.

        • You do realise that we atheists tend to grow up in the same societies as you, right? Therefore we have been exposed to the same cultural influences as you. You get that, as we’re writing in english, that we’ve grown up in the, predominately, christian countries and thus the religion we are most familiar with is christianity, right?
          Can you stretch your imagination to recognise that the reason we tend to focus on christianity is because that is the religion you fanatics have tried to ram down our throats since we were old enough to comprehend language?
          Personally I have no problem with christmas, it’s a great day to get free stuff, eat to much and get drunk.
          You mention creation, if I didn’t have a problem with that I would be a complete raving imbecile. Do you believe in creation?

  5. It’s too bad that you don’t address the real reason that atheists give for not believing in a god…that we have been given no valid evidence that a god exists.

  6. Your problem is that you are not willing to examine the actual positions held by atheists, because you realise that to do this, will cause doubt to rise in your own faith. You have been warned many times not to question your faith, but just believe and everything will be good. But the fact that you have this blog shows that you are a seeker, and you do have doubts about the existence of the god you have been told to believe in.

    But lets work with a few of your points. Science or better yet Evolution, suggests strongly that your god is not needed, across the whole 6000 years of the narrative. We know from evolution that there could not have been just two starter humans, which means the garden is a fiction, and that leads to there being no original sin, making the resurrection unnecessary. Now you try and twist the story of the Garden into evolution, then you making your errant book invalid and causing it to say what it did not actually say.

    Further with regards to science, there has never yet been a question that science has provided an answer to, no matter how poor that answer, which religion has come along later and provided an equal or better answer. Not once in all of human religious history, across all religions ever known.

    The problem you, like all theists, run away from is the burden of proof. You make the claim that Krishna, Allah, the Great Ju-Ju upon the Mountain, exist, but you can never show the god, or anything that can be directly connected to the works of these gods. Everything we can point to in the universes, functions as if there is no god involved in it’s creation or the maintenance of it’s continued existence. Not one single thing, and if you disagree with this, please point of that one thing that only a god could do, and explain exactly what you are talking about.

    Of course, if you do reply to this rant, you will evade and misrepresent everything that I said, because that is the only way you can keep your failing belief alive.
    Come to the dark side, we have cookies and no guilt.

  7. YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with Christmas
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with Jesus
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with the 10 commandments
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with the things I post on Facebook
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with God in school
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with God in the workplace
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with creation
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have a problem with faith
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You have to protest holidays
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You’re steering children away from a God you don’t believe in
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You make it your job to mock people about their faith in Christ
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You got a problem with religion
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You got a problem with God in general
    YOU’RE NOT A TRUE ATHEIST IF
    You believe in EVILution (it’s a religion based on faith)

    You’re making True Atheist look bad.

    I applaud the True Atheist, none of these things bother you!!

    For the so-called true atheist or new atheist, it sounds to me that your hurt is deeply rooted. You can remove God from wherever you want but you can’t really remove God.
    Just because you make it so that He is out of sight then out of your mind doesn’t make Him any less real.

    Society is doing away with anything Christlike.
    They are taking away our rights to worship our God so that you can worship yourselves and be accountable to no one.

    I pray that you would stop being mad at God. Soften your heart.
    Turn away from your sins.
    Call out to God and be forgiven.
    He will put peace in your heart.

      • Thanks for labelling your post as useless, Louise. Very helpful.

        Oh, you didn’t mean your post?

        Well, subconsciously, I think you realised your post makes no sense at all and that your yukka plant makes more sense than you do.

        Or did you actually have something with substance to say?

  8. The only proper response that a Christian should give when replying to these “arguements” is; “I will pray for you.” The only win is if your prayers results in their salvation.

  9. Its so hard to manage data. If I dont copy/paste this, or screenshot, its lost! So please send this list of arguments to email.

    #2, my schooling in history had heavy emphasis on Greek gods, but little on Roman, Viking, Egyptian, or more today religions, Buddhism, Hinduism, or the BS Allah Advocate cult. And noticeably absent, was the Bible. I’m an adult now, and want to learn. No need to make me aware of the blockade of Judeo-Christianity, but I am in need of it.

  10. Pingback: 5 Quick Replies to Atheist Arguments (part 2). | James Bishop's Theology & Apologetics.·

  11. The atheist has to have faith that a non-theistic evolutionary process that cares only for survival somehow produced his rational cognitive faculties. If this is true then why should the atheist, or anyone else, trust his beliefs?
    ok i will take the challange, first evolution is not a guided process that is a animal will not growth their necks for take leaves, that is the flaw idea that was selled before but now nobody believes it. Evolution is a genetic change that happen by accident ( and happen all days in all generations, but for be visible we need a lot of generations) that change (mutation) happen by radiation, virus (yup virus change dna you can read articles about that in nature) and other things.

    Now lets forget how appear the brain cause we dont know yet, but lets say how brain work. Brain takes the information outside and then create a reaction (i will forget breath and other things cause is a more complex system that dont interfere in the faith system), all animals devolop a conduct that is transmited genetical to others ( we could even think how a mutation affect the conduct). Now how we know what will pass and what will not to next generation, well if its good for survive in the current enviroment then will pass.

    Now the proccess of get our intelligence to think in abstract dont come in 1 generation, that is a monkey with no interest in the future become someone that have faith for mutation. What really happens is that some start to devolop tools for live day by day. Those tools + our hands change the form of brain work, that is our brain change was gradual (yup this in on other things and is kinda hard to explain how that happen, we kinda know things like how plants change their dna based in their invorment but that is on other things and is not so simple, still is accidental that is dna not change with the objective of get a better brain but of all mutations that can happen appear one that increase the chance by that). At one point the frontal brain become greater than rest of brain, in that point humans become capable in think in temporal form and do simulations. Still a lot of things stay with us before that, like happy be happy is a genetic trait the muscle that moves and that people can know when someone is happy is something before that part of brain, but that part of brain is responsible of faith at some level).

    Now exist 2 things that guarentee our survival (could be more or be even different but dont matter we got them), first we want explain the world, explore understand it and use it for survival (really good dont you think ) and second we dont think we could be wrong, animals in general do all without any regrets, have regrets is not a form of increase survival, if you think a predator is in that direction you dont go there…be wrong is something you can’t do. So with those two things appear the first gods and shows how the idea of god can be manteined.

    First we see thunder and dont know why happen, the rain still dont know why happen… and well how we appear here. So someone using antropomorphism (thinking from their human perspective and what they see ) said ok something like us did it, all first gods that appear were kinda humans….they go angry, jelaus and others human traits. And then the second part act, we are not wrong that is the solution a kinda humaoind thing more powerfull is the cause. With time gods evolve with our knowledge increased…you can actually see how the god evolve in the bible (is a good text in that matter, god there at start is very human even said at start god create human at his image, that is the reason atheist said we create god at our image) but when you go to new testament he stop being human and become more our ideal that is, he knows all (yup at start he didnt know all that happen then he come to know all) he punish humans for what they do but then offer salvation to all, etc.

    So why we trust our belief, well easy we are genetic prepared for not accept we could be wrong….that is probably the more harder part to accept in all our life, and our history is full of gods for explain thinks and we can’t be wrong our parent’s can’t be wrong.

    Accept be wrong is hard but not impossible i have to add, that is you have to show a lot of things for make people accept they are wrong. we thinked that god create humans, evolution says nope at best he make some part we dont understand yet (wings for example, we dont know all about wings but seems a virus is the reason that they appear in first place) and took a lot of time and work show to all people (or almost all people ) that the idea of evolution is correct. That is human nature, even some atheist are so full of themself that even if appear a god and create a human they will say ok that can create humans but not us.

  12. A quicker rebuttal to you quick replies
    (1) That is not addressing the argument. No one is arguing that he being evil means that he is fictional. What they are arguing, and you are ignoring, is that God is, objectively, the most vile fictional character created.
    (2) a- No, but the fact that many competing claims of Gods do exist throws doubt yours. b- The sameness of all your myth is self evident- they all posit that there are divine beings with superhuman attributes who affect our lives. c- Not an argument in any way. Just because we are treating your God with more scrutiny at the moment, it is because more people believe in your stupid God.
    (3) No atheist are arguing that the backwardness of a religion demonstrate its falsity, so that is a strawman that you just pulled out of your ***.
    (4) Disproving the inerrancy of the Bible also means that the parts about Jesus can now be called into question, as the other parts are now proven to be questionable at best or false at worse.
    (5) God is magic and can theoretically do anything isn’t an argument for anything. What it does demonstrate is that the Bible is full of stories that goes against the known laws of Physics. You also chide Atheists for their ‘a priori’ rejection of the supernatural, a rather strange way of our ‘a posteriori rejection of your nonsense based upon our empirical observation of the world’. There is no evidence of Supernatural nonsense, give it up.
    (6) No, it is a testimony to the ridiculousness of the Bible and a statement of the author’s spiritual journey into atheism. No one ever claimed it was a proof, you sot.
    (7) James, pointing out to the supposed ‘Good’ it has brought (it hasn’t) and then claiming bad apples is simply a ‘No True Scotsman’ Fallacy. This isn’t an argument for anything.
    (8) Of course science can explain everything, that is the point of science. Aesthetics, Ethics, etc. are all product of the mind and can be explained away by science, and does not have any special metaphysical existence. ‘Scientism’ is often used as a term of abuse, I accept that term gladly.
    (9) It disproves the narrative of the Bible, its inerrancy, and therefore calls into question the whole of it, even the parts it has no say on.
    (10) We have two competing explanation, that Religion is a product of our biological and social development, and that it is that, but also God came down and magic it into us. Use Ockham’s Razor for a moment, James, and tell me which one is more likely as an explanation?

  13. Wow. Threatened Atheists even troll pages like this. Do you Atheists really have such pathetic dull lives, that you have to troll every Christian page? OR, do you feel that your trolling somehow adds fuel to the denial of God’s existence and the threat that you feel from it? You guys are funny. Btw, thanks for fulfilling biblical prophecy. =)

Let me know your thoughts!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s