Amusing Take On the "New Atheists"

I read this over on GeoChristian’s Blog.  It doesn’t advance the argument for Christianity at all, but I think it does give the reader some insight into the minds of the crop of new atheist writers who have been attacking Christianity for the last few years.

Rev. Cwirla, in his review of the Charlotte Allen article on atheism that I linked to in my previous post, summarizes the new atheist (Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, Dennett, Myers, et al.) arguments as follows:

1.  The existence of God can’t be proven scientifically, therefore there is no God.

2.  Religious people do bad things, therefore there is no God.

3.  No one has yet to convince me there is a God, therefore there is no God.

4.  The world sucks, therefore there is no God.

5.  Santa Claus and the Tooth Fairy don’t exist, therefore there is no God.

Pretty good summary of the shallowness of modern atheism.

  • Nathaniel Foster

    Actually. It shows the shallowness of your understanding of atheism.

  • Andrew

    While I am a Christian, I don’t feel that you do atheists justice. Citing the arguments above the best atheist arguments against God is akin to an atheist claiming that all modern Christians believe in God because it makes us ‘feel warm and fuzzy to have a big grandfather in the sky’. This post is rather insulting and childish in its intent.

    Is the purpose of apologetics to convince atheists and agnostics of the potential validity of Christianity, or is it to mock atheists and preach to the choir? This post in particular certainly seems to be taking the latter approach.

    I personally find this quote from Life of Pi to be rather illuminating:

    “Atheists are my brothers and sisters of a different faith, and every word they speak, speaks of faith. Like me, they go as far as the legs of reason will carry them – and then they leap”

  • Colin

    Actually, I think this is more indicative of the theist’s inability to logically understand reasonable disbelief in their particular sky fairy.

  • Hi.One problem with a believing in somekind off God are that some people believe in a God because off wishful thinking and houp etc.I dont think we finelly can defenie what god are or are not.Natural laws for.ex can exist forever without a creator or a God kind off automaticly, enercy for.ex can exist without a “reason or purpuse”.I might believe 60% off the Christian bible but not genesis for.ex. if it say that the world are created,if energy and natural laws exist for ever it cannot be created.Taosm for ex. are more scientific because it is open for new ideas.I dont like christiannity for.ex because noone have c hange the lies in the old testamente in 2000years,if they can do a new telephone cataloge with the latest valid numbers etc. every year ,why dont anyone chance the bible lies?Why does lies have to be “wholy”?budd hism says that there is a absolyte trueth and a ralative trueth,the absolute trueth are an presupposition for the relative trueth ,things etc. with dont have a real suorce in the reallity terrain dont exist at all!Right.Even if we cannot find the absolute trueth we should always try to find the MORE relative trueth!Right?!!!One problem in the Christiannity are I think are why it dont explain why the “lord” make us to pleasure creatures first and then make us suffer with pain etc.even trought natural catastrofies etc.Tao mean in this case that the heaven are impartial.I dont believe there is a God why listen to priers or cares about our personal problems or “loves” us etc. We have the responsivity to our actions in a personal etc. level.We should trust to our own capasity instead off waiting for help from “above”. Anyway, anything have to have somekind off true SUORCE, so far I call that suorce Tao instead off god, does anyone have better,names ideas or suorces to the trueth for ex. !???!!Yuo can discuss more on my email adress aki@aol.se might later.greetigs Aki.T.

  • Hi am a trueth seaker alsoand this my own words, not the words “yuo comment is awaiting moderation”inthe earlier comment I dont know who or what but it there?But im gonna end the message with some off my principals which explain whole lot to the profound one.Can anyone say am wrong in this case!The super rellity terrain are superior its own interprenting sympole map and survives whithout its own interprenting map ,but the reallityterrain sympole map dont survive whithout its own reallity terrain.Right?!If we want to do as god and true symbole maps we canwecan use scientific principals for.ex does anyone have better ideas?Now some final words.The everlasting cyclic and cosmic superreallity terrains foreground natures simple and complecatet parts are intimate connected together in the long run and clearly confirm for.ex the behind lyin cosmic taos yin and yang verifying works,in the ineradicable natures entirety reallity terrain and its everlasting “dance play and mating”whith it self!Right?!!Greetins aki@aol.se

  • The one who want to discuss with me should notify me on aki@aol.se greetings Aki.T.

  • TheRedTide

    Except that’s not true at all. What modern atheism actually says is, “There is absolutely no evidence whatsoever for any god, including the Christian one. Faith is dangerous both to the individual and to society as a whole. It is both reasonable and morally acceptable to conclude that there is no god until some evidence can be provided that points to its existence.”

  • I read that the other day, too. I realize the actual arguments atheists make are not quite so simple, but this list does offer a little insight.

  • Before want to discuss if there are a God or not we have to try explain or defenite what God relly are and mean to different people.I can locical argu that everything in the long run have to have some kind off suorce where it comes from etc.Right?Some kind off real suorce Right?A true suorce etc.right?but i dont necessarily have to call that suorce God for.ex Right?I call it tao today, because I dont find better words,my words are not enaught to even describe it,have anyone any wise things to add this discussion?Wonders aki@aol.se

  • Greg

    Andrew,

    While I do agree with you that we should provide a useful witness to atheists in hope of their conversion, I disagree with you about them being our brothers and sisters. In a Christian sense my brothers and sisters are only those in Christ. Actually, since as a Christian I am a child of God, and all non-christians are enemies to God, one would therefore conclude that non-christians are enemies to christians. And in fact this is evident by the responses this blog usually receives. We are however supposed to show love to our enemies but we do not have to agree with them or in any way support their beliefs.

  • Greg

    Aki,

    Explain the “source” for the universe. Both mathmatics and physics explain that an eternal universe is impossible. Therefore if the universe is not eternal (2nd law of Thermodynamics and the impossibility of infinately negatively regressing in time) it must have been caused. Do you know of anything that is the cause of itself? It is sort of a silly question (the answer is NO) because for something to be the cause of itself it would have already been in existance and so why would it need to cause itself? Unfortunately you ramble without any shred of evidence to support your position as many atheists do. When you quote above that if we cannot know absolute truth we should then seek out the “more relative truth”; and i ask, Is that absolutely true that we should seek out the more relative truth? I would love for you to explain how the everlasting cycle (as you put it) can exist when the 2nd law clearly explains that all matter is in entropy and thus becoming unusable and eventually it will all be used up. I’d venture to say that 95% or more of the respected scientific community agrees with the closed loop universe theory. How then can we even be at this point in time if time had no beginning? If you negatively infinitely regress in time (which you have to) you can NEVER arrive at this moment in time and even if you could you would not be able to because all energy in the universe would be used up. It is not infinite!

    You think Taoism is more scientific because it is open to new ideas? What if Taoism was open to the belief that the world was flat or that the sun revolved around the earth. Would that make Taoism more scientific??? You logic needs some serious work.

  • kay

    This discussion is a little deep for me, but I do have a question. What is the purpose of life for an athiest? Christians have the promise of eternal life. What do atheist have hope for? What keeps them going? What is their purpose other than to eat, sleep and work? What is their reward for being faithful?

  • My brother C.Sagan said and wrote”1979-81″that COSMOS is all that is or ever was or ever will be!So far I have to agree.If I write God is all that is ever was or ever will be!I think I make some Christians and mormons very happy,but It dont make me so happy because I can easier prove what cosmos are even when I dont know all the cosmos,but its very hard for me prove anything about the Christian God for.ex If yuo are a christian,mormon or that kind off belivier I give yuo a change here to prove or explain better what yuo really belive in and why,Im not here to judge yuo for .ex. IM moustly here to find out what really are true!Because im moustly interested in what really are the trueth!In also have democratic principals with mean that anyone have the right to believe in everything they want etc.But I dont respect or like liers, and I hope yuo are interested in to separate liers from nonlier,more migth later on aki@aol.se Ps.May the truth liberate us!

  • Bill Pratt

    Nathaniel,
    I have a decent understanding of atheism, and I’ve written on it extensively on this blog (search for atheism and you’ll find many posts), but the point of my post was humor, not serious dialogue. I thought GeoChristian’s post was funny. I’m sorry if it seemed like I was poking atheists in the eye. It’s just that the new atheists have been so nasty and so rude to Christians for so long, that every once in awhile I enjoy seeing someone put them in their place. Consider my petty humor just a transient event. Hopefully you’ll read some of the other posts, where we can actually interact on a more serious basis.

    God bless,
    Bill

  • kay

    Don’t think any Christians like liars. The ones who don’t always tell the truth probaby aren’t really Christians, even it they think they are.
    Well, I hope you find the correct TRUTH. You will be much happier when you do.

  • tye

    My brother C.Sagan said and wrote”1979-81″that COSMOS is all that is or ever was or ever will be!So far I have to agree.

    So are you a materialist then? only things that are empirical actually exist?

  • Greg

    So you have a massive amount of FAITH in what Carl Sagan said… Why? Did he ever present any proof for his statement that the cosmos is eternal? Again, i ask you to address the Laws of Thermodynamics and explain scientifically how they support an eternal universe.

    You rely on just as much faith as the average person but in the case of a Christian, their faith is founded on the TRUTH and can be supported by the natural laws of the universe, philosophy, morality and many other things.

    As Kay put it above, if the cosmos is all we have and there is no God, no life after death on this earth, we just cease to exist, why do you care at all what others believe? In fact why are you wasting what precious little time you have on this earth dialoguing with us moronic Christians. You should be more concerned with having as much fun as possible while you are still in existance. You are not bound by any morals because given no ultimate moral law giver, all morals are just mans subjective value beliefs. Quit wasting your time here and go have some fun for tomorrow you die. I think someone famous said that once.

    Unfortunately what you choose to ignore is that Carl Sagan was a fool and he is not enjoying the eternity he is in right now. If you really are a truth seeker (and not just relative truth) then go read Josh McDowell’s “New Evidence that Demands a Verdict”. Study the more that 30+ years of research put into this book by a former atheist and really challenge his statements. Then come back and let us know if you still have problems or questions w/Christianity.

  • Dear truth seeking brothers Im back!Does anaone off yuo understand Swedish or finnish! If so tell me.Its not easy for me to use english but Im trying.There is something i call “DET ALLTID VARANDE ÄRO ALLTID VARANDE!”=THE everlasting been (or existing)are everlasting!You have to agree if yuo Belive for ex.1 no one can extirpate energy.No noone can create new or more energy to add in a cosmical energy maximum .2Nowone can extirpate natural laws which always been in existence automaticly.3.Now one can existirpate Tao because tao are everlasting and noncreated.3 Noone can extirpate a GOD Which are everlating and noncreated.4.Its more locical that SOMETHING ALWAYS EXIST rather that its exist sometimes!A simple ex.are ENERGY for.ex.5.NOTHING cannot result in something ,nothing =nothing,only something can result in something. Brothers I already know yuo have to agree in one or all my five points here,because the “LORD” did NOT make yuo Stupid?Right?!!More might later Greetigs aki@aol.se

  • Dear brothers and sisters more principals and solutions, in the everlasting reallity terrain, we can do ,without “doing”.WE can taiste without spicing.We should se the great and big things in the small things and the several in the few.We should take care off the diffecault things while they still are small.Suorly in our galactic philament bubble our galactic solarsystem planetary home earth still perform diffecault things easily and bring about and effect to us big things with small means.Throuht not stripe for greatnes brother Aki attain his own greatness.If we think everything are easy we more often gono meet diffecaulties,thats why the wise one also can see and notice everything as so diffecault ,but not necessarily EXPERIENCE anything as diffecault in the everlasting reallity terrain, thats some things I can say about my tao,and its true,given to yuo free.If yuo use tao ,I garante its never gone end!more might later.greetings aki@aol.se

  • The point of the post was to point out the shallowness of the New Atheists such as Dawkins and Hitchens. Even other atheists are embarrassed by the poor arguments of these guys. I realize that there are more sophisticated atheists out there, but it is the New Atheists who get all the publicity, and the post was directed against them. It actually is a pretty good summary of their arguments.

  • While I am a Christian, I am a Truth Seeker, I believe 60% of the bible and none of Genesis, Tao mean in this case that or that and the imfamous Carl Sagan(or any unsaved favorite personality) said and/or wrote.
    These are Buzz phrases for saying “I AM LOST AND ON MY WAY TO HELL PLEASE TELL ME THE WAY WAY”
    A. Believe GOD/Jesus is who He says He is and the rewarder of those that seek Him.
    B. Repent/Turn away from all of your sin, you will be a work in progress.
    C Confess to GOD that you have not lived for him and ask him to come into you life and and fill you with the Holy Spirit in order to live in victory and to be your GOD.
    D Go and tell others what GOD has done for you.

  • Joseph

    Hey, Stephen Hawking says that our understanding of the Laws of Physics no longer has room for god. Hmmmmm. Not to mention that you can’t solve the finite universe theory with a God because he would need a creator.