Atheism Rebuttal

2/4 of Atheism Debate

Next (Next Week)     Previous

      I was pretty excited when Phillip proposed this reversal of roles, and I'm also really happy that these questions were asked. I can finally explain at least a little bit about what atheism is and what it means to be an atheist, which is an important thing to know since some people think we worship Satan...

When we actually worship Cthulhu

How glorious!

    Anyways, I will be answering the questions asked by Phillip. Many of these answers will actually teach all of you something new about atheism!

     Before we begin, however, here is the definition of atheism: "disbelief or lack of belief in the existence of God or gods." This is literally all atheism is. Nothing follows after that: It doesn't mean I support Communism, it doesn't mean I pick up an 'Atheist Bible' and adhere to the basic tenets of atheism. It means I don't believe in the existence of a God or Gods. There are many different ways to live life as an atheist. One such way is called "Christian Atheism"; that is: "a theological position in which the belief in the God of Christianity is rejected or absent, but the moral teachings of Jesus are followed." Even some sects of Buddhism that don't recognize Buddha as a deity are atheistic religions. Here is a wiki page dedicated to why atheism IS NOT a religion: Here

1. Would you agree with me that atheists claim that it is possible for God to exist?

       I do agree with you! There is actually a classification for this: "weak atheism", or "Agnostic atheism". The general rationale for this position is that we cannot 100% know for sure that God or some definition of "God" does not exist. Agnostic/Weak atheists believe either that since God is not tangible, we cannot know for sure if he exists, or they believe that God or some definition of a God might exist somewhere else in the universe, but none of our religions got it right. I don't hold this position because with this logic, we can never be certain of anything ever. I can't say "leprechauns don't exist" because how could I know they don't? Repeat this for Thor, Zeus, unicorns, and God. For the sake of practicality, I can say "God/Thor/Zeus/Unicorns don't exist" despite only having 99.99% certainty. 

2. Would you also agree that atheism accepts people that say it's impossible for God to exist?

      Not to be nit picky about wording, but when you say "atheism accepts people", you make it sound like atheism is a religion with a church that denies people for not following the "true" atheism. Better wording would be, "Would you agree that some atheists claim that it's impossible for God to exist?". To this question, the answer is also a yes. This position is called "strong atheism", and is most commonly just called "atheism" (even though the majority of nonbelievers take the agnostic position). This position believes that there is no God or Gods with absolute certainty. When you say "impossible for God to exist", this is also oddly worded. Atheism in general follows that there is insufficient evidence for a God(s); not that it's impossible for God(s) to exist. There is, however, a qualm over how an omniscient, ominpotent, and omnibenevolent God(s) could exist while also having evil and suffering exist. This is the problem of evil, and that has to do more with an impossibility for a God(s) that has those three attributes to exist. With this conundrum, the Christian God does not exist. That's not to say some other type of God or Gods out there don't exist; they might, but it's such a low chance, that it's more practical to say there are is no God(s).

3. Would you agree that some parts of the Bible are true?

     Of course! Some parts are bound to be true. But I see where this question leads, which is in the direction of "If some parts are true, why not others? Isn't the Bible at least partially credible?" Well, think about the Spiderman comics. Some parts of the Spiderman comics are true, are they not? New York City is a real place, for example. But we know that Spiderman and Mary Jane and the Green Goblin are all fictional. The Spiderman comics can almost be described as historical fiction. My point is that just because the setting is a real place, the events that actually happened don't also have to be real. The tribe of Israel may have been captured by the Babylonians, but that doesn't make everything described in the Bible true. It can be seen as a Spiderman comic in that respect: actual place, some actual events, and a lot of fantasy thrown in for effect. Even Greek Epics such as "The Odyssey" feature real places and some real events, but throw in random fantasy elements.

 4. Do you believe in objective moral values?

Before Daniel answers, I am going to define what objective moral values are. These are moral values that exist independent of a group or an individual's opinion, just as physical laws exist regardless of how we would prefer them to work (some things are good other things are evil).Atheism is inherently evil. There is no foundation of morality (what is right and wrong) in atheism. The best thing atheism can offer anyone is death, a life without no objective purpose because we are all accidents. Why do atheists talk to other religious people about their beliefs? They want to "help" them out right? That's what Daniel wants to do~show us that we're wrong and we've been doing the wrong thing all of our lives. However, the universe is going to die right? Which means humanity will die. So in the atheist world view, everyone dies and everything that atheists are doing to "help" humanity (or in this case us) is in vain. Let me give an example. Someone is building a house, which he's building to help humanity and everyone else, but you know that the house is going to collapse on everyone and kill everyone, why would you build that house?Now, let us define atheism. Daniel may be able to help me with this one. Atheism is the disbelief in an existence of a God or gods. As there are people that leave Christianity, there are people that leave atheism. The reason for this is because people come off angry at God and don't give arguments against His existence and rather come off as "disagreeing with the way God does things."

    This is a big one, and I like it. I'm going to break it into bits so I can more easily address all the parts of this great question(s). And throughout my answers, remember that atheism is simply the lack of belief in a God or Gods. It is nothing more, and nothing less. 

 (A) Do you believe in objective moral values?
Before Daniel answers, I am going to define what objective moral values are. These are moral values that exist independent of a group or an individual's opinion, just as physical laws exist regardless of how we would prefer them to work (some things are good other things are evil).

     Other atheists might answer differently, because there are many ways to understand the world, and a simple lack of belief in God(s) doesn't automatically lead someone to choose a single understanding of morality. If you are referring to objective moral laws that exist as surely as gravity does, then my answer is no. Nothing is truly "good" or "evil", "moral" or "immoral". It's all completely relative to our culture and biology. However, if you're talking about something that is objectively moral or immoral, such as murdering an innocent human being as "objectively immoral", then I agree and disagree. It would appear that no civilization on Earth has ever shown a completely agreed morality: Cannibalism is acceptable in some cultures, and wicked in others. Stealing is acceptable in some cultures, and wicked in others. Same for the killing of innocents, torture, homosexuality, polygamy, and so on. This is clear evidence that we aren't born with a sense of morality, but rather are taught morality through our relative cultures. Right and wrong, good and evil is completely relative. Our understanding of biology also shows that animals and humans are born with certain tendencies, such as a desire for 'justice", or helping others. These I would consider objective, since all humans and a lot of animals exhibit such behavior. Whether they are good or evil is relative, though.

     If you want an obvious example of how objective moral values don't exist, look at ISIS and the Old Testament God. They honestly believe that taking child brides from defeated cities and slaughtering people is completely ok; nothing wrong morally. Talk to an ISIS member or an ancient Israelite and they'll say, "What's wrong with that?" Obviously we find these things atrocious. Therefore it's pretty reasonable to say that no objective moral values exist if both ISIS/God honestly find it fine, and we honestly find it horrible.

(B) Atheism is inherently evil. There is no foundation of morality (what is right and wrong) in atheism.

      This is simply incorrect. Lack of belief in a God or Gods isn't inherently evil in any way. Once again, the wording of the question makes atheism seem like a single ideology with principles and guidelines; like a religion. Atheism is not this at all. My belief about our foundation for morality (remember, my belief /=/ all atheists' beliefs) is that our culture is our foundation, and it's quite simple to observe. In the Middle East, to some, killing someone for leaving Islam is completely moral. They truly believe in their minds that they are completely justified and moral to do such a thing. To us, obviously this is insanity and immoral. Even in America, what is moral and immoral (what is right and wrong) is completely divided. Some Americans believe that torture is a moral method of attaining intelligence, while other Americans view it as immoral. Some Americans believe the death penalty is moral, some Americans view it as immoral. You can do this over and over again, from culture to culture. A lack of belief in God or Gods doesn't mean there is no foundation for morality. It means that morality, at least to a large extent, is relative; a simple, provable, undeniable fact. (This is my observation and opinion. Other atheists might disagree and say morality IS objective.) I think this question is based on the belief that morality literally comes from God, and if that's the case, I want to know when the taking of child brides and slaughter of sinful people are justifiable acts again.

(C) The best thing atheism can offer anyone is death, a life without no objective purpose because we are all accidents. 

      Again, acting like atheism is a religion with tenets and some definitive system. And once again, my personal belief is that there is no objective purpose in life; no "meaning of life". You make your own purpose in life because there is no divinely-mandated purpose. Some find purpose in taking care of family and raising kids, others find purpose in making the world a better place. Purpose and meaning is yours to decide. Some people don't find purpose in life, and decide that there is no point in living: nihilism. I don't like the wording of, "The best thing atheism can offer anyone is death," because now we're arguing based on what we want to believe is true rather than what is fact. A Christian proposal would be, "The best thing Christianity can offer anyone is false hope in a blissful life after death; a life with an objective purpose because we are all divinely mandated to worship and glorify God.". At this point, you're arguing that the coziest and most feel-good position is true, and the uncomfortable one is false because it is uncomfortable. This is wishful thinking. Arguing that atheism is false because it leads to no objective morality and/or no objective purpose to life is an appeal to consequences. I prefer to live with the truth rather than hide behind comforting lies. 

(D) Why do atheists talk to other religious people about their beliefs? They want to "help" them out right? That's what Daniel wants to do~show us that we're wrong and we've been doing the wrong thing all of our lives.

      My main goal was to help you look at the world for what it is rather than what an ancient book says the world is. I prefer not to have people voting against gay marriage because "God finds it detestable", and I prefer science not to be censored in schools just because it goes against an ancient book. Misinformed beliefs lead to misinformed actions, and these misinformed actions don't just affect yourselves. They affect me and everyone around you. 

(E) However, the universe is going to die right? Which means humanity will die. So in the atheist world view, everyone dies and everything that atheists are doing to "help" humanity (or in this case us) is in vain. Let me give an example. Someone is building a house, which he's building to help humanity and everyone else, but you know that the house is going to collapse on everyone and kill everyone, why would you build that house?

      It's a sad fact, yes. But it's best not to base the facts of the universe on emotions, and like I said in (C), people can find their own meaning in life. If I find my purpose is to have kids and raise them to be the nicest, brightest kids they can possibly be, then that is my purpose. I built the house because I found that to be my purpose, even if it was ultimately in vain. And just because you feel sad about this view of life, doesn't make it untrue. You can close your eyes and cover your ears, but that doesn't make the oncoming car "not true". 

(F) Now, let us define atheism. Daniel may be able to help me with this one. Atheism is the disbelief in an existence of a God or gods. As there are people that leave Christianity, there are people that leave atheism. The reason for this is because people come off angry at God and don't give arguments against His existence and rather come off as "disagreeing with the way God does things."

      This is very true indeed! Some atheists choose to be atheists because they are angry at God, for example, "God gave my mother cancer! I don't believe in Him anymore!". This obviously makes no sense, and is based purely on emotion. I feel that the last bit about some people disagreeing with how God does things is addressed towards me and how I question why God does things the way he does. When I bring up better ways God could've done certain things, it's to show you guys that God is either a buffoon or is not real. When you're omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent, there is no excuse to be incompetent at just about everything. To sum it up, my points go like so: "An omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent entity would have done things this way instead of that way. Because they were done that way, an omnipotent, omniscient, and omnibenevolent entity does not exist." My arguments and disbelief aren't based on anger towards God, but rather how everything he supposedly does is terribly planned, nonsensical, or is downright evil (in respect to our modern morality). He's either lacking some of these attributes, or doesn't exist.

     Ironically, I find it interesting that religion and Christianity in particular seem to gain most of their followers through emotional necessity and other methods rather than actual truth. I was going to do a blog post on this topic on it's own, but I can introduce a bit right here:
People become Christians because:
(a) Childhood indoctrination
(b) Need an objective purpose in life
(c) Coping mechanism (Why did my dog die? God's plan, which will ensure that everything works out just fine!)
(d) Fear of hell
(e) Fear of death/nonexistence

I think there are more, but I'll include them if I do the blog post on it.

I put question number 5 and the last sentence of question number 4 together because they go hand in hand:

5. Another main reason is that there is no proof and evidence that would show atheism is true, accurate, or correct. What proof or evidence is there that shows that atheism is correct or accurate? 

     

     You're simply shifting the burden of proof over to me (to disprove God), when the burden of proof actually lies on the person making the claim (There is a God and his name is Yahweh). Now, to you, I'm the one making the claim: "There is no reason to believe Yahweh exists because there is no evidence for a Yahweh". This is due to a majority of society believing in a God of some sort, and all of us being raised as if this was fact from the day we were born (childhood indoctrination). To demonstrate that the burden of proof lies on you, I shall make a list of what the neutral position is:

-Q. Is there a God(s)/Creator? A. I don't know 
-Q. Who/what created the universe?  A. I don't know 
-Q. Who/what created mankind? A. I don't know 
-Q. How did life develop on Earth? A. I don't know 

Now I shall make a list of things Christians claim:

-Q. Is there a God(s)/Creator? A. Yahweh, described in the Bible
-Q. Who/what created the universe? A. Yahweh, described in the Bible
-Q. Who/what created mankind? A. Yahweh, described in the Bible
-Q. How did life develop on Earth? A. Yahweh allowed it to/Yahweh created it; it didn't develop
-Q. Why is the Bible true? A. Because Yahweh inspired it
-Q. How do we know Yahweh inspired the Bible? A. The Bible says so
-Q. How can we trust what the Bible says? A. Yahweh inspired it

Now do you see? The burden of proof lies on the person making the claim. You claim that Yahweh did these things? The Bible itself is the claim, not the evidence, Prove Yahweh exists. If you cannot do that, then you prove atheism (at least in regards to Yahweh) correct and accurate.

If you still don't understand how the burden of proof lies on you, let me reword your question:

 Another main reason is that there is no proof and evidence that would show the nonexistence of unicorns is true, accurate, or correct. What proof or evidence is there that shows that the nonexistence of unicorns is correct or accurate? 

Another main reason is that there is no proof and evidence that would show that disbelief in Zeus is true, accurate, or correct. What proof or evidence is there that shows that the nonexistence of Zeus is correct or accurate?

This is your logic: I say that there is a clay teapot in orbit around Jupiter. The teapot is too far away to see, and too small to measure through any equipment. Now prove me wrong. If you can't, then that means there is a clay teapot in orbit around Jupiter. Russell's Teapot