ATHEISM EXPOSED AND DEFEATED HOME

Introduction

ATHEISTS’ GREATEST MISTAKES

     Atheism is founded in large part on emotions, subjectivity and a cavalier treatment of realities that demand depth of thinking and an open mind. Lord Bacon was correct in his assessment of Atheism when he wrote the following:

 It is true, that a little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism; but depth in philosophy brings about man's mind to religion: for while the mind of man looketh upon second causes scattered, it may sometimes rest in them, and go no further; but when it beholdeth the chain of them confederate and linked together, it must needs fly to Providence and Deity (Bacon, 1875, 64). (See Bibliography for references)

     What follows is a list of grave mistakes that atheists have been making for centuries that have led them to embrace the most irrational philosophy that humans could ever conceive.

     It is very sad to read the diatribes of atheists, such as Richard Dawkins, against extremist Christian groups or individuals who in no way reflect the teachings of Jesus Christ. Rather than using them as examples of the evil within Christianity, would it not be more fair and objective to point out the discrepancy between their actions and the teachings of "true" Christianity? That would be the more honorable way to go, but some atheists prefer to create evil associations with Jesus Christ at all costs. Therefore, when they find irrational or hypocritical actions on the part of "some" Christian groups or individuals, they quickly announce that Christianity has been proven to be evil one more time. (Please read Is Christianity Evil? on this web site.)

     The presence of evil and suffering is to some atheists the greatest proof for the non-existence of God. Evil exists and so does suffering. People have been granted the great gift of "free will" which allows them to choose their actions, and they consequently often choose wrongly and as a result cause themselves and others pain and anguish. This is the painful reality of "sin": the innocent pay for the actions of the irresponsible and the foolish. This is what Christianity has been preaching for millennia, but people fail to heed -- and atheists fail to support this obvious and critical reality. In fact, some of them openly "embrace" and "model" sinful behaviour that ultimately leads to anguish in themselves and others.

     What about natural catastrophes? Is God responsible for earthquakes, hurricanes, tornadoes? We do not know for certain. One thing is clear; He fails to intervene in such cases. Is that a manifestation of His cruelty, or is there much more that the Bible makes evident that atheists fail to understand or accept? (Read God and Catastrophes, on this web site)    

     This is a perennial problem with many atheists. This is an evident problem with Richard Dawkins, the High Priest of modern atheism. His most recent work, The God Delusion oozes with biases, unfounded facts, and distortions that are unworthy of a man who should know better. For evidence of this, please read Dawkins Rebuttals on this web site.

     For further evidence of hasty and subjective propagation of unfounded facts read also Atheists and Divorce on this site.

4. Looking desperately for a few weak links in the Bible and ignoring the many strong ones.

     Most atheist sites make sure that a section is dedicated to what they see as Bible contradictions. They spotlight "minute" historical discrepancies so as to invalidate the whole Bibles. Unfortunately, they fail to inform the readers that Christian scholars have addressed such "discrepancies" many times and that there are ample resources to explain them (See Bible Contradictions).

     Worst of all, they totally ignore the fact that the Bible is in total harmony in almost all cases and that various biblical sources in many cases testify to the exact same events harmoniously. Why not also include the "huge" number of historical events recounted by more than one book, in which there is harmony and agreements, such as the existence and the divinity of Christ? Of course this they will not do because it would be devastating to their cause. If they were truly objective they would put on hold that which some witnesses appear to disagree on and accept that in which there is agreement. Is that not what a wise and just judge would do? If there are witnesses to an event, and the witnesses agree on most "critical" details but seem not to agree on a few "less important" details, he would ignore the unimportant details they disagree on and rely on  the important facts that they agree on. It is "agreed upon" facts that carry testimonial weight, and of such the Bible is replete.

5.  Emphasizing almost solely the weak and non-biblical explanation of “young- earth” creationists, while ignoring the biblical explanations of “old-earth” creationists.

     Well known atheists love to ridicule the unscientific and "unbiblical"  "young-earth" creationist views. What they consistently fail to mention is that there are creationist scientists that have a world view that is perfectly in harmony with proven science and the Bible. (See, "Old Earth Creationism," on any search engine.)

     Atheist sites are replete with quotes of known and less well known atheists who have in the past offered acerbic views on God and religion. A close inspection reveals that, in fact, many of them are not atheists at all, and that many quotes have no references, thus indicating the possibility that they are probably spurious and unfounded. This author has taken the time to investigate the religious views of the greatest minds of the past over a period of several  years  and does have thoroughly referenced statements directly from the greatest minds that prove, undeniably,  that they held a firm belief in God but that many were very devout people. (See God and the Greatest Minds on this site.)

7. Generalizing ad nauseam about Religion.

     One need only peruse major Atheist sites to quickly see  that this is a common tendency. Their attacks are almost consistently directed at "Religion," as if it were one homogeneous block. This alone betrays the hatred many of them have for anything religious and the emotional blindness that prevents objective assessment. Furthermore, it reveals  an unwillingness to openly acknowledge that the religious continuum indeed includes extremists, but it also includes sincere, kind, loving, honest and wonderful people who would never even hurt a fly, and who manifest their love for their fellow man not only with words but with large monetary donations to charitable organizations and hundreds of hours of free service to the same.

More coming in the future.