Saturday, January 14, 2012

Atheism = A-Fraud

 FRAUD



A-Fraud is a nickname given to Yankees 3rd baseman Alex Rodriguez because of his apparent struggle with showing he is worthy of wearing the pinstripes.  However, this post is not about ARod, it is about Atheism.  It is about a philosophy - a religion, a set of beliefs that I held for a long time.

For far too long I relied on its false understanding of logic.  Its pretense and irrational conclusions.  Its narrow view of science and disconnection from common sense.  It is a placebo for the contrarian.  An appeasement for those who are angry with God or religion.

Life is full of uncertainties.  We know, but don't know.  We are aware, yet not aware.  It is a paradox.  Because of this uncertainty, I can understand first hand how it can be hard to accept that there is a God or that Heaven, Hell or Purgatory exist.

How can we know is often the question I asked as an Atheist.  How can I live my life on a belief - on something that appears to not be tangible?   How do I know that living a life of prayer and virtue prepares oneself to meet the Maker at death on good terms?   Is this what really happens?   These questions and more I've wrestled with and I am sure many Atheists have as well.  Even most Saints have questioned God and the afterlife.

It is not easy.  We are bound to 5 senses.  I see a pizza.  I smell it, I taste it, I hear it crunching in my mouth, I feel its heat, bread, cheese and saucy oily texture.  But God, what do I see?  What do I smell, taste, hear or feel?   Living life relying on senses is not easy.

Atheism seems to come to the rescue.  If it had a voice, it would say:
  • We can only trust what our senses tell us. 
  • There is no God, He is dead.  
  • God is imaginary.  
  • Our senses cannot empirically study God so He is not real.  
  • All that matters is the material world.  
  • There is no spiritual world.  

These all sound interesting and often can lure those who may have had a "bad" experience with God or religion.

Science is hijacked as the "Magesterium" of Atheism, so to speak.  However, science does not exist to disprove God or religion.  It exists to study and learn about the natural world.

Theories such as the Theory of Evolution or the "Big Bang" are often thrown around as proof that there is no God.  However, these theories do not disprove God, but highlight His intelligence and creative work.

How? You may be asking.  Well, there is no rationality in the idea that one day everything just exploded into existence, with laws, mathematical order and life evolving on this planet.  Anyone who thinks that is a fool.

Atheism in this sense is a fraud.  It attacks one set of so called "irrational" beliefs and replaces it with an even more irrational one.  

Nothing cannot put something in itself.  SOMEONE has to put SOMETHING in NOTHING.  That is the most rational way of seeing it.  Laws in the universe keep order, but laws need a lawgiver.    

This is one of the reasons why I could not hold Atheistic beliefs any longer.  They just did not make any sense to my rational mathematical mind.

I could not last any longer accepting the ideas that Atheism presented.  It is a fraud.

10 comments:

  1. You made the comment that if atheist had a voice, a few of the things it would say might be...

    There is no God, He is dead.
    God is imaginary.
    Our senses cannot empirically study God so He is not real.
    All that matters is the material world.
    There is no spiritual world.


    While some individuals might try to make those arguments, they are not valid, especially not from the atheistic perspective.

    Atheism does not try to assert that the supernatural does not exist, nor does it attempt to prove that there is no God or supreme being, only that, in the absence of evidence, asserting that they do exist is irrational.

    You have, as I said before, constructed a straw man by insisting that atheism says certain things, which it clearly does not do.

    As an atheist, I am the first to admit that God may exist, that the supernatural may, in fact, be real. However, I would also argue that in the absence of empirical scientific data, it makes little or no sense to commit one's intellect to the proposition.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Atheism, like religion has many factions within its umbrella. There are those who believe there are no gods, and affirm this view as fact.
      There are those who don't believe there are gods, but are not really sure.
      There are those who lack belief in gods, but are open to the possibility.
      There are those who lack belief in god but hold firmly to the belief that there is definitely no god.
      There are those who deny the existence of all gods, and those who deny the God the majority believe in.

      I can go on and on, but you get the point. For all intent and purpose, I try to stick to the general definition of atheism.

      The type of atheism you describe is called the "agnostic/negative atheism."

      Delete
  2. No,Karl is correct. We say this over and over again and Richard Dawkins even makes a point of stressing it and we get the burden of proof emphasis made so often by atheists for this very reason.

    Atheists do NOT say 'There are no gods' 'We cannot see gods so they are not real.' We say 'There may be gods but there is no evidence that there are any and so we will assume there are none until there is some.' This is really not unusual and we say this about other things too and Christians agree with us. Mermaids, leprechauns, vampires etc - it is dishonest to say they do not exist because we cannot know that. We can say, however, that there is no evidence of any of them and we cannot possibly believe in everything anyone has ever claimed to exist. Christians are with us on this when it comes to thousands of gods and even more mythical creatures. They make one exception for a god and possibly some peripheral characters like demons and angels but view it as very strange and illogical when everyone else does not make the same exception.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. What you and karl fail to understand is that atheists cannot redefine what atheism is out of convenience. Atheism is literally a reject of God - "without God." It is not a lack of belief or an assertion that we don't know if God exists. We need to stick by the real definition of atheism. This is why most atheists are agnostics. If you claim "there may be gods, but not sure" then that is agnosticism, not atheism. Atheism is no gods exist period, end of story. This idea that there is no evidence for God is unfounded. For centuries, men of faith and of science have provided evidence. Atheists just don't want to pay attention to it. It is intellectually dishonest to take that subjective position when observing any evidence.

      Delete
    2. As an atheist, I reject all Gods as silly superstition brought about by illiterate people trying to make sense of their world. It's really quite simple. Now maybe you'd like to explain why your version of God is any more valid than Hinduism, Wicca, Buddhism, or any other myriad of conflicting religions?

      "For centuries, men of faith and of science have provided evidence." ...While you're at it, please provide links to these proofs so I can pay attention to them. How absurd.

      Delete
    3. As an atheist, I reject all Gods as silly superstition brought about by illiterate people trying to make sense of their world. It's really quite simple. Now maybe you'd like to explain why your version of God is any more valid than Hinduism, Wicca, Buddhism, or any other myriad of conflicting religions?

      "For centuries, men of faith and of science have provided evidence." ...While you're at it, please provide links to these proofs so I can pay attention to them. How absurd.

      Delete
    4. To date, the claim that belief in God is superstition has not been supported. The greatest of philosophers believed in God. To claim that belief in God stems from illiterate people is an uneducated statement. The difference between my version of God and that of those that you have listed is that the latter defined God, while my version of God comes directly from God. God revealed Himself to the Hebrews and came as Christ. He reached out to us as opposed to the religions you've listed which deal with man's attempt to reach out to Him by defining Him based on experience and understanding of the times.

      At the library or via amazon, you can find texts by scientists of different fields using their knowledge to show evidence for God.

      Delete
  3. I am an atheist.

    My voice says:

    There is simply no evidence for god.

    You assert that the big bang doesn't make sense. I assert that some humanoid god appearing out of nothing is even more unlikely.

    No one that understands the Big Bang Theory holds the belief you emboldened -- it is a misunderstanding on a deep level. The big bang theory has absolutely nothing to do with life or evolution on earth.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I am an atheist.

    My voice says:

    There is simply no evidence for god.

    You assert that the big bang doesn't make sense. I assert that some humanoid god appearing out of nothing is even more unlikely.

    No one that understands the Big Bang Theory holds the belief you emboldened -- it is a misunderstanding on a deep level. The big bang theory has absolutely nothing to do with life or evolution on earth.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. On what grounds do you make the assertion that there is no evidence? I never asserted that the "big bang" does not make sense. What I did write is that using it to prove there is no God is illogical. The "big bang" has every thing to do with life and evolution. Without it, this universe would not exist.

      Delete

Thank you for reading and for your comment. All comments are subject to approval. They must be free of vulgarity, ad hominem and must be relevant to the blog posting subject matter.

Labels

Catholic Church (448) God (306) Atheism (232) Jesus Christ (212) Jesus (208) Bible (171) Pope Francis (164) Atheist (141) LGBT (128) Science (111) Liturgy of the Word (104) Christianity (84) Rosa Rubicondior (75) Pope Benedict XVI (73) Abortion (71) Gay (64) President Obama (56) Prayer (54) Vatican (39) Christian (37) Physics (35) New York City (33) Philosophy (33) Blessed Virgin Mary (32) Christmas (31) Psychology (31) Women (29) Politics (28) Biology (26) Liturgy (26) Baseball (24) Religious Freedom (23) Pope John Paul II (21) Space (21) Holy Eucharist (19) NYPD (19) Pro Abortion (19) priests (19) Evil (18) Supreme Court (18) Child Abuse (17) Pro Choice (17) Evangelization (16) First Amendment (16) Protestant (16) Police (15) Donald Trump (14) Death (13) Health (13) Christ (12) Priesthood (12) Astrophysics (11) Blog (11) Marriage (11) Pedophilia (11) Racism (11) Poverty (10) Illegal Immigrants (9) Theology (9) Vatican II (9) Divine Mercy (8) Human Rights (8) Muslims (8) Personhood (8) September 11 (8) Autism (7) Condoms (7) David Viviano (7) Easter Sunday (7) Ellif_dwulfe (7) Evidence (7) Gender Theory (7) Gospel (7) academia (7) Apologetics (6) Barack Obama (6) Big Bang Theory (6) Humanism (6) Jewish (6) Morality (6) Pentecostals (6) Traditionalists (6) Babies (5) Cognitive Psychology (5) Cyber Bullying (5) NY Yankees (5) Spiritual Life (5) The Walking Dead (5) Angels (4) CUNY (4) Donations (4) Ephebophilia (4) Eucharist (4) Gender Dysphoria Disorder (4) Holy Trinity (4) Podcast (4) Pope Pius XII (4) Evangelicals (3) Hispanics (3) Pluto (3) Pope John XXIII (3) Sacraments (3) Baby Jesus (2) Dan Arel (2) Death penalty (2) Encyclical (2) Founding Fathers (2) Freeatheism (2) Hell (2) Massimo Pigliucci (2) Oxfam (2) Penn Jillette (2) Pew Research Center (2) Plenary Indulgence (2) Catholic Bloggers (1) Cursillo (1) Dan Savage (1) Divine Providence (1) Eastern Orthodox (1) Fear The Walking Dead (1) Pentecostales (1) Pope Paul VI (1)