If they were not around, I would approach Pentecostals, Baptists and other Evangelicals who would stand on the sidewalk with a speaker and microphone shouting and warning everyone to prepare for the end of the world. Their shouts and cries about 666 and how the government would instill chips in their bodies with this code would give me a chuckle and cause me to shake my head in disbelief.
In school and eventually college, I would run into Christian club members and question the heck out of them. They all seem to give the same answers. However, when I questioned the answers even more, they got annoyed and wanted to walk away. To me this seemed strange. Supposedly God would speak on their behalf and give them the answers right?
As I got older and focused more on physics, I began to realize that God may not be a bad explanation after all for the causality of everything. Atheism started to make less sense.
Atheism - to be blunt - was a stupid concept. Here's why:
- Free Thought: Atheists pride themselves in claiming that Atheism is all about free thought. However, I began to question this for the mere fact that Atheists do not give time to the God concept. They are quick to dismiss it as a "sky fairy" superstition. As a science student, my career involved investigating, questioning and theorizing. I could not simple state, "There is no God, it is superstition." This would be intellectually dishonest and a cop out. Atheism is NOT a haven for free thought.
- Denial of Causality: Atheists are quick to dismiss God as the causal factor of all that exists without evidence to support this claim. They hide behind the different theories surrounding the "Big Bang" or the "Big Splat." However, they completely ignore that these events need a trigger. Things do not just happen, there is reason for them. Whatever begins to exist has a cause. Atheism does not answer the question of causality and therefore cannot be taken seriously, scientifically speaking.
- Abuse of Science: Atheists pretend to rely on science to support Atheism; however, nothing in science actually supports Atheism. The "Big Bang" theory, Evolution - two ideas often cited - do not support Atheism. The aforementioned are effects of a prior causal element. Nothing in science suggests that God does not exist. On the contrary, God is often defined in a deist manner in science. Scientists who have trouble believing in God do so because they try to define God within the laws of physics. By doing this, they define a limited God that is subject to the laws of physics instead of the author of them.
- Misrepresenting History: Atheists will misconstrue historical events in order to make religion look primitive or immoral. They will claim that the Catholic Church burned scientists and that the Church was against science in general. This is untrue. Leaders at the time used the capital punishment that was deemed appropriate for a particular crime. The crimes of those who were put to death were disobedience and heresy, not scientific progress. If I lived in those times and went to the Pope and told him that the Bible is wrong and needed to be edited, then of course the Pope and leaders of the time will have issue with that. The same would happen today if I went to the president and told him that the Constitution is not real and that I had the real one which states that we need to have a king, not an electoral process that elects people into office. Will the president be happy and quickly jump to believe me and make the changes? History must be studied in-depth and conclusions must be made with the understanding of how people thought in those times. Centuries from now, our generation will most likely be criticized for having the death penalty and abortion. This criticism will most likely stem from advances that deem the use of the death penalty and abortion unnecessary.
- Contrarian Position: Atheists often will use the contrarian approach as a safety blanket. They will deny whatever argument or evidence is presented to them. This makes any discussion futile and only shows that the Atheist either cannot comprehend the arguments or simply is not interested and is just engaging in a discussion just for the sake of discussion. He/she has no intention of finding the truth. This position debunks the "free thinking" claim atheists present. If one is a free thinker, then one would be objective and absorb whatever evidence or argument presented instead of finding any poor excuse in order to invalidate it.
- Filter: Atheists often use a mental filter in order to counter any arguments or evidence presented. They will judge the aforementioned via this filter in order to avoid looking unprepared or foolish when strong arguments are presented. Again, this filter does a disservice to the supposed "free thinking" that atheism is said to bring about. If I enter a dialog already convinced that I am right, then I will not learn anything.
- Straw Man - Atheists are well known for their reliance on the Straw man fallacy. They misconstrue what they believe Faith and God is in order to for it to favor their ridicule. When closely analyzed, their arguments and attempts to describe Faith, God and Religion are nothing more than misrepresentations.
- Atheism is Stupid: The idea that God does not exist or that there is no evidence is unfounded. For centuries philosophers, religious thinkers and scientists have offered all kinds of proof for the existence of God. The suggestion that there is no evidence for God is simply not true. There is indeed evidence for God. Whether or not one wants to accept it, then that is another issue. Nevertheless, the rejection of evidence does not invalidate that evidence. It merely shows sophophobia.
As a student of science, a mere "I do not believe" is not enough for me. I am a seeker of truth, not a denier of anything that might be truth. Atheism was not for me. Atheism is for the intellectual sloth who does not take the effort to find answers to questions.