Thursday, April 4, 2013

Atheism is STUPID III

Due to the fact that my previous posts Atheism is STUPID I and Atheism is STUPID II have been such a success, I have decided to make a third installment.  In this third part, I will focus on Presentism and Evidence.

Presentism
Atheism is stupid in how it abuses the term "evidence" with the filter of presentism.  Presentism is defined as: "an attitude toward the past dominated by present-day attitudes and experiences"  In other words, people of the present many times impose their attitudes, experiences and understanding on people of the past.

By doing this, one will come out with unfair interpretations of the past.  Atheists are guilty of this.  They read certain passages in the Bible and cry foul!  Some passages seem to present God as this evil entity.  Others are violent, such as the "bashing of babies on rocks" verse (Psalms 137:9).  Atheists read this and immediate denounce the Bible as an evil book and God as an abuser of mankind.  This judgment is based on presentism.  The atheist is interpreting the past via experiences and understandings of the present.  The atheist completely ignores the literary style of the passage, the time and circumstance, and the audience.  These are a recipe for doubt and rash judgement against God and Scripture.

Granted, there are passages in Scripture that will naturally raise an eyebrow; however, those passages have their meaning that must be studied.  The passages in question will make more sense when looking at it via exegesis.  A lack of exegesis will result in either the formation of a new sect or atheism.  Students sometimes have trouble learning mathematics.  Basic arithmetic is not a big deal; however, when alegebra comes into play and students see the xyz's and abc's mixed with 123's, then they become agitated.  To them, the concepts seem extremely illogical and complex to understand or complete.  However, when the rules of how to interpret these equations is carefully taught, students will begin to see how easy this math really is.  It may take a little more thinking as opposed to a simple 2+2=4 problem; nevertheless, the equations are doable.

Similarly, Scripture must be read carefully.  It must not be read like a newpaper and then attacked due to its apparent message.  Care must be taken to read it in context so as to avoid presentism.  Presentism must be set aside.  If presentism is used, then one will fall into the fallacious arguments of writers such as Christopher Hitchens or Thomas Paine.  

Evidence
Evidence is a word atheists like to throw around - they ask: Where is the evidence?  When atheists ask theists for evidence for God and the theist cannot produce a man in a white robe, then they immediately cry out victory.  They believe that a theist's inability to produce a 3D tactile presentation of God to be proof that no such being exists. In my "no evidence for God, therefore no God post," I touch on this in more detail.

Evidence for God does not have to be in the form of an actual being.  It would be like demanding the animated body of President Lincoln in order to believe he existed.  As I write this, the Mar's Rover is rolling around Mars looking for evidence of life or past life.  The Rover is doing this by collecting samples of soil.  Based on the composition of the soil, the Rover will be able to find evidence of life or past life.

Think about it:  NASA is studying Mars to find evidence of life. So why can't we study nature to find evidence of God - its creator?  Why are atheists quick to knock down any arguments from design if NASA is looking for life based on the design of composition in soil samples collected?  One can see why atheism is indeed stupid or contrarian in regards to evidence of God.  Similarly, many NASA scientists believe life does exist on other planets.  They base this idea on the mere fact that the universe is huge and there are hundreds of billions of galaxies each with its own planetary systems.  Therefore, the logic is that if the universe has all this space with galaxies and planets, then life must be present elsewhere as well.

Ironically, when nature or the design of nature is used to show an intelligent creator, atheists do not want to hear it.  This makes absolutely no sense.  It is irrational to believe that order can come about from disorder.  It is irrational to believe that everything that exists-exists in this way by mere coincidence.  It is more probable to believe that an elaborate design has a designer that is intelligent and able to create order with aesthetic value.

Atheism is stupid for cherry picking what it considers evidence and what it does not.  Similarly, atheism is stupid for judging ancient texts via presentism.  They lose the true meaning by resorting to this mental filter.

We need to end the stupidity called Atheism.              
    

4 comments:

  1. On presentism: Surely God is eternal and unchanging?
    >order can come about from disorder
    What disorder?
    >mere coincidence
    is there a god of dice then as well, or can coincidence occur without gods?
    >It is more probable to believe...
    I have never seen or heard any reliable account of anything being created 'ex deus'

    Also you still seem to be generalising, remember the parable of the good samaritan. Try to talk about the issues rather than the people.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't think you understand what presentism means. Presentism means when we interpret the past with today's thinking. The disorder of matter as it formed to become what we call the universe. There is no coincidence in creation, the math does not allow for chance to be a factor. If you have not seen or heard, then it is time for you to do research. My post addresses atheism not atheists. Please reread the post carefully.

      Delete
  2. Having seen some of you posts on twitter, it's rather clear to me that you don't really think through things. One thing you do is you attempt to shift the burden of proof, it you your claim, so you must prove it.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It is hard to take your words seriously because of the lack of substance. It comes across as a cheap jab instead of a critique. You claim that I don't think things through despite my posts containing explanations and cites, but do not cite anything that will make your case. The burden of proof is something you need to understand before reasoning. Every claim I make here is supported. I would appreciate for you to do the same, otherwise this comment is simply made out of stupidity.

      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)