Atheism is not just about pointing out the fallacies of religion...


#1

Note: I do NOT hate atheists in general. It would be unbecoming of me if I did so.

This site is a site that “specializes” in pointing out the fallacies of religion, in particular the Catholic faith. Some of the arguments/articles presented on the site may seem strong but if you read again, they are weak in the gut.


For the aspiring apologist, you may debate about them on the site forum, but that’s really up to you.

Anyways here’s a few I dug up:

Biblical Basis for a Young Earth
(The “reasoning” behind the insanity…)

***Regardless of your biblical interpretation, ***you will end up with an age of the Earth between 6,000 and 10,000 years old. This is far from 4.6 billion years old.

“Regardless of your biblical interpretation” (??)
If I can recall, the word used in Hebrew is “yom”. “Yom” is rendered “day” in the English translation. But “yom” really means a period of undetermined length. Therefore we have 6 periods of undetermined length!

I think the author also forgets that the sun itself was made on the 4th period therefore “day” is NOT a solar day!

  1. SCIENCE, TRUTH AND THE CHURCH

In rational, intelligent human beings, when they learn a fact that is in direct conflict with a held belief, they reevaluate that belief and likely reject it as untrue. However, most religious people act as if they do not want to be bothered with facts. These are some of the most dangerous and psychologically unstable people on the planet. They’re willingly being controlled by a schizophrenic mind that allows both fact and fiction, truths and mythology to govern their actions. They knowingly let this unstable mind exist and use it to evaluate their friends and neighbors, other groups (religious or not) and other countries.

The author (who I have nothing against mind you) of the article continues later by comparing scientific truth and the “Catholic Church’s” explanation on how things work ( rather odd because his “RCC’s” explanations are unfounded and are not in line with the Church’s public interpretation of the Bible itself!) Obviously, the notes he put under the table, Church/Religious Explanation, are his private interpretations of the Bible and don’t even reflect the Catholic Church’s interpretation! :confused:


#2

And Brutus is an honorable man :stuck_out_tongue:

Those articles seem to be aimed mostly, if not entirely, at Biblical literalists, with whom the Catholic Church, as I recall, has its own beef.


#3

I don’t believe in Greek mythology, yoga, feng shui, or that microwaves really bake potatoes, but I put forth time, effort and expense to set up websites rebutting any of them. It is a mystery to me why an atheist would spend 30 seconds debating something that as far as he is concerned does not exist.


#4

You don’t want to humilate Catholicism by associating it with young-Earth creationism.


#5

et el

If one checks into the background of a atheist you will often find (name it what you will) but backslidden christians, those who were offended by God, Jesus, another christian, a church, or a religious practice like refusal of blood transfusions by JW’s but the practice has been applied to all.

In the atheists view all christians catholic, protestant, jw, mormon, are all the same mindless, cant speak for themselves, have not left the superstition of our caveman ansestors.

When they are not moving goal posts or recognizing the discussion as another held by so and so in history, in discussions they ask good questions and its a great exersice for ones faith, standing accountable for what you believe. :slight_smile:


#6

It’s funny though, the author of the site claims his works are good proof and evidence against the Catholic Church’s teachings yet these “Church teachings” he lists are not even accepted by the Church! So if you look at it, the arguments would have more validity (and dignity) if he actually argued against something that the Church holds true. But he argues instead about certain things that the Church (and plain old common sense) would not agree upon or things which the Church has no official stand on. What he declares as “Church teaching” is NOT even official Church teaching!

Over centuries people have been reminded not to take the Bible too literally and to look at the Church’s official public interpretation of the textut when making arguments in order to “prove” the Bible’s fallacy


#7

I was an for a decade atheist before I became a Catholic, and I use to hang out at the forum for websites like that.

Arguing with them is a waste of time. The vast majority of them are there for emotional reasons. They hate God. And if you talk to them long enough, and shoot down enough of their objections, eventually, almost all of them will get to how they think God is evil.

I spent the first few months of my conversion chasing them in circles about it on a forum.

Science, evolution, reason…its all a pretense in all but a handful of them. (And those are the handful that you never find saying things like “Rational and intelligent people are all atheists.”)


#8

Exactly! What possible benefit could they have for “converting” someone to atheism?


#9

What I’ve also noticed about atheists on atheist forums is that they know that they are the vast minority. (A fact considering that they number less than 200 million world wide compared the 2 Billion+ Christians) And most live in areas where Christianity is predominant. Therefore, Christianity is the most “attacked” religion than any other on atheist forums. So, to many of these forums users (since it would be unjust and unwise to say all share such views), we are the Goliaths and, we are at the same time, the “dumbdumbs” of the world for believing in the existence of God, the Bible, Creation, etc… So by de-converting Christians into atheism they gain numbers (duh). And by gaining numbers,
it seems to “benefit the world” since there are more “intelligent humans” and less “fundie dummies”. Rather odd. Of course there are nice ones as well but, from forum experience, they seem to be disgusted at me once they figure out Im Christian. If you play nice they’ll eventually forget it just like any person.:rolleyes:


#10

Well, I’m not that cynical. For alot of atheists, its emotional.

But, while I was an atheist, I argued plenty with my friends (who are almost all fundamentalist protestants, so we had plenty to argue about, just in the first two chapters of the Bible). I never cared about “expanding our numbers”…I just thought my views were the truth. And I wanted people to know that truth.

Now, I argue with atheists in exact reverse. Largely its for the same reason. I want people to know the truth.

One can be an atheist and value Truth as an ideal (I always held truth as the ideal…that’s why I wound up a Catholic after I had enough time to think it over :wink: ). As far as nonreligious ideals go, Truth isn’t such a bad one to have.

I think the real atheists and the really religious both agree on one thing, though:

Whoever is right, this subject is important.

The people that bother me the most are the ones who disagree on that one thing…who think its irrelevant…who say “Sure, there’s a God, a heaven for the good and a hell for the bad.” in the same tone of voice they would say “I guess I’ll eat steak tonight.”

One of the things that caught me most by surprise after my conversion was that the statement “There is a good God.” didn’t make me feel happy, or warm and fuzzy inside. Pardon my French, but it scared the **** out of me. There is a God…and He cares about what’s right…which means He doesn’t like 9/10ths of what I’ve done with my life. That all these little games we play with each other in polite society to pretend we are all rightous aren’t going to fly with Him. The standing in front of Him, I don’t think I could even try.

Anyways, there are some intelligent, smart atheists (they are also not the ones calling us all “dumbdumbs”).

There are some dumb Christians (I’m sorry, As an atheist, I thought most Creationist Scientists were charlatans. As a Catholic, I think most Creationist Scientists are charlatans. Actually, as an atheist, I thought AnswersInGenesis.com was funny. As a Christian, I wish they would just go away the same way I wish Fred Phelps would just go away).


#11

In the U.S., I often hear a figure of 10% quoted. Not exactly a vast minority, just a disorganized one. I see no reason why the figure would differ worldwide.

And most live in areas where Christianity is predominant. Therefore, Christianity is the most “attacked” religion than any other on atheist forums.

That’s because for atheists living in a place populated with a Christian majority, Christianity is the religion that’s in their faces all the time and therefore the religion they comment on most. Given that atheists are the most despised minority in the U.S., it’s not a surprise if they do attack Christianity as they experience it.

So by de-converting Christians into atheism they gain numbers (duh).

And by converting non-Christians, Christians gain numbers. Duh.

I don’t know many atheists who try to de-convert religious believers. In fact, I don’t know any at all, but I suspect those that do have a firm inner conviction that they’re doing the believer a favor and from my point of view, they may well be right.

they seem to be disgusted at me once they figure out Im Christian. If you play nice they’ll eventually forget it just like any person.

You’re saying you’re not nice, then they are disgusted at you, and when you start to play nice they tolerate you? Why play nice, by the way – are you trying to convert them?

I generally stay away from atheist forums; I know I am one, so what’s the point of hanging out with others and pat ourselves on the back for a job well done? Forums and blogs run by atheists are a different story, there’s often a lot more commonality of interest due to clustered belief sets. In either case, all too many Christians dropping by these sites are nothing but rude, vacuous, and barely articulate trolls. After a while, a bias develops that strongly disfavors religious believers.


#12

What many atheists fail to realize is that they have deified science and reason. To say that they are godless is strictly not true. Try as we might, human beings by their nature need a god. We just choose another when we deny God.


#13

I hope his scientific proofs are better than his poetry:smiley:


#14

What many theists fail to realize is that atheist do not deify science and reason – it’s just what’s left when you don’t succumb to blind faith. It’s not uncommon for drive-by theists to deliver a variation of this line on atheist forums, resulting in richly deserved derision for not even getting the tu coque fallacy right.


#15

The point is that there is a very real intellectual debate going on between Christianity and atheism. I use the word Christianity advisably. No one of any philosophical standing is a Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist, or rather is a man of standing as a Muslim, Hindu or Buddhist. Similarly no one of standing believes the Orthodox Jewish position on the Bible. Though there are Jews of intellectual standing, these are men who have made their name in Christian academic institutions, as secular thinkers.

However the average atheist you will meet isn’t really a contributor to that debate. He has picked that it is going on, and attached himself to the atheist side, for emotional reasons. Most of the arguments he offers are very weak. In writing 12 Common Atheist Arguments, precisely one atheist admitted that I had identified one weak argument. A professional philosopher, of course, knows that it is relatively easy to identify weak arguments for a position, and refuting them isn’t a knock out blow. Nor do I claim anything else in the book. The problem is that once an atheist starts identifying weak arguemnts for atheism he is in intellectual territory, and his world view begins to slip.

Having said that, the atheist is in a much better spiritual state than the agnostic who says “Christianity might be true for you, but don’t try to claim it has any relevance for anyone else”, or “I am a spiritual person but I don’t believe in organised religion”. He is saying “prove your position”. To a point that is reasonable. The problem is that the nature of the proof isn’t what the atheist thinks it is; just as the value of PI can’t be obtained by measuring various circular objects but needs a whole new way of thinking, so it is with the debate on the existence of God.


#16

Having associated with more than one atheist, my observation is that it smells, sounds, talks like a religion. They were as enslaved to their point of view as any deists I have ever met.


#17

I don’t know the “atheists” you have “associated with”, but I can assure you that just like the science and reason are the gods of atheism, the atheism is like a religion play shuts the door to any meaningful discourse with every atheist I myself know. It’s one of many tired old saws that we’ve answered time and time again, to the point of summarily dismissing anybody who brings them up.


#18

I don’t entirely agree with your phrasing and your conclusion.

The Christianity most atheists are exposed to doesn’t invite debate and comes across as profoundly anti-intellectual. Most atheists I know won’t go out of their way to debate Christians, because they consider it a waste of their time. They will engage articulate Christians who come to their sites, but these are few and far in between.

However the average atheist you will meet isn’t really a contributor to that debate. He has picked that it is going on, and attached himself to the atheist side, for emotional reasons. Most of the arguments he offers are very weak. In writing 12 Common Atheist Arguments, precisely one atheist admitted that I had identified one weak argument.

I don’t know which “Atheist Arguments” you refer to, but as far as I’m concerned I don’t have to justify why I find Christian apologetics as intellectually weak (if not deliberately dishonest or inflammatory), unconvincing, and uncompelling. The ball in in the Christian’s court to make their case.


#19

the evidentiary ball is in the court of anyone making a positive claim. like someone who says, “christianity is false”.

or, “christian apologetics are intellectually weak”…

so. whatcha got?


#20

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in these forums do not necessarily reflect those of Catholic Answers. For official apologetics resources please visit www.catholic.com.