Friday, 28 March 2008


I’m a canonical person who is sometimes bordering on the verge of insanity as some people around me will aver. So, as I tattle about me being an atheist, no one needs to take heed. I don’t want to bore you with my perpetual lecture about Atheism. Anyhow here goes aught.

Someone today brought up the issue which got me thinking again about HIM i.e. GOD. I always assay to ascertain why I bother to waste my invaluable time to think about HIS existence or non-existence (According to me) ? It’s been a hell lot of time since I last spared HIM a thought! Those of you who are still reading this and aren’t bored to death will tend to think that I’m sacrilegious.

For those unworldly beings who doesn’t know what Atheism Means: The word ‘atheism’ comes from the negative ‘a’ which means ‘no’ and ‘theos’ which means ‘god.’ Hence, atheism in the most base terms means ‘no god.’ Basically, atheism is the lack of belief in a god and/or the belief that there is no god. By contrast, theism is the belief that there is a God and that He is knowable. I need to mention that most atheists do not consider themselves anti-theists. Most consider themselves as non-theists. I've encountered many atheists who claim that atheism is not a belief system while others say it is. Since there is no official atheist organization, nailing down which definition of atheism to use can be difficult. Following are some definitions offered by atheists. ·

"An atheist is someone who believes and/or knows there is no god."

"An atheist lacks belief in a god."

"An atheist exercises no faith in the concept of god at all."

"An atheist is someone who is free from religious oppression and bigotry."

"An atheist is someone who is a free-thinker, free from religion and its ideas."

Which ever definition you go by, atheism denies God. There are two main categories of atheists: strong and weak, with variations in between. A strong atheist actively believes and states that no God exists. They expressly denounce the Christian God along with any other god. Strong atheists are usually more aggressive in their conversations with theists and try shoot holes in theistic beliefs. They like to use logic and anti-biblical evidences to denounce God's existence. Agnostic Atheists, as I call them, are those who deny God's existence based on an examination of evidence. Agnosticism means 'not knowing,' or 'no knowledge.' I call them agnostic because they state they have looked at the evidence and have concluded that there is no God. But, the interesting thing with them is that they say they are open further evidence for God's existence. Weak atheists simply exercise no faith in God. The weak atheist might be better explained as a person who lacks belief in God the way a person might lack belief that there is a green lizard in a rocking chair on the moon; it isn't an issue. He doesn't believe or not believe it. Finally, there is a group of atheists that I call militant atheists. They are, fortunately, few in number. They are usually highly insulting and profoundly terse in their comments to theists, particularly Christians. I’ve encountered a few of them and they are vile, rude, and highly condescending. Their language is full of insults, profanity, and blasphemies. Basically, no meaningful conversation can be had with them at all.

But indeed I think GOD is a theoretical conception contrived to ply psychological back up to people.

Atheist positions seem to fall into two main categories. The first is the lack of evidence category where the atheist asserts that the supporting evidence isn't good enough for him to affirm God's existence. The second is the category where they believe that the idea of God existing is illogical and contrary to the evidence at hand. To simplify, one says there isn't enough evidence to decide and the other says there is evidence contrary to God's existence. For those atheists who simply lack belief and exercise no energy in the discussion, neither category applies because they are not involved in the debate. A typical argument posed by an atheist to show why God does not exist is as follows: God is supposed to be all good and all powerful. Evil and suffering exist in the world. If God is all good he would not want evil and suffering to exist. If He is all powerful then He is able to remove all evil and suffering. Since evil and suffering exist, God is either not all good (which means he is not perfect and not God), or he is not all powerful (and limited in abilities and scope). Since either case shows God is not all good and powerful, then He does not exist.

Some Basic Tenets of Atheism

Presuppositions are important to us all. We look at the world through them. The atheist has a set of presuppositions, too. Though there is no definitive atheist organization that defines the absolutes of atheism, there are basic principles that atheists, as a whole, tend to adopt. They are listed below. Please note however, that not all atheists assert all of these tenets. The only absolute common one they hold to is that they do not believe in a God or gods.

1. There is no God or devil.

2. There is no supernatural realm.

3. Miracles cannot occur.

4. There is no such thing as sin as a violation of God's will.

5. Generally, the universe is materialistic and measurable.

6. Man is material.

7. Generally, evolution is considered a scientific fact.

8. Ethics and morals are relative.

For the Christian, atheism clashes with many aspects of our faith. Some atheists openly attack Christianity citing apparent contradictions in the Bible, perceived philosophical difficulties related to God, and what they consider as logical evidences against God's existence. But the atheists' criticisms are not without answers. Hopefully, this information will help answer some of their claims and give reasons for believing in God.

We sometimes tend to think otherwise that there indeed is something out there which we have no clew around but what if it’s a legerdemain? What if there is nothing at all?

These are questions to which I haven’t been able to answer but I can surely say that which I can’t see, feel, hear or touch, I don’t believe.

Can Atheists be ethical?

The answer to this question is a definite, "Yes." Atheists are people who, whether they like it or not, have the law written on their hearts. They are subject to the same laws of our country (and other countries). They have a sense of right and wrong. They must work with people and being unethical in society would not serve them very well. It is practical and logical for an atheist to be ethical and work within the norms of social behavior. Atheists, generally, are honest, hardworking people. Nevertheless, some Christians raise the question, "What is to prevent an atheist from murdering and stealing? After all, they have no fear of God and no absolute moral code." The answer is simple: Atheists are capable of governing their own moral behavior and getting along in society the same as anyone else. At the risk of labeling the atheist as self-centered, it does not serve the best interests of an atheist to murder and steal. It would not take long before he was imprisoned and/or killed for his actions. Basically, society will only put up with so much if it is to function smoothly. So, if an atheist wants to get along and have a nice life, murdering and stealing won't accomplish it. It makes sense for him to be honest, work hard, pay his bills, and get along with others. Basically, he has to adopt a set of ethics common to society in order to do that. Belief in God is not a requirement for ethical behavior or an enjoyable life.

On the other hand

Atheists' morals are not absolute. They do not have a set of moral laws from an absolute God by which right and wrong are judged. But, they do have a legal system with a codified set of moral laws. This would be the closest thing to moral absolutes for atheists. However, since the legal system changes (slavery was legal 200 years ago but is not now), the morals in a society can still change. At best, these codified morals are "temporary absolutes." This can be a problem as the norms of society shift and the ethics shift with them. In one century abortion is wrong. In another, it is right. Well, is it or isn't it right? If there is a God, killing the unborn is wrong. If there is no God, then who cares? If it serves the best interest of society and the individual, then kill. This can be likened to something I call, "experimental ethics." In other words, whatever works best is right. Society experiments with ethical behavior to determine which set of rules works best for it. Unfortunately, however, social experimentation is often harmful.

There are potential dangers in this kind of ethical system. If a totalitarian political system is instituted and a mandate is issued to kill all dissenters, or Christians, or mentally ill, what is to prevent the atheist from joining forces with the majority system and support the killings? It serves his self-interests, so why not? But, to be fair, just because someone has an absolute ethical system based upon the Bible or Gita or Koran or any other Holy Book for that matter is no guarantee that he will not also join forces for the killings. But the issue is the base and ramifications of that base. Beliefs affect behavior. That is why belief systems are so important and absolutes are so necessary. A boat adrift without an anchor soon crashes into the rocks. The Bible teaches love, patience, and seeking the welfare of others even when it might harm the Christian; in this the ten commandments are a summary. In contrast, the atheists' presuppositions must be evolutionary. Since evolution teaches that life is the product of purely natural and utilitarian properties of our world, survival of the fittest, natural selection, and equating humans to animals as a species are the ontological basis for our existence and living. With this the value of man is lowered. In contrast, it is a very high calling to treat people properly who also are made in the image of God.

Basically, I do not see how the atheist could claim any moral absolutes at all. To an atheist, ethics must be variable and evolving. This could be good or bad. But, given human nature being what it is, I'll opt for the moral absolutes.

I have read incandescently many theistical and atheistical books but haven’t arrived at a conclusion yet. But will what I am rambling about have any repercussions in those who read it eventually? I doubt it. What good will it do for you to read a lecture on atheism given by a hallucinating 25 year old male? Don’t you think you have wasted a lot of time if you are indeed still reading this? Anyway, if you visualize anything about GOD and want to speak out then do reply and let others know about what your view is !!! Signing off here. Will write again if anyone is duly interested to hear what this crackerball of an atheist has to say.

No comments:

Post a Comment