No announcement yet.

Why Can't Atheists Answer this Question?

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Why Can't Atheists Answer this Question?

    Here is a good argument against atheism.

    You should read it to strengthen your faith in God and also to be able to show others why God has to be real.

    Why Can't Atheists Answer this Question?

    [COLOR=#777777 !important]By Gary DeMar / 21 March 2016 / 1 Comment[/COLOR]

    Atheists are evangelists for a materialistic religion.

    A recent attempt at atheism evangelism is with a banner that reads: “Relax: hell does not exist, or heaven either, enjoy your life.”

    The following is my attempt to show what could happen if a person consistently followed the operating assumptions of atheism:

    After noticing the above sign, a curious atheist followed the man who posted the sign into a bar to engage him in conversation.

    First Atheist: I noticed your banner that I should enjoy life because there's no hell, no ultimate judgment. Do you mean that after death there won't be a God to judge me for what I do or don’t do while I am alive?

    Second Atheist: Yes. In fact, there won’t be anyone or anything to judge you and me. There’s no karma or transmigration of the soul. As the song says, “All we are is dust in the wind.” Furthermore, God is a fictional character that humans created a long time ago to give meaning to life before there was science. When something in the world could not be explained, humans attributed the unknown to supernatural entities like gods and devils, spirits, and sprites. Since the advent of science, we know that only matter matters. If it can't be seen under a microscope or its properties can't be measured, it doesn't exist. Invisible beings like gods, ghosts, and goblins can't exist in a world that is now defined by the physical sciences.

    First Atheist: So if I can’t see it or examine it, it does not exist. If a claimed entity does not have any physical properties, it does not exist.

    Second Atheist: Yes. Science has come a long way in removing many religious superstitions of the past. They’re still with us, but our organization is working overtime to eliminate every vestige of religion and the supernatural from our world.

    First Atheist: I'm so relieved. All my life I was taught that there was a divine being who brought the world into existence, expressed His character in a specific moral code, and one day would judge me based on how I measured up to that moral code. So you're saying that no such entity exists and I'm free to enjoy life on my terms. I want to be sure about this. There’s a lot riding on an atheistic belief system.

    Second Atheist: Yes. As our banners say, “Relax: hell does not exist, or heaven either, enjoy your life.”

    First Atheist: That’s why your banner caught my attention and makes my life worth living. I have a purpose for living. Any guilt I had is gone. Now give all your money to me and the keys to your car. I also want the PIN numbers to all your accounts. If you don't do what I say, I'm going to blow your brains out.

    Second Atheist: We are free to enjoy life as long as our enjoyment does not infringe upon the rights of others.

    First Atheist: Who says? On what basis is this true and obligatory?

    Second Atheist: It’s common decency.

    First Atheist: Who gets to determine what’s decent?

    Second Atheist: It's wrong to steal and murder.

    First Atheist: No. At this moment in time it's unlawful to steal and what religious people claim is murder. Laws are social conventions that are a holdover from our superstitious religious past. Survival of the fittest is the true basis of non-religious evolutionary origins. Laws are constantly changing. That shows that there are no moral absolutes. As atheists we can't prove that moral absolutes exist since no one has ever seen a moral absolute or has been able to study one. They’re like the phantasms we dismiss as being unreal.

    Second Atheist: But there all kinds of moral absolutes that can be studied.

    First Atheist: Show me one. You said that only the physical is real. God is not a material entity that can be studied by the standards of science, so He cannot exist. That’s what we atheists claim. Show me the actual physical laws against murder and stealing. Of course, you can't because they don't exist given our materialist assumptions.

    Second atheist: Reason tells us that murder and stealing are wrong.

    First atheist: That's the best you can come up with? Reason? I think it's very reasonable to take your stuff because I'll enjoy all of its benefits. Your sign tells everyone to enjoy themselves. This is how I want to enjoy myself. Anyway, whose version of reason should I follow? Yours? It seems reasonable to me to take your stuff since you aren't really being consistent with your belief system. You're holding on to the remnants of religion and the fictional worlultimately reasonable. Adolf Hitler didn’t believe he was being irrational or unreasonable. Neither did Lenin nor Stalin, and they killed millions of meat machines for what they claimed were for very rational reasons. The French fought a revolution for the absoluteness of reason. Guess what? They took people's stuff and killed people in the name of reason and called it “virtue.”

    Second Atheist: But civilization depends on laws and morality.

    First Atheist: A consistent atheist cannot account for meaning, morality, or rationality. If there is no judgment after death, then there is no difference between Adolf Hitler who killed 6 million Jews and businessman Oskar Schindler who is credited with saving the lives of 1,200 Jews from almost certain death. At death, given atheist assumptions, they are equal, nothing more than dust in the wind.

    Mao Zeong and Josef Stalin would argue that they were working for a type of world that they believed would bring the most joy for themselves and those like them. Your banner is pretty stupid. You need to think through your belief system before you end up like atheist Madalyn Murray O'Hair. In 1995, she was kidnapped and murdered "along with her son Jon Murray and granddaughter Robin Murray O'Hair, by former American Atheist office manager David Roland Waters.”

    Waters must have said to himself, “I need to relax. Hell does not exist. I won’t be judged for this.”
    Now that I think about it, I don’t like atheism. If I can rob and kill you with no eternal consequences, then other people can do the same to me.

    The views expressed in this opinion article are solely those of their author and are not necessarily either shared or endorsed by
    Last edited by Lou Newton; March 21, 2016, 10:19 AM.

  • #2
    What an enlightening skit. That argument defeats itself. Man's reason condemns murder and stealing one moment, and then justifies murder and stealing the next. This is the distinction between lawful (God-given law) and legal (man-made "law", or man's faulty interpretation of God-given law).

    Although it is a clear demonstration of the folly of atheism, there is also a direct application to theism outside of YHWH and His morals.

    The international banks and their corporations posing as governments are using man-made law to justify more than a century of murder and robbery on a multinational scale. Although it is illegal, even under their own man-made laws (aka Satan-made laws), they twist and hide the meaning of words, use trickery, and make evil presumptions so they can maintain the appearance of lawfulness under a veil of semantic deceit. And through legalistic immunity acts they indemnify themselves of crimes for which they hold their victims accountable, thus operating under two sets of laws: one for the masses and one for them, both in favor of the predator.

    The people in the royal and corporate dynasties are not atheists. Yet God reveals the same folly, arguably magnified, than those who profess to not believe in a god. This should be obvious to anyone who has been freed of deceptions like "I suppose it's a necessary evil".
    Last edited by Baruch; March 22, 2016, 02:27 PM.