Common Atheists' Myths

http://www.godandscience.org/apologetics/atheists_myths.html ^

[truthfinder9]

Introduction

I know that Christians are supposed to be the ones who believe a lot of myths. However, the vast majority of atheists believe myths such as religion is the primary cause of wars, and the vast amount of atrocities have been caused by religious people, the Bible has been vastly changed over the centuries, Paul invented Christianity, and the list goes on and on. Find your favorite myth below and read the article so that you won't embarrass yourself in the future.

Atheists' Myths

• Atheists have Proven God Does Not Exist. Right? - Only if that god is not the God of the Bible
• Religion is the Cause of All (Most) of the World's Problems - Religion is not even close to being the leading cause suffering in the world. In fact, atheists have been responsible for most of it within the last 100 years.
• Are Most Wars the Result of Religious Belief? - Religion is implicated in less than 7% of all wars over the entire written history of mankind.
• Is Christianity a Made-up Myth Written by the Disciples? - Now really - would the disciples write about all their shortcomings, make the Christian church into a female, design heaven with no sex in it, and say that they were going to be married to Jesus in heaven? I don't know about you guys, but this is not what I would have written if I had made up the Bible!
• Paul Invented Christianity? Is the Founder of the Christian Religion Paul of Tarsus or Jesus of Nazareth? All Paul's core teachings were also taught by Jesus and the disciples, and are even found in the Old Testament.
• Misquoting Jesus: Does Bart Erhman Prove the New Testament is Corrupt? - Contrary to Erhman's claims, the New Testament canon was established in the early second century, and scribal errors/changes did not affect any significant Christian doctrine.
• The Christian Church Was Never Really Persecuted - Were all the reported persecutions of Christians were made up by the Christian church?
• The Bible Has Been Changed Over the Centuries From the Original? - Sorry, the manuscript evidence doesn't support this idea at all.
• Jesus Christ as God and the Trinity Was Not Invented Until the Fourth Century? Contrary to the claims of The Da Vinci Code, even secular sources indicate that Christians worshipped Jesus Christ as God no later than 113 A.D.
• This Joyful Eastertide: A Critical Review of The Empty Tomb (2006) - Has the resurrection been proven false? )
• The Universe Just Happened Without Any Need For a Designer - For all those who expect to win at lotto!
• There is No Evidence For the Fine Tuning of the Universe - The cosmological constant (dark energy) shows this belief to be false
• "The Lost Tomb of Jesus": Have the Bones of Jesus Christ Been Found? Only if Jesus had his ossuary inscribed when He was 2 years old!
• Omnipotence is Logically Impossible? Atheists attempt to define God out of existence through illogical arguments
• The Universe is Eternal - Contrary to atheist's claims, the majority of scientists state as fact that the universe had a beginning.
• Only Stupid People Believe in God - A large number of famous scientists believed in God, many being devout Christians
• The Roman Catholic Church's Condom Policy is Responsible For the Spread of HIV and the AIDS Crisis in Africa - Actually, HIV infection rates are lower in Catholic-dominated countries!
• The Myth of the Flat Earth by Jeffrey Burton Russell - The "history" that Christians taught a flat earth was not invented until the 19th century. (off site)
• People are Basically Good - Proof to the Contrary
• Jesus didn't really die on the Cross? - The old swoon theory doesn't hold up to historical/medical reality.
• Hitler was a Christian? - This seems like a no brainer, but there are free-thinkers who think he was. (off site)
• Jesus and Adolf Hitler - The new (and improved?) German Jesus (off site)
• Are Atheists and Theists Morally Equivalent? Aren't atheists morally superior to theists?
• Atheism Doesn't Lead to Immoral Behavior - Or Does It? In theory it doesn't, but in practice...
• Atheism and Humanism Provide Hope for the Future - The ultimate "hope" of atheism is eternal entropy as the universe loses all ability to perform work, and all life, consciousness, and knowledge is eternally destroyed.
• The Bible Teaches a Flat Earth Covered by a Solid Dome
• Teaching Religion to Children is a Form of Child Abuse? Dawkins's hypothesis is falsified.
• BLOODLINE: Serious Documentary or Hollywood Hoax? - by Gordon Franz MA
• Debunking Dawkins: The God Delusion
  • Debunking Dawkins: The God Delusion Chapter 1: A deeply religious non believer - Deception, lies, and misrepresentations.
  • Debunking Dawkins: The God Delusion Chapter 2: The God Hypothesis - Failure to support debunked assertions, quoting out-of-context, and a desire to escape moral accountability.
  • Debunking Dawkins: The God Delusion Chapter 4: Why There Almost Certainly Is No God - Richard Dawkins' Ultimate Boeing 747 argument is shown to be formally fallacious.
• The Universe Just Created Itself Out of Nothing - Why Stephen Hawking is wrong about God not creating the universe.
• Book Review: The Moral Landscape by Sam Harris - Sam Harris claims that science can determine human values, but just resorts to ranting about religion.

For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. (2 Timothy 4:3-4)

More Answers

• Answers for Atheists and Agnostics
  • Criticisms of God's Character from Atheists and Agnostics
  • Criticisms of God on the Basis of the Existence of Evil and Suffering
  • Religion is Stupid
  • Bad Christians
  • Bible and Science Criticisms
  • Answers to Bible Contradictions
  • Skeptics' Objections to Christianity
  • No Evidence of the Supernatural?

[James C. Bennett]

What *objective* grounds do you have to advocate one over the other?

The Golden Rule, or in other words, the Principle of Reciprocity. Break it, and you'll have real-world consequences that are to the detriment of any organised social structure.

Cheers!

[James C. Bennett]

But conventional scientific thought tells us, in describing the event of the Big Bang, that conventional science is not all-inclusive. Because current laws of science are not applicable to phenomena having to do with the Big Bang. Therefore, the Big Bang itself is supernatural.

Is any phenomenon that lacks an explanation, 'supernatural'? For example, if no adequate explanation can fully describe the origin and mechanisms involved in causing pancreatic cancer, does that mean that 'supernatural' forces are in play? Are there different kinds of 'supernatural'? Can these differences be obfuscated / abused in deliberate attempts at mixing superstition with phenomena that is 'supernatural'?

Discuss!

[grey_whiskers]

Really? Scads of dictators lived for many years as kings of the roost, with many of their victims never avenged, never recompensed.

(Isn't that what you atheists complain about, that God isn't just, but is unaccountable? So why comfort yourself with fairy tales about "recompense" of dictators when it doesn't even happen here in "the real world" ?)

Cheers!

[grey_whiskers]

Neither ad hominem nor changing the subject will save you: you made an unsubstantiated universal assertion about the degree of suffering.

You are, and remain, incorrect.

[James C. Bennett]

Try doing more than cutting-and-pasting and beating your chest, Tarzan-style.

You have a vivid imagination, but not as much proclivity to actually ping the person who initiated that kind of debating here, to which I had replied with the excerpt to stimulate the discussion further (which, as I predicted, served my purpose rather well). Why did you ignore that person's original technique?

[reasonisfaith]

With respect and for the sake of honesty I must point out that atheism continually shows itself to be the product of flawed thinking and confusion.

The claim “God is not good” is both an admission of the truth of divine existence and a demonstration of a dependence on the unworkable logic that God’s standard of good is the same as our standard of good.

[grey_whiskers]

Ducking the question, as usual.

This implies that you are incapable of breaking down your cut-and-paste to it essentials, as I thought.

Ta-ta for now, have some Christmas gifts and personal things to attend to.

Cheers!

[Yaelle]

The funniest thing about atheists is that most of them say that there is no G-d because bad things happen. The only creator they can dare imagine is one who would only make a shiny unicorns and rainbows world. Obviously the god that would interest them would take away free natural biology, technology that could never be experimented on, no human growth, and no human choice! The god they want would be a perfect robot and we would all have to be robots.

It’s the same as saying that they hate the world. They do not see the brilliance, creativity, and freedom of Creation. They want ultimate control, like an obsessed model railroader.

[James C. Bennett]

The problem with discussing with you is that you've learnt the technique of throwing around phrases like "ad hominem" in order to attempt getting out of the mental trap that your arguments have lead you to falling into.

You believe that an infant that was inflicted with an illness serious enough to cause sickness for a week, followed by death did not cause the infant any suffering, just the same way as you had implied in the earlier thread that the Amalekite infants and children could not have suffered through the consequences of the supposed act of the same deity ordering for their infanticide and deaths.

Since there is no possible way for you to redeem yourself (from this situation here that you find yourself in) other than by absorbing a more-than-healthy dose of self-inflicted embarrassment, you choose to pepper the thread with, ahem, "ad hominems"!

Cheers, and Merry Christmas!

[kosta50]

the proper question is not "What is God?"

If he is a who then he is also a what. How about what is divine?

[kosta50]

Until the (anti-Christian, Gramsci-inspired) liberals Communists started rotting our society

We seem to agree on something. The question is what are you going to do about it? bellyaching is not enough.

[James C. Bennett]

Ducking the question, as usual.

LOL, the answer to your question required clarification of your poorly-concealed intent, which when exposed, caused you to make your predictable reaction / outburst. How thoroughly the scaffoldings have been unravelled!

Ta-ta for now, have some Christmas gifts and personal things to attend to.

Indeed, you do. Buh-bye!

[kosta50]

Selected Projective Solipcism

You mean solipsism? is there any other type?

As Calvin said, "I declare you Null and Void."

Oooh, did he wave his magic wand?

[James C. Bennett]

With respect and for the sake of honesty I must point out that atheism continually shows itself to be the product of flawed thinking and confusion.

Returning the same respect, why is there no answer to the question as to why David's child had to suffer?

"God's justice is not Man's justice" is a poor way of putting it, really, especially since we're all supposedly "created" in a certain image.

It is astonishing why this question is rarely, if ever, addressed in theological circles, especially in times that were contemporary with the writing of the scriptures, themselves. Wouldn't you agree that this is true?

[reasonisfaith]

“Is any phenomenon that lacks an explanation, ‘supernatural’?”

No.

Any phenomenon for which conventions of physics or chemistry cannot be applied, due to the fact that the particular phenomenon isn’t subject to pertinent laws or principles, is supernatural.

In trying to figure out something like cancer there’s no reason to exclude known principles of physics and chemistry.

But in thinking about the moment of the Big Bang, conventional principles of physics and chemistry are useless. The rules of nature, as defined by conventional science, don’t apply.

If you think there are “different kinds” of supernatural, let me know what they are.

[kosta50]

And you, a God-fearing intellectual atheist, haven't heard of The Golden Bough?

See, you don't know anything about me. I never said I was an atheist an I never heard of Golden Bough. You are making things up, as usual. If I remember correctly, I asked you not to post to me and if not, I say it now. Making personal attacks and unsubstantiated claims doesn't contribute to a discussion of a topic.

[reasonisfaith]

Almost as clear, or maybe more clear, than the teaching that we’re created in God’s image is the teaching that we are inferior to God.

To think our being created in God’s image means our thoughts are equal to his is like trying to have common sense while excluding both the common and the sense.

“For my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways, saith the LORD.” (Isaiah 55:8)

[reasonisfaith]

So the question is do you have the confidence in your position, or your theology, or your ideology to admit and describe it openly? Why keep it a secret?

Can it withstand scrutiny, and can you support the burden of honesty and sincerity?

[kosta50]

I have confiedence in my position. There are no secrets. The issue was certain poster's baiting and assuming too much. Your questions and the whole tone is one of condescension to which I feel no special appeal to reply.

When and if you drop your judgmental questioning manner I will entertain your inquiries. But as long as you start with "are you capable of" or "are you honest enough" I will not because such questions are only baiting and provoking, and I will not stoop down so low.

[James C. Bennett]

The problem with that explanation again relates to what Kosta50 exposed in his earlier reply to you where he pointed out that for you to accept David’s child’s being inflicted by a fatal illness by the supposed deity as “divine justice”, you have to resort to the same deity’s supposed words which essentially boil down to mean that it did it because it can do it.

Now, for someone to accept this as sufficient justification, it requires them to possess faith in this deity, beforehand. In the same manner, a Muslim can “justify” the vile actions of that religion’s god, as well - and many do just that.

What is your explanation as to why there is a remarkable ‘toning down’ in the attitudinal qualities of this divinity-figure, from the Old Testament god all the way through Jesus? In other words, is it possible for you to imagine, say, Jesus ordering the slaughter of the Amalekite infants?