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?

[kosta50]

Is any phenomenon that lacks an explanation, 'supernatural'?

Apparently, some individuals who support the Intelligent Design pseudo-scientific thinking believe so as a convenient way of introducing God into the science.

I think you hit the nail on the head: anything that lacks explanation is considered "supernatural" by them. At one time, not so long ago, people considered illness and ligthening to be "supernatural" too. In fact, I am curious, since we are on the subject and one poster raised the issue of your medical qualifications, is to ask our supernatural proponents (whose medical qualifications remain a mystery) just which "demons" cause specific illness, or is it an across-the-broad "demonic" property?

I had one Intelligent Design poster tell me that the bacteria and viruses "prove" the demonic etiology of illness—since they are living little "demons" that "jump" into us (invade us), just like the Bible says!(never mind that viruses are really not "alive" in the strictest sense of the word).

[kosta50]

broad=board

[James C. Bennett]

Why must the effects of ‘supernatural phenomena’ be precluded from consideration in studies pertaining to diseases like cancer, particularly when diseases have been a mode of exerting influence by the divinity figure of your faith?

[James C. Bennett]

LOL, I was composing my earlier reply when you posted yours...

[James C. Bennett]

LOL, I was composing my earlier reply when you posted yours...

[eastforker]

I would like to bring something else to this table of discussion.Not all athiest or agnostics use the bible and or science in their beliefs. Some could care less how the bible compares to science. They live their lives, day to day, making their way through life with no other intent other than to make it to the next.They understand that medicine/science can cure some diseases without themselves having a medical or science degree. They also know that some people believe in divine intervention and need religion in their lives even though they themselves don't feel a need for it.Most all of these threads deal with belief or non belief in the bible.Not everyone cares about how the world or humans began or even if there is such a thing as eternal salvation.As far as I am concerned, there is not enough information or facts on either side of this argument to make any definite conclusion except that one day we are all gonna die.The believer prays for salvation and the non believer hopes he/she has not been a disappointment to their families and loved ones.The truth of the matter is when the light does goes out, no one knows whats in store for them.

[reasonisfaith]

It could be that supernatural forces explain cancer. But I doubt a researcher could get funding to investigate the question.

Remember, I’m speaking to conventional science, hoping to remind you and/or others that conventional science met its limit when the Big Bang was verified.

The atheist has two choices: reject conventional science or accept the fact of extra-natural phenomena.

[reasonisfaith]

I’m no scholar on the moslem religion. But it seems the moslem god is not known as one who goes out of his way to show love or to seek reconciliation with man. The inherent nature of the moslem god, as defined by his actions, is very different from that of the God of Abraham.

Christ’s purpose is to reconcile us with God. To repair the damage started by Adam and continued by us all.

Think of it this way: God needed to fix the problem from within. He had to become man, in order to show that man, at least in a single example, could resist all sin and in the final moment take on all sin (on the cross) in a final victory over it.

Christ’s incarnation, when he came to establish the New Covenant in which Old Testament rules were replaced by those of the New Testament, was in the form of a lamb, symbolically speaking. And his purpose was to represent us to God the Father. So of course Christ seems more gentle to us and more “toned down” as you put it.

Please don’t forget—it would be highly unreasonable to expect that we could understand the entirety of God’s plan, including the totality of the nature of the Trinity. But I can’t understand why a person wouldn’t want to know as much as possible about him.

[kosta50]

conventional science met its limit when the Big Bang was verified

How so?

[kosta50]

Think of it this way: God needed to fix the problem from within. He had to become man, in order to show that man

God had to become man? This sure sounds like this God is subject to Higher Ncesseity.

[eastforker]

I’m no scholar on the Muslim religion. But it seems the Muslim god is not known as one who goes out of his way to show love or to seek reconciliation with man.............................................................................I take it you are familiar with Isaac and Ishmael. Abraham was the father of both. Ishmael, his first was mothered by an Arab, Sara's mistress and Isaac by Sarah 14 years later.According to the bible Isaac was the intended sacrifice and to the Muslims it was Ishmael. No matter, Abraham was the Father of both religions.

[grey_whiskers]

Hi, got a short break from the housework, so I'll reply to this before acknowledging (mostly) your request to bugger off.

1) I know you've claimed your not an atheist: in an earlier post #1704 you wrote to me that you weren't.

And for my retort, I was personally admonished in post #1708 by the Admin Moderator.

And on earlier threads you have posts such as this one, #12.

But I've never run across any practicing Christian who (attempting to make, or to bolster their *own* positions), quoted from atheist sites, as it appears you have donein this post #162 and the link to John Adams, Letter to F.A. VanDerKamp; nor again one refers to "praying to an imaginary God" as you did here post #803; nor one who alternately attacked incest (here, post #17) and then reversed tack, using close parsing of the text to argue that father-daughter incest is not forbidden (here, post #192).

So at the very least, you're not always dealing from either the top or the bottom of the deck.

Note the substantiation of the claims that your posting history has changed from more orthodox to...unusual.

SO, in the future, if I do refer to you or to your posts while commenting to another party on an open thread, would you like a courtesy ping, or not?

Cheers!

[kosta50]

You wrote all that in a "short break from housework"? I am glad you study my posts religiously even on short breaks. And you think my posts are unusual?

As for pings, I suppose you plan on continuing your attention-getting rants involving me. I don't care, my pay is the same. Mind over matter: I don't mind and you don't matter.

[reasonisfaith]

I would say this latest theory of yours—that Christian doctrine is true except that it leaves out your claim that God has some being above him telling him what to do—is not right.

[reasonisfaith]

Asking you to speak honestly is not condescending. Quite the contrary.

[Notary Sojac]

In answer to your two last posts to me....

I have reached the conclusion that believers' and unbelievers' minds are wired differently. Why this is so, I don't claim to understand.

Believers are so put together that they must answer the big "Why?". They find that their lives are unsatisfied without a knowledge of the ultimate Cause for... well, for everything.

Unbelievers are wired differently. I can go for years on end without thinking about "why" I hold some things to be right and others wrong, or about "why" I am here in the universe. And when I do think about those things, they are more a matter of idle speculation than anything else.

Our minds are wired differently, not better or worse. Neither the believer nor the unbeliever is "wrong" or "stupid" or needs a "crutch". That's why I never attack God or belief in him.

The only time I take offense here on FR is when someone posts to the effect that as an atheist, I cannot be a conservative, or that my atheism is harmful to America. With those ideas up I will not put....

[reasonisfaith]

“I can go for years on end without thinking about ‘why’”

Yet everything you post and everything you say about yourself demonstrates the opposite—that your style of thinking is to pursue the “big Why.”

Faith in God is ultimately determined by will. Will, as separate from intellect.

This answers the “why” question about the difference between believers and atheists.

[Logic n' Reason]

Thanks for the “tip”; I’ll check it out!

[Logic n' Reason]

This reminds me of the time honored question asked of 6, 7, and 8 year olds. To whit: “God does not have a belly button, and this can be proven. How?”

[grey_whiskers]

Very interesting thought, Notary.

If it *is* true (I haven't thought it through yet, and I'm still in the Tigger-making-exploring-noises-with-his-tongue-and-what-have-we-here-noises-mode...)

it'd be consistent with many of the early scientists attempting to get to know "the Mind of the Maker" by investigating His handiwork.

What I *do* disagree with altogether, is the idea that science has "supplanted" religion as a superior model, i.e., that religion started out as an attempt to explain the wonders of the world around us, in the absence of technology, sophisticated mathematics, or empiricism. If religions *were* manmade, they'd more often be used to justify sexual escapades and wealth for the leaders -- just as fraudulent hucksters do today; or, give license to drinking & sex -- just as the ancient Greek religions did.

Atheism *may* be harmful to America, if it is used as a stalking horse, or if it either undermines the good results of Christianity, or hollows America out so we get overrun with Moose-limbs the way England is.

Cheers!