Home » Uncategorized » Atheism = A-Fraud III

Atheism = A-Fraud III

Sacerdotus

Enter your email address to follow this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Join 3,681 other followers

Twitter

Blog Stats

  • 75,027 hits
November 2013
M T W T F S S
« Oct   Dec »
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
252627282930  

 

afraud iiSince my critiques of atheism have been such a success, I’ve decided to make a series of my original Atheism = A-Fraud post.

 

In the latter, I gave a general critique of atheism as a fraudulent irrational ideology.  In this post, I will focus on atheism as a counter to religion and how it fails.

 

First let me briefly introduce atheism and what it really is:

 

Atheists often poorly define atheism in order to shift the burden in regards to belief and whether or not the nonexistence of God is an absolute position.  They often define atheism in such a manner in order to present it as a position that does not accept God, but at the same time is not sure if He is real or not.  This kind of definition is more agnostic than atheistic. A “lack of belief” is ‘apisteuo’ not atheism.  Philosophy defines atheism as such:

 

“Atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God. So an atheist is someone who disbelieves in God, whereas a theist is someone who believes in God. Another meaning of “atheism” is simply non-belief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God. … an atheist, in the broader sense of the term, is someone who disbelieves in every form of deity, not just the God of traditional Western theology.” (Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy)

 

As the Encyclopedia of Philosophy puts it, “Atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God.”  There is no other way to define atheism.  Any attempts to make it into agnosticism only shows an atheist to be ignorant of definitions and the substance behind the ideology called atheism.

 

Atheism is often pushed as the rebuttal to religion and faith.  It is the ideology that claims to “expose” religion and faith as nonsensical attributes in human rationality.  To them, religion and faith are archaic superstitious responses to the questions man has asked since he became cognizant. Atheists claim that God is not real, is a figment of the human imagination, and is a ridiculous concept to hold especially in today’s world where science has allowed for much knowledge to be obtained regarding the natural world.  Atheism is then presented as the cure for religion where religion is viewed as mental illness.

 

In reality, atheism is neither a rebuttal to religion and faith nor a cure for them.  The latter are not mental illness as psychology clearly states this.  The APA’s Diagnostic and Statistical Manual states:

 

A false belief based on incorrect inference about external reality that is firmly sustained despite what almost everyone else believes and despite what constitutes incontrovertible and obvious proof or evidence to the contrary. The belief is not one ordinarily accepted by other members of the person’s culture or subculture (e.g., it is not an article of religious faith). (DSM IV-TR, p. 821)

 

Mental illness in order to be classified as such must meet certain criterion.  The mental condition must have comorbidity, present antisocial behavior, causes distress that impairs daily living, must have prevalence, genetic abnormalities and so on.  Obviously, praying to God despite being seen as foolish since one is literally talking to an ‘invisible’ person does not cause either of these conditions. On the contrary, the human brain is hardwired to have belief in God and the supernatural. (Why we believe what we believe.)

 

In light of this, it is foolish to call religious faith a ‘delusion’ or ‘mental illness.’  Doing so not only shows ignorance and disdain in regards to science, but also shows bigotry and insecurity.

 

Atheism does nothing to answer man’s life long questions.  It merely substitutes the idea of a conscious being as creator with one that is unconscious and pantheistic as I noted in my Atheism is Stupid IV post. It simply becomes a contrarian position seeking to present the contrary opinion before the opposing one instead of providing answers that satisfy the human intellect.  This presents a problem with atheism.  Instead of being the so-called ‘rational’ position to hold; it becomes a copy-cat philosophy that offers the counter view of the mainstream one while providing no substance to its premises.

 

This is why atheism has the lowest retention rate of any religious faith.  An intelligent seeker of truth and knowledge will not remain in atheism for a long time.  He/she will eventually spot the inconsistencies and fallacious holdings of atheism and brush them aside as a waste of synapses.  It is exposed as the fraud that it is; a fraud disguising itself as a rational position supported by the sciences and academia.  In reality, atheism is an irrational position supported only by those who get a thrill on taking on the social script of the ‘rebel.’

 

Eventually, those who mature will move past this mental “teenage” ritual passage into a more mature and intellectually stable acceptance of religious beliefs and how they play an extremely important role in our biology and psychology.

 

Advertisements

9 Comments

  1. Stephen Ind says:

    Thank you for blogging about issues pertaining to the faith and being so willing to defend it. May God bless you.

  2. Has the alternative definition in the quote from Routledges completely escaped your attention?

    Another meaning of “atheism” is simply non-belief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God. … an atheist, in the broader sense of the term, is someone who disbelieves in every form of deity, not just the God of traditional Western theology.

    • Sacerdotus says:

      No, but your comprehension of it has. The “alternate” is what I am critiquing. In writing, there is a certain flow to a construction of a thesis. I am not throwing out definitions just for the heck of it. If you read the entire post in context, you will see why I included that “alternate” meaning. Both reject God. I really don’t understand why you cannot see this.

      • You are clearly not critiquing the alternative definition, cf.:

        *As the Encyclopedia of Philosophy puts it, “Atheism is the position that affirms the nonexistence of God.” There is no other way to define atheism.*

        The definition clearly permits an alternative meaning, cf.:

        “Another meaning of “atheism” is simply…”

      • Sacerdotus says:

        Obviously you have not read the entire post and are making a fool of yourself by making such a silly claim.

      • Stephen Ind says:

        Dear Sacerdotus,

        Thanks so much for your post. While Martin states only one of the definitions of atheism is possible, I did not understand the difference between the two definitions.

        May God bless you!

        Thanks for getting me thinking.

  3. “Another meaning of “atheism” is simply non-belief in the existence of God, rather than positive belief in the nonexistence of God.” …. Mental %. Nothing more. How silly.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: