Is Atheism Rational?
Over the past few decades, atheists have overwhelmingly claimed the realm of logic and science. They've given the impression that atheism is rational and faith is irrational and emotional. Secularists have convinced many that atheism is supported by evidence and religion is strictly a matter of blind faith, forgetting that much of what they believe is untested theory and speculation. So is atheism rational as many people believe?
Atheism comes from the Greek “A” which infers the negative. Theism for god. Definition: There is no God. It’s not saying, “I do not think there is a God.” It’s not saying, “I do not believe there is a God.” It is saying, “There is no God.” It is affirming the non-existence of God. This is very different from saying there is a god, which is affirming the positive. Affirming a negative is very different and much more challenging.
Universally, affirming a negative is a logical fallacy. An introductory course in philosophy or logic teaches that, you cannot affirm a negative in the absolute. Let me say it again: you cannot affirm a negative in the absolute. That is, you cannot prove the non-existence of something universally. You can prove the non-existence of something in a closed system, for example: there are no atheist in the Senate. Yes this can be supported by taking a survey. But to make a universal statement, there are no atheist in the universe without first searching the universe is a logical fallacy. Thus, atheism is self-defeating, because atheism does not have infinite knowledge to make this claim.
Example: If I said, “There is a green ball in the universe,” all I have to do is find one green ball and my statement is true. This is affirming a positive. Now if I said, “There are no green balls anywhere in the universe,” I would have to look everywhere first for my statement to be true. We know the atheist has not looked everywhere for God.
Of course this does not prove the existence of God, it just demonstrates that atheists have no case against the existence of God and that it is quite irrational to make such a case.
Does the Atheist Know Everything?
One way to make this point is to ask the atheist if he knows everything? Then ask, what percentage of everything does he know? If he says “60%” ask: is it possible that the knowledge of God exists in the 40% of things he doesn’t know? If he says no God cannot exist there ….remind him he just admitted he has no knowledge of this 40%.
A Cause Must be Sufficient to Account for the Effect
Let's continue to demonstrate how irrational atheism can be. Suppose you walked into my house one day and you saw a beautiful painting of a sunset hanging on the wall. You noticed it was signed, so you asked me who is the artist. Suppose I told you that one day I had left some canvas and some paint outside, and the next morning I found this painting complete, and next to it was a frog with the brush in his hand finishing the job. So I concluded that the frog painted the sunset. You would think I was crazy because frogs are not sufficient to account for beautiful paintings. Put another way, everything that exists must have an adequate and appropriate explanation. Example:
When an atheist speaks of the universe appearing from nothing, our solar system coming together by chance, an eye, butterfly or kidney coming together by natural selection, we have to conclude that the cause is not nearly sufficient to account for the effect, as there is an unimaginable amount of precision, information and purpose behind all of them. It is more likely that a rabbit wrote the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Can the Christian be Sure of God's Existence?
Suppose you are speaking to an atheist and you put forward some persuasive arguments. You've even managed to get him to doubt some of what he believes. When you are done, the atheist turns around and asks you, how can you be so sure God exists.
I would respond to this question by stating that I can be certain of God’s existence. You can make this point by asking the atheist if he is certain that his mother exists. How can you be certain that she exists: because you know your mother. You talk to your mother and have a relationship with your mother. The fact that I never met your mother is irrelevant. In the same way, a Christian who knows God can be certain of His existence. Here we are affirming a positive, rather than affirming a negative.
What about conflicting experiences from other religions? No other religion suggests that you can know God and experience His presence. The Muslim at best can only know Allah's will by reading the Quran. The Buddhist doesn't even claim god exists. Therefore, other religions at best only support the idea of a supernatural experience, while only the Christian can come to know the living God.
Articles
Atheism and the Burden of Proof Paul Copan
Does God Exist? Craig Branch
Atheism comes from the Greek “A” which infers the negative. Theism for god. Definition: There is no God. It’s not saying, “I do not think there is a God.” It’s not saying, “I do not believe there is a God.” It is saying, “There is no God.” It is affirming the non-existence of God. This is very different from saying there is a god, which is affirming the positive. Affirming a negative is very different and much more challenging.
Universally, affirming a negative is a logical fallacy. An introductory course in philosophy or logic teaches that, you cannot affirm a negative in the absolute. Let me say it again: you cannot affirm a negative in the absolute. That is, you cannot prove the non-existence of something universally. You can prove the non-existence of something in a closed system, for example: there are no atheist in the Senate. Yes this can be supported by taking a survey. But to make a universal statement, there are no atheist in the universe without first searching the universe is a logical fallacy. Thus, atheism is self-defeating, because atheism does not have infinite knowledge to make this claim.
Example: If I said, “There is a green ball in the universe,” all I have to do is find one green ball and my statement is true. This is affirming a positive. Now if I said, “There are no green balls anywhere in the universe,” I would have to look everywhere first for my statement to be true. We know the atheist has not looked everywhere for God.
Of course this does not prove the existence of God, it just demonstrates that atheists have no case against the existence of God and that it is quite irrational to make such a case.
Does the Atheist Know Everything?
One way to make this point is to ask the atheist if he knows everything? Then ask, what percentage of everything does he know? If he says “60%” ask: is it possible that the knowledge of God exists in the 40% of things he doesn’t know? If he says no God cannot exist there ….remind him he just admitted he has no knowledge of this 40%.
A Cause Must be Sufficient to Account for the Effect
Let's continue to demonstrate how irrational atheism can be. Suppose you walked into my house one day and you saw a beautiful painting of a sunset hanging on the wall. You noticed it was signed, so you asked me who is the artist. Suppose I told you that one day I had left some canvas and some paint outside, and the next morning I found this painting complete, and next to it was a frog with the brush in his hand finishing the job. So I concluded that the frog painted the sunset. You would think I was crazy because frogs are not sufficient to account for beautiful paintings. Put another way, everything that exists must have an adequate and appropriate explanation. Example:
- Paintings imply a painter
- A book implies an author
- A computer program implies a programmer
- A building implies a builder
When an atheist speaks of the universe appearing from nothing, our solar system coming together by chance, an eye, butterfly or kidney coming together by natural selection, we have to conclude that the cause is not nearly sufficient to account for the effect, as there is an unimaginable amount of precision, information and purpose behind all of them. It is more likely that a rabbit wrote the Encyclopedia Britannica.
Can the Christian be Sure of God's Existence?
Suppose you are speaking to an atheist and you put forward some persuasive arguments. You've even managed to get him to doubt some of what he believes. When you are done, the atheist turns around and asks you, how can you be so sure God exists.
I would respond to this question by stating that I can be certain of God’s existence. You can make this point by asking the atheist if he is certain that his mother exists. How can you be certain that she exists: because you know your mother. You talk to your mother and have a relationship with your mother. The fact that I never met your mother is irrelevant. In the same way, a Christian who knows God can be certain of His existence. Here we are affirming a positive, rather than affirming a negative.
What about conflicting experiences from other religions? No other religion suggests that you can know God and experience His presence. The Muslim at best can only know Allah's will by reading the Quran. The Buddhist doesn't even claim god exists. Therefore, other religions at best only support the idea of a supernatural experience, while only the Christian can come to know the living God.
Articles
Atheism and the Burden of Proof Paul Copan
Does God Exist? Craig Branch