Contemporary Atheism
Contemporary atheism is a positive and new humanism trying to re-found and re-construct the entire human universe of thought and values. It shows the possible abuses of religion and points out all concepts of God are only imperfect means to see him. What they say about God couldn't possibly be. Atheists are avoiding responsibility. God is not like anything we know so stop talking about him. Everything you're saying about God is wrong and invalid. The most important problem is the problem of the attributes of God more than his existence. How can we know God? We must be believers in the irrational world where we are presuppositionalless. Contemporary atheism is a new philosophical anthropology. It commands us to guard a more authentic vision of what man is. Man is a contingent, historical, and finite being. Philosophical anthropology is the meaning of contemporary atheism. Contemporary atheists say that people live with a rational structure of consciousness. We approach everything with an idealistic nature. We only know things by their relationships to other things. We only know how x determines y and not what x is by itself. We only know by imposing categories on things, therefore we do not really know God because we cannot impose categories on him. God is unlike anything else so we cannot know him in relationship with something else. The problem of God centers on the idea of alienation and the critique of real or possible abuses in religion. God is looked upon as an illusion and essentially an alienation. If our anthropology is limiting then our theology may be abusive. We are the problem if that is the case. God does not exist in the minds of atheists. They're saying get rid of all your ideas of God because they are invalid. Alienation can be positive and negative. On the positive side, I am still becoming. I am all that I have yet to become. I am incomplete. I am the result of my past choices. On the negative side, society is going to try to stop me from becoming. We trust our minds to keep us in touch with reality. What we don't realize is that our minds may be covering up what is really there.
H.J McCloskey’s article, “On Being an Atheist,” is an attempt to show atheism as a more practical alternative to the Christian belief. McCloskey reasons against the theistic beliefs of the cosmological argument, the teleological argument and design. He references the presence of evil in a world created by God and the absurdity of living by faith. This article is an attempt to reason that God does not exist because He is perfect and the world is not perfect; evil exists therefore God cannot exist. McCloskey’s article labels these arguments as “proofs” and concludes none of these arguments would be evidence of God’s existence. I find McCloskey’s article to lack logic and coherence which only serves to invalidate his arguments. I find this little more than an attempt to justify his own atheistic worldview.
Does God exist? That is the question that so many scholars, peasants, governments, and individuals have been trying to answer from the beginning of human civilization to the present and beyond. Every group in the history of mankind, from Taiwan to Jamaica, from the top of Russia to the bottom of Chile, has said yes to a form of divinity. Their religions have ranged from one God to one million Gods to no God and these religions have defined culture, tradition, lifestyle, and the society of the place; they have ruled nations and defined nations, inspired nations and controlled nations. Not every person has been a believer but every culture has had a belief. Yet somehow, despite this vast evidence that there must be something or else everyone in the history of mankind is delusional, atheism has taken rise in the west. “Science” is the new salvation and human’s greatest belief in something grater is simply a mistake. Great atheists have arisen: Dawkins, Nagel, Harris, Hitchens, and Dennett, just to name a few, have taken hold of America. No longer is religion the way; now religion, specifically Christianity, is the bane of mankind. So we shall take a look at their convincing ideas and twisted words, through the work of Scott Hahn and Benjamin Wiker in Answering the New Atheism, to examine the question: Does God exist?
In today’s culture, the idea of there is perfect and divine designer that made the earth and everything that entails with it, really pushes people away. Not only has this idea been conflicted about in today’s culture. It has been especially trivial in past decades, an example of this is seen by H.J. McCloskey. McCloskey wrote an article about it called “On Being an Atheist”, which attempts to defeat the notion that there is a God. McCloskey first addresses the reader of the article and says these arguments he is about to address are only “proofs”, which should not be trusted by any theist. He then goes and unpacks the two arguments that he believes can actually be addressed, the cosmological and teleological argument. McCloskey also addresses the problem of evil, free will, and why atheism is more comforting than theism.
Penn Jillette is a very well-known atheist and a research fellow at Cato Institute and has lectured at Oxford and MIT. He also authored an article entitled, “There is no God.” In this article, Jillette declares himself to be “beyond atheism.” He argues that everyone needs to take a step back and start with no belief in God. Then, we can all start to look for evidence of God. Even Jillette believes that whatever conclusion we end up with, it has to be “some leap of faith that helps one see life’s big picture, some rules to live by.” Jillette's conclusion is simply “This I believe: I believe there is no God.” The rest of the article he goes on to explain that this decision has informed every moment of his life. He concludes his article by stating that believing there is no God gives him more room for belief in family, people, love, truth, and beauty.
The Canadian philosopher J.L. Schellenberg has recently put forward an argument for atheism based on the idea that God is supposed to be perfectly loving and so would not permit people to be deprived of awareness of his existence. If such a deity were to exist, then, he would do something to reveal his existence clearly to people, thereby causing them to become theists. Thus, the fact that there are so many non-theists in the world becomes good reason to deny the existence of God conceived of in the given way. I first raise objections to Schellenberg’s formulation of the argument and then suggest some improvements. My main improvement is to include among the divine attributes the property of strongly desiring humanity’s love. Since to love God requires at least believing that he exists, if God were to exist, he must want widespread theistic belief. The fact that so many people lack such belief becomes a good argument for atheism with respect to God conceived of in the given way. Some objections to this line of reasoning are considered, in particular the claim that God refrains from revealing himself to people in order to avoid interfering with their free will or to avoid eliciting inappropriate responses from them or some other (unknown) purpose. An attempt is made to refute each of these objections.
Is the man of the 20th century unreasonable to believe in the existence of God? Atheism is constantly attacking religion, and very sharply. For example, Freud said that religion is the desire for a noble origin; it was created due to fears of natural phenomena, the fear of parents, and alike. But the religious psychologists have made psychoanalysis of Freud, and concluded that Freud had a bad attitude toward his father. Instead of intent to kill his earthly father, he decided to "avenge" the heavenly Father.
According to agnostics, there is absolutely no proof of a God and thus, “God” could actually be an existence fabricated from myths. In addition, it is believed that the universe is both ethereal and uncaused by any higher power; it is simply “just there”. Take the Big Bang Theory for example, agnostics claim the universe essentially sprang into existence all on its own and life is merely a series of random processes. Likewise, one could easily ask the question, if God created the universe then who created God? However, some may argue that deism is the most accurate worldview since it is most rationally correct. Many scientists today are actually discovering reasons to believe a God does exist but does not intervene in our daily lives. Philosopher, Antony Flew, was known for being a famous atheist that later took on the deist approach because of how modern science is beginning to “prove” the existence of a creator. Both agnostics and deists agree that there are explanations for mundane happenings and mystical occurrences are merely coincidental. Similarly, if there is a supposedly good God, why is there so much evil and suffering in the world? Why does he not
Theology is an intentionally reflective endeavor. Every day we reflect upon the real, vital, and true experience of the benevolent God that exists. We as humans tend to be social beings, and being so we communicate our beliefs with one another in order to validate ourselves. Furthermore atheism has many forms, three of the most popular atheistic beliefs include: scientific atheism, humanistic atheism and the most popular one being protest atheism. Scientific atheism is the idea that science is the answer for everything and god is not existent. The humanistic approach states that society is self-sufficient; therefore God is not needed for survival. Therefore how could he exist? The position that I will argue in this paper is the pessimistic idea of protest atheism.
The topic of atheism has become an increasingly investigated topic in the United States. With the slow, but steady, rise of the atheist population in the United States, the inquiry is becoming more relevant in modern research. The atheist population in America are considered to be cognitively deviant because they reject a theist view which are the majority. They are also one of the most discriminated groups and hold a very large and pervasive stigma.. There are a multitude of recent studies that address the topic of atheism in the United States in varying ways.
Religion is a symbolic representation of society. The sociological approach to religious belief looks at how society behaves on a whole, to answer the question, “Why are people religious?” We express our participation in religious events through plays, acts of confession, religious dances, etc. To begin to understand why we have such term, let’s understand the common elements of religion. There are different types in which people believe in or follow and that is: animatism, animism, ancestral spirits, god and goddesses, and minor supernatural beings. Beyond these different elements, such one is to have religious leaders to follow.
...ferences and similarities as its predecessor atheism. Individuals and groups continue to assert their ideologies through their writings and critics continue to rebut these claims. As discussed, new atheism has shown evident different approaches in showing how religion has detrimental effects on society using events such as the many previous wars that have been initiated due to issues concerning religion. New atheism also addresses how these views and conceptions are forced upon children which highlight the significant developments of the ideas that have emerged since traditional atheistic times. By understanding how atheism and new atheism has developed and evolved, it can also be understood that there will be an endless and continuous arrivals of more diverse interpretations, approaches and goals of new atheism and issues revolving around religion in the future.
Even though Atheists pray that there is nothing after death, it will not provide an escape or any shelter from the coming wrath of The Holy God. Can man stand naked before the King of Kings, in the revealing light of all truth? Can he answer for every single one of his sins? When judgment comes, no man will ever be good enough. Therefore, Atheism is useless, in fact the only good thing Atheism displays is irony. It is ironic that the core philosophy of Atheism is “Think for yourself” (285) yet the majority of its followers, if not all, fail to do so completely; therefore Atheism is a fool’s religion with severe devotion to ignorance. It is ironic because it preaches tolerance yet is grossly intolerant of anyone who doesn’t accept the Atheist faith. Again, as Ehrenreich’s children revealed, “the world would be a better place” (285) without other religions. Lastly, it is ironic because Ehrenreich speaks of her family being “disillusioned with Christianity” (284) while she herself is enslaved to the deceitful illusion of Atheism. Atheists will find no hope in any other man’s help either, and the weight of their sins will drag them all helplessly into
Let’s start off by explaining what atheism is, it’s when you don’t believe in any form of an “Intelligent Creator” or God, as usually referred to as. The word atheism comes from the root word “theism”, which is when you believe in a God, or numerous Gods depending on the religion, and the prefix “a”, which means “not”. There are no set practices of atheism, or a set list of beliefs. To be an atheist you must believe what you would like and simply live your life without constraints based on what you believe is good or bad, not what you are told is good or bad. There is a constant debate against atheism from the theist side, because both sides’ arguments are polar opposites and each believes their side of the argument is 100% valid. I will state my view on some arguments, and clarify some common atheist stereotypes.
“Religion is a ritualized system of beliefs and practices related to things defined as sacred by an organized community of believers.” (Basirico et.al. 379). Religion is an important element in the society because it influences the way individuals act and think. It has shaped the relationship and bonding among families as well as influenced the decision made in economics and politics. Religion in general has contributed to shape a society and a government structure which will influence the way the individuals under certain governmental structure behave. Sociologists are interested in religion mainly because religious belief is heavily rooted in individuals’ lives and it helps sociologists to interpret human’s actions, expression, and experiences. Due to its significance in society, sociologists try to study religion in depth to explain and understanding religions beyond science. Supernatural belief, which is the core of religion, cannot be explained using science which relies only on facts and data. According to Emile Durkheim, religion consists of three elements, a system of beliefs and practices, a community or church, and sacred things which are common throughout all religions. Although a lot of people may have thought that sociological studies in religion will undermine one’s faith towards their beliefs, in my opinion, sociological perspective in religion will have no effect on one’s faith toward their beliefs.
What is religion? Well according the Dictionary it is “a set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a super human agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs.” But to a person who practices a religion it is much more than this definition, it is a way of life. Well then what about Atheists? What do they believe? Well many of them believe in this definition, in-fact most do. But do any believe that even though they don't believe in religion themselves, does it serve a bigger picture other than what the definition says. Yes! Emile Durkheim, Max Weber, Karl Marx all have theories on why religion is more than just god’s and rituals.