Nov 12, 2015

The Illogicity of Atheism

THE ILLOGICITY OF ATHEISM

    It is unreasonable and illogical to believe there is no God. Atheists believe that in truth there is no God. Their faith in that premise is sometimes so strong they may or may not even be open to new information. Their proof they say is their own logic and reasoning. Well, theists also claim logic and reason as their friend when thinking about the notion of the existence of God. In this post I will using logic, reasoning and a very simple philosophical argument prove the existence of God.

Check it out!

In order for the statement "there is no God" to be a truthful statement we would have to admit to have looked at all sides of the argument and every possible variable within the argument. We would have to admit to being omniscient. In other words we would have to be God, to know that there is no God.

Our first thought "there is no God" is actually canceled out by our second thought "only God could know that." Therefore God exists! To be honest human beings we can only say "I don't believe in God" or "I don't know if God exists." Not believing, or knowing is not proof. And not believing in God doesn't make him non existent anymore than believing in God makes him exist. God does not derive his existence from our willingness or unwillingness to believe.

Let's look at it one other way. 

We know that God can be viewed as "absolute truth." He himself being the source of all Truth in the Universe as theists believe. Simply put if God is the source of all things and the beginning of all things then he is also the source of that which is true (in accordance with fact or reality) in the universe.

So, in order for the statement "there is no absolute truth" to be true it would have to be absolutely true! Therefore once again are second thought cancels out our first and absolute truth also exists.

Done just proved the existence of God/absolute truth using logic and reasoning alone. Lol! I realize there is a lot more we could discuss about the existence of God, but I believe this is the simplest argument.

Thanks for reading!

Joanne Utke



For further reading see...

Atheism, God and The Proof

The Godless Delusion: A Catholic Challenge to Modern Atheism

An audio by Patrick Madrid on Atheism

3 comments:

Joanne Utke said...

I understand that saying that an Atheist is someone who believes that there is no God can be viewed as incorrect. An Atheist is someone who disbelieves in God. I agree with that but what Atheists fail to see is that human beings are never without belief. To disbelieve in God is to believe that he does not exist. Atheists believe all kinds of things, they just choose not to look at it that way in reference to God. When you the atheist leaves your house every morning to go to work you believe it is safe to do so, you don't simply disbelieve in the possible dangers of it. You believe that when you go out to eat that the food isn't poisoned because you trust the person giving it to you when in reality you don't really know it's not. You don't simply disbelieve in being poisoned. The point is when it comes to everything else Atheists live by belief in something, not only disbelief. It goes hand in hand. You can't have disbelief in something without belief in something else. Atheists aren't being honest with their self or how the human race works.

Unknown said...

Your arguments are indeed simple, but I am afraid that they hold no water whatsoever.
Both of your arguments begin with the assumption of the existence of God; an assumption which you offer no evidence for.

Let's go on to the arguments. You claim that in order for one to know that God doesn't exist one must be as God. If this were true, then one would also have to be as God to know that he does. Also, the premise that something exists because it cannot be proven that it doesn't is an extremely weak one. By your reasoning I can say that there is a teapot in orbit around the sun somewhere between Mars and Jupiter. It is all but impossible for you to prove that there isn't. Is that real evidence that there is indeed a teapot in orbit?
Your second argument, again presupposes the existence of God, which is what you are trying to prove. You can't prove something exists by first assuming that it does. Also, you presuppose that God is "absolute truth." You offer no evidence or support for that claim. You also offer no description of what "absolute truth" might be.

So I offer a polite "sorry, but you haven't proved anything here."

Joe Drumheller said...

You are confusing belief and understanding. When I leave the house, I understand why it is probably safe, or not, based on my knowledge of the conditions outside and reasonable expectations about the future. If, based on that, I feel it is unsafe, I don't go out.

You seem to have a misconception about atheism. Atheism is simply and only the non acceptance of claims made by some people about the nature of the universe; specifically, that there exists an omniscient and omnipresent being responsible for the creation of the universe and that this being is involved with the everyday affairs of human beings. That's all. To describe someone as an atheist is to say only that about them.