Hubris And Bigotry
Don't Prove Atheism
I have a few qualms with the nature of the letter "'Satan' Speaks: Is That So?" My main problem is what, to me, appears to be a great deal of hubris and bigotry coming from an atheist. If I'm not mistaken, doesn't atheism more-or-less let "de-converts" come and go and is an individual pursuit of truth, whether you stay an atheist until you die or you should happen to convert to any religion? I seriously doubt the attitude of this person's letter is the type of way to go about proving atheism: simply attack the theists (verbally), and thinking that we freethinkers have the upper-hand to begin with.
Yet, I feel sorry for anyone knowingly believing something that I know, proof-positive, is just mythology.
If someone has proof positive that there is no God, why not publish the findings and reveal the truth to everyone? I think this is probably the first time I've ever heard any non-theist say that they were "proof-positive" that the idea of a higher power "is just mythology." I always claim not to believe in God; not assert that there is no God. I don't foresee any way to prove the existence or nonexistence of a higher power. Although, while I don't believe in it, I don't deny the possibility. I think a phrase like this is rather foolish on the part of the atheist, since I doubt he has solid, undisputable proof that no higher authority exits.
All this sensory input made possible the state of delusion you are currently in.
With the case of fundamentalists and flat-earth Christians, I think this sentence carries out well: they're like McArthians to me: they simply believe that the Bible is wholly true, no matter how heavily the evidence against it weighs. However, I don't see this being applicable to other protestant religions and to faiths like Catholicism. Catholics, and to an extent, most Protestants (that I know) will accept science and at the same time try to make a teaching of faith something in their heart and not let it nullify them into dementia. I think making a blanket statement like this is simply arrogant.
The move the Atheism is a step of maturity. To cling to a god is no better than relying on drugs to make you happy. It fake and dishonest.
If you can prove there is no God, or any higher power for that matter, this statement is wholly valid. But, you can't prove it. This is simply an affront to a Christian thinker that will make them see us, atheists, more animal-like. If you can prove atheism over theism, it's valid; but at the moment, it's a use of the ad hominem approach, in my opinion.
And it has come from reading the many really good Atheistic proofs out there. I can recommend you quite a few!
Alright, name some. I don't there is any solid proof out there, or else we would all know about it or organized religion would make one huge rewrite of its texts to find a way around it. My atheistic reading is slim, but in my experience the author does not blatantly assert that there is no God; rather, they simply present evidence against the existence of a God, but prove nothing.
It is you who have closed your mind to the ultimate truth: Atheism.
I reiterate: prove it.
I see it as using my precious time wisely to help the sick and confused. It is a very noble act on my part. You should be grateful to be counseled by one so wise.
If atheism was solidly proven to be true and some people continued to follow organized religion in spite of it, this would be noble. But atheism is not a proof, it's a belief based on testable evidence-not a faith type of belief. Since atheism has not been proven, but just seems more logical -- to the mind of the atheist, that is -- this is simply a boasting of oneself.
I think a jogging of the mind is needed for an atheist like this, assuming this is an atheist. Granted, he's entitled to his views, but I think making blatant assertions like this is simply foolish since some of them cannot be backed up. And I think it's wrong for an atheist to convince people to "de-convert," mainly because that is what our church "rivals" have been trying to do for centuries, so let us be wiser than to stoop to their level.
From: "Positive Atheism" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Re: Response to: 'Satan' Speaks: Is That So?
Date: Monday, April 16, 2001 11:36 PM
"Satan" is a young, enthusiastic activist who (like many of us when we're "on duty") makes some of the mistakes that others of us wish nobody on our side would ever make. I say this only because I'm sure I make my own share of mistakes that others of us wish nobody on our side would make. In fact, I'm sure some of us wish you hadn't made the mistake of criticizing a fellow-atheist at work (I've been nailed for that one more than twice).
It's not as if there are any books out there on The Proper Way to do this. Our Forum is all about learning and experimenting. If I hadn't been posting Matt's material here, we wouldn't have it to examine and to compare his approach with how we think it ought to be done.
So, I posted his shtick (he seems to do this for its humor value, more than anything). And I'll post your response, cross-link the two, and trust that those who read that far will be sharp enough to make up their own minds -- or to remain open about it.
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
Five years of service to
people with no reason to believe
Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2006 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.