Atheism an Assumption Based Faith

Atheism an Assumption Based Faith

The atheism faith is based on at least two assumptions that cannot be proven.  And yes, it is a faith because it is an idea that exists in the human mind and is supported by other human beliefs.  The idea that it is a non-belief is nothing but atheistic sophistry.  Calling it a non-belief is like calling it a non-idea.  Just some more nonsense.

Let’s look at a couple their assumptions.  The first one being that there is no God.  No one can prove that there is no God for in order to do so they would have to be everywhere in the universe at the same time and also outside of the universe at the same time, for the very place that they were not, might be the very place that the Uncreated One is present.  They would also have to know everything there is to know in the universe, for if there was one thing that they didn’t know it might be that there’s a God.  In essence, they would have to be God in order to say with certitude that there is not a God.  The atheist always has to leave a small possibility that there might be a god, in which possibility itself negates the very idea of atheism.  However, out of fear of the camel getting his nose into the tent, many pretend to deny the possibility altogether.

The second assumption that I have found in most atheist’s is the belief that they are smarter than those that believe in a God.  I have found this trait even in those who seem to be friendly towards religion.  Of course, this is an assumption that has no scientific basis.  In fact, recent polling of scientist’s indicate that the split is about 50-50 as to whether or not they believe in some kind of higher power.  There is also evidence that at the higher levels of IQ there is about equal numbers that believe in a Higher power.  Some believe that the American philosopher and psychologist  William James was the most intelligent man in recent times and of course he was a believer.  I have read estimates that his IQ was twice that of Einstein’s.  Many people believe that Chris Lagan, a believer, is the smartest man alive at the present time with an IQ of over 200.  Of course, this does not prove or disprove the existence of a God, but it does prove the atheists second assumption that they are smarter than believers, as totally wrong.

The only argument that an atheist has, if it can be called an argument, is that the human mind can create alternatives to the God hypothesis.  However, alternative narratives are neither evidence, nor proof that a position is right, they are simply positing another position.

The Myths of Atheism

The Myths of Atheism

Myth #1

Atheists are smarter than believers.  This is a common myth among many non-intellectual atheists and even the sentiment of some of their more intelligent expounder’s.  If this myth is true, we would expect to find those on the higher IQ level to be unbelievers.  However, that is not what we find.  In fact we find somewhat of the opposite for example; Christopher Langan who many believe to be the smartest man on earth has a IQ of close to 200 and he is a theist.  The philosopher William James who some believe to be the smartest man that ever lived with an IQ of 270 or above, he also was a believer.  Albert Einstein did not believe in a personal God but did believe in a higher power[i].  Then there comes is Copernicus, Newton and Galileo, Shakespeare and Goethe.  All of these men were estimated to have had with very high IQ’s and all were also believers.  The founding fathers of our country were all brilliant men with high IQs and all were either Christians or Deist.  My personal belief is that IQ has little or nothing to do with belief or non-belief in God.  It most likely has includes a number of components ranging from genetics to environment.

Myth #2

Most scientists are unbelievers.  A survey of scientists who are members of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, was conducted by the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press in May and June of 2009 and they found finds that members of this group are, on the whole, much less religious than the general public.1  Indeed, the survey shows that scientists are roughly half as likely as the general public to believe in God or in a higher power. According to the poll, just over half of scientists (51%) believe in some form of deity or higher power; specifically, 33% of scientists say they believe in God, while 18% believe in a universal spirit or higher power.  By contrast, 95% of Americans believe in some form of deity or higher power, according to a survey of the general public conducted by the Pew Research Center in July 2006.  Specifically, more than eight-in-ten Americans (83%) say they believe in God and 12% believe in a universal spirit or higher power. Finally, the poll of scientists finds that four-in-ten scientists (41%) say they do not believe in God or in a higher power, while the poll of the public finds that only 4% of Americans share this view.  This poll was taken in 2007 and may not reflect present figures.

Myth #3

Science disproves religion.  “Science doesn’t draw conclusions about supernatural explanations Do gods exist? Do supernatural entities intervene in human affairs? These questions may be important, but science won’t help you answer them. Questions that deal with supernatural explanations are, by definition, beyond the realm of nature — and hence, also beyond the realm of what can be studied by science.”  Science Dept, University of California at Berkeley

“Science describes and explains the natural world: it does not prove or disprove beliefs about the supernatural.”  American Anthropological Association

“No aspect of science can address supernatural questions…supernatural entities by definition operate outside of natural laws and so [truly] cannot be investigated using methods of experimentation.”  American Association for the Advancement of Science

“Science is not based on faith, nor does it preclude faith.”  American Astronomical Society”

“Theologians may also be interested in the physical world, but in addition they usually believe in a metaphysical or supernatural realm inhabited by souls, spirits, angels, or gods, and this heaven or nirvana is often believed to be the future resting place of all believers after death. Such supernatural constructions are beyond the scope of science.”  National Academy of Sciences

The National Science Teachers Association adds, “Science is precluded from making statements about supernatural forces because these are outside its provenance.”

“Explanations employing no naturalistic or supernatural events, whether or not explicit reference is made to a supernatural being, are outside the realm of science …. all of science, is necessarily silent on religion and neither refutes nor supports the existence of a deity or deities.”  National Association of Biology Teachers.

The US National Academy of Sciences has gone on record with the following statement: “Science is a way of knowing about the natural world. It is limited to explaining the natural world through natural causes.  Science can say nothing about the supernatural.  Whether God exists or not is a question about which science is neutral.”

When a scientist speaks about religion he is not speaking as a scientist.  He is speaking as a philosopher or a theologian.  For example, when you ask a scientist if there something outside of the natural order?  He may say no, but his answer is not based on science but on presuppositions taken from philosophy.

[i] Einstein faith question has been settled by Max Jammer’s book on “Einstein and Religion, Physics and Theology.”

Carl Jung Thoughts on Atheism

 

In following video, Carl Jung presents some material that should make the new atheist type rethink the virtue of their constant attacks on religion as though virtuous.  Jung points out that a loss of faith and religion is the reason why so many people today are despondent.  Young also shows that a loss of faith tends to move a culture towards State-ism along with the development and growth of a will for power in the human spirit, which results in mental disorders and the totalitarian state.

In a past article I pointed out that atheism is a phenomenon which seems to take place at the end of a civilization and is one of the marks of a decaying culture.  It is hard to tell whether atheism is the cause, or the fruit, of a culture in declension.  However, either way it is not a positive force in the human community.

An honest unbeliever, Dr. E. Wengraf does not seem to share the enthusiasm of the new atheist in debunking people’s faith,  “Every piece of anti-religious propaganda seems to me a crime.  I surely do not wish it to be prosecuted as a crime, but I consider it immoral and loathsome.  This not because of zeal for my convictions, but because of the simple knowledge,  acquired through long experience, that, given the same circumstances, a religious man is happier than the irreligious.  In my indifference and skeptical attitude toward all positive faith, I have often envied other men to whom deep religiosity has given a strong support in all the storms of life.  To uproot the souls of such men is an abject deed.  I abhor any proselytizing.  But still, I can understand why one who believes firmly in a saving faith tries to convert others.  But I cannot understand a propaganda of unbelief.  We do not have the right to take away from a person his protecting shelter, be it even a shabby hut, if we are not sure we can offer him a better, more beautiful house.  But to lure men from the inherited home of their souls, to make them err afterward in the wilderness of hypotheses and philosophical question marks, is either criminal fatalism or criminal mindlessness.”

 

God and Einstein

 

God and Einstein

There has been much debate about the religious beliefs and faith of Albert Einstein.  Both the atheist community and the believing community have claimed him as one of their own.  However, I believe it can be demonstrated that Einstein was somewhat of a mystic and would not be overly comfortable in either group.

“The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious.  It is the source of all true art and science.  He to whom this emotion is a stranger, who can no longer pause to wonder and stand rapt in awe, is as good as dead: his eyes are closed.  This insight into the mystery of life, coupled though it be with fear, has also given rise to religion.  To know that what is impenetrable to us really exists, manifesting itself as the highest wisdom and the most radiant beauty which our dull faculties can comprehend only in their most primitive forms — this knowledge, this feeling, is at the center of true religiousness.  In this sense, and in this sense only, I belong in the ranks of devoutly religious men.”

Rudolf Otto wrote a book entitled, ‘The Ideal Of The Holy’ in which he attempts to explain the spiritual experience that Einstein describes and what Otto goes on to refer to as the numinous which he believes is a sign which points to the deity and could be likened to the voice of God that beckons man to his true center.

The sub-title to Otto’s book, ‘The Idea of the Holy’ is ‘An inquiry into the non-rational factor in the idea of the divine and its relation to the rational’.  In the book Otto points out that numinous is not rational or reasonable but it’s not irrational or unreasonable, it is simply outside of those categories.  You might call it super-rational.

It is this numinous experience that the atheist lacks.  Because he has not experienced it, it is impossible for him to understand someone who has experienced it like Einstein.  Einstein had experienced the Totally Other which lied beyond his explanatory powers to communicate it to those who had not experienced it, those that he referred to as dead or blind.  Otto’s book is the best attempted I have seen to put the experience into words.  You can get a PDF copy at the below address.

http://churchsociety.org/docs/churchman/046/Cman_046_3_Harvey.pdf