Tired old atheist arguments

[Pim Pendergast]

Atheists use the same old tired arguments when debating Christians. The atheist penchant for flogging a dead horse makes life easy for us Christians. All we have to do is stick with tried and tested responses that have stood the test of time. Here are some common atheist arguments that have been debunked many times. Feel free to chime in with any others you can think of.

1. Atheism is the lack of belief in a deity.

Atheism is the foolish denial of one’s latent belief in God (Rom 1:18-32). The correct secular definition of atheism is an unshakeable faith that there is no God.

2.

A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of knowledge that has been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment.

A theory is a hunch, a guess, a tentative hypothesis.

3. There is no proof Jesus ever existed.

What year is it? Huh?

4. The Bible isn’t proof of God’s existence.

It is, because God inspired it (2 Tim 3:16). Besides, what other proof do we have?

5. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

Just look at the miracles of Jesus (Jn 10:38; 14:11). Pretty extraordinary.

6. The stories in the Bible are too far-fetched.

Not if you believe in an omnipotent God who can do anything (Rev 19:6).

7. Evolution, abiogenesis, cosmology and climate change are separate fields of scientific inquiry. They are not synonymous terms that can be used interchangeably.

Yes, they are.

8. A close look at nature reveals evidence for an old earth and evolution.

A look at Creation proves the existence of God and the Genesis Creation and Flood accounts (Rom 1:18-32; Ps 19:1).

9. The overwhelming majority of biologists, palaeontologists and geologists believe in evolution.

A lot of scientists reject evolution but they are afraid to speak out.

10. Dating methods are accurate.

No they aren’t, according to every Creation scientist and every Creationist website. And what reason would they have to lie? Besides, I once heard from a friend who knew someone who attended a Creation-science seminar that 90% of dating methods support a young earth, although I couldn’t name them.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

"You don’t need religion to have morals. If you can’t determine right from wrong, then you lack empathy, not religion."

That's just silly, especially coming from people who believe in "relative morality." They don't know what's right from wrong, and think it's okay for men to be poking each other with random objects at truck stops and airport bathrooms just because "love is blind" or some such nonsense.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

The Bible is a fairytale with stories about talking serpents and talking donkeys.

Says the man who believes he's a talking monkey.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

"Human evolution is one of the most strongly-supported examples of evolution. The human phylogenetic tree is almost complete."

Piltdown Man and Nebraska Man have both been proved to be fakes. It’s only a matter of time before all the other so-called transitional forms are as well.

"The legal system of the United States is not based on the Ten Commandments."

The laws of the US are based on the Bible. Murder, stealing and perjury are illegal in every civilized nation. That’s three out of the Ten Commandments.

"The founding fathers of the United States were not overtly Christian. The US was not founded on Christian values."

Although I don’t live in the US and have never read any of the founding documents and know next to nothing about US history, I have no reason to doubt my American brothers and sisters who tell me this is a blatant lie. God calls atheists fools (Ps 14:1), so I would be a fool to believe anything they say.

"The atrocities committed by Hitler, Mao and Stalin cannot be attributed to atheism. Their actions were motivated by political ideals such as communism, fascism, nationalism and militarism; and Hitler was not an atheist."

Hitler still rejected the only true God. Communism was invented by an atheist. It was these men’s lack of morality as atheists that allowed them to carry out their political convictions to such extremes.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

“The evolution of increased genetic variety in a population, increased genetic material, new genetic material and new genetically-regulated abilities have been observed. Genetic sequencing has revealed that gene duplication, in which a long stretch of DNA is copied, followed by point mutations that change one or both of the copies is the likely origin of some proteins.”

Mutations are random. They do not add information. There has never been a single recorded incident of information being added to the genome.

“Many transitional forms have been discovered in the fossil record and are on display in museums around the world.”

All I see are gaps in the fossil record. Show me just one missing link. Show me a crocoduck.

“Irreducible complexity has been refuted in peer-reviewed papers and is rejected by the majority of the scientific community. Bacterial flagella are not irreducibly complex. The eye is not irreducibly complex.”

Irreducibly complex organisms are evidence of special creation and intelligent design.

“There is no evidence of intelligent design. Why would an intelligent being design the human jaw to be too small for all its teeth or design the eye with the rods and cones set up backwards?”

Evidence of intelligent design is all around us. Just look at the banana.

“If we are intelligently designed, why would we have vestigial organs that we don’t seem to need?”

God created everything for a reason. Scientists may one day discover that our vestigial organs serve a vital function. Just because they haven’t yet doesn’t mean they never will.

“If special creation is true, why would God create birds with the genes to grow teeth and humans with the genes to grow a tail?”

I’ve never seen a bird with teeth or a person with a tail.

“Even if Darwin retracted his theory on his deathbed, and that’s doubtful, that wouldn’t make it any less true.”

Darwin retracted his theory just before he died, so why should we believe him?

[Pastor Ed Lowman]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

And don't forget...

"There is evidence of a primate descent of man."

Well, if we teach our children they came from monkeys, they will act like monkeys!

[BelieverInGod]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

And don't forget...

"There is evidence of a primate descent of man."

Well, if we teach our children they came from monkeys, they will act like monkeys!

Compare how children act these days to the way they acted in the 50's.

I think that sums it up quite well.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

“Atheism is not the belief that everything came from nothing.”

But that is ultimately what you’re saying when you reject the notion that God created the universe. The atheistic belief that everything came from nothing is an intellectual embarrassment. It’s missing one vital ingredient. God spoke… and then everything came from nothing.

Heb 11:3Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear.

“That crocodiles and bees have changed little over millions of years doesn’t disprove evolution. Some species remain static for long periods of time if they are not under strong selective pressure to change.”

Evolutionary stasis disproves evolution. If evolution were true, species would be changing constantly.

“Speciation has been observed.”

There is no record of one species changing into another. If evolution were true, new species should have arisen at some point in the last 150 years evolution has been around.

[A Follower]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

I just clicked the link in your last post, it has clear evidence of how scientists operate:

5.3.2 Disruptive Selection on Drosophila melanogaster

Thoday and Gibson (1962) established a population of Drosophila melanogaster from four gravid females. They applied selection on this population for flies with the highest and lowest numbers of sternoplural chaetae (hairs). In each generation, eight flies with high numbers of chaetae were allowed to interbreed and eight flies with low numbers of chaetae were allowed to interbreed. Periodically they performed mate choice experiments on the two lines. They found that they had produced a high degree of positive assortative mating between the two groups. In the decade or so following this, eighteen labs attempted unsuccessfully to reproduce these results. References are given in Thoday and Gibson 1970.

Scientists just make up what they want to believe, publish that and then it's "true". All their processes are designed to facilitate this. They talk a lot about peer review, but a peer reviewer is not allowed to reproduce an experiment, they are only allowed to say whether an experiment as described could theoretically be executed.

More evidence, at least 55%* of European scientists are actively involved in committing and maintaining fraud:

Overall, about 8% of the Flemish medical scientists admits to recently having made up and/or massaged data.
...
47% has witnessed such practices in their direct surroundings or heard about them firsthand.

(*) the actual number will be a lot higher because the "study" relied on scientists admitting to being criminals.

This is in medical science, where the scientists making up their studies are directly responsible for killing sick people with their fantasy treatments. Just imagine how high the rate of fraud is in scientific fields where there are no moral reasons to not fabricate science, like evolutionary biology, geography, climate research, astrology, sociology, etc.

And even when they do not knowingly lie they are still wrong: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

I just clicked the link in your last post, it has clear evidence of how scientists operate:


Scientists just make up what they want to believe, publish that and then it's "true". All their processes are designed to facilitate this. They talk a lot about peer review, but a peer reviewer is not allowed to reproduce an experiment, they are only allowed to say whether an experiment as described could theoretically be executed.

More evidence, at least 55%* of European scientists are actively involved in committing and maintaining fraud:

(*) the actual number will be a lot higher because the "study" relied on scientists admitting to being criminals.

This is in medical science, where the scientists making up their studies are directly responsible for killing sick people with their fantasy treatments. Just imagine how high the rate of fraud is in scientific fields where there are no moral reasons to not fabricate science, like evolutionary biology, geography, climate research, astrology, sociology, etc.

And even when they do not knowingly lie they are still wrong: Why Most Published Research Findings Are False

You raise a good point, Brother Follower. We can only trust Creation scientists. No true Christian would ever manipulate, misrepresent or falsify data. Ken Ham, Kent and Eric Hovind, Carl Wieland, Ray Comfort, and the like are men of unquestionable integrity. It infuriates me when atheists try to cast doubt on their character. There's even a YouTube channel dedicated to this purpose. Every year potholer54 awards the Golden Crocoduck to the Creationist who YouTube voters believe has committed the most grievous breach of the ninth commandment (lying). The number of Creationists he accuses of lying is frightening. He's already made a playlist of 2013 Golden Crocoduck nominees. He makes videos exposing the so-called lies, such as the one below.

But I would trust a Creation scientist over a secular scientist any day. Creation scientists have no need to lie because they have an unfair advantage. They are looking for evidence to support the Bible, and we already know the Bible is true.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

"Atheism isn't a religion any more than not collecting stamps is a hobby or not playing football is a sport."

That sounds very clever... until you really think about it.

[Pim Pendergast]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

“Complex biological forms, such as wings and eyes, evolved step-by-step through intermediate structures.”

[AthiesticChristian]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

I'm sorry, but saying that the Bible proves God real because it says he does and this rings true because he wrote is cyclical justification. I, as an Atheistic Christian, believe that God is a representation of the conscience that humans have and we use God as our own idea of what to do, which is why we have so many interpretations. I do believe in God but I am an Atheist. God is the human conscience externalized.

[Mary Etheldreda]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

God is a representation of the conscience that humans have and we use God as our own idea of what to do

Interesting idea, dear, but it doesn't make sense when you look at it with any depth. For example, why would Abraham seriously consider sacrificing his only son, Isaac, if the voice of God was just a representation of his conscience? That would suggest he was schizophrenic, and that's just ridiculous. Why would God choose a schizophrenic to be the "Father of Many Nations" (Genesis 17:5)?

[AthiesticChristian]

Re: Tired old atheist arguments

I don't understand why I am unsaved trash for following the moral teachings of the Bible. My belief teaches me that the Bible is a book teaching me the way to live my life but it is not meant literally. Surely if God did exist he would judge me on my moral action and not my belief in him.