Following on my previous post about why Atheism is morally wrong, I’m going to show you why Atheism cannot be true.
First, what is Atheism?
Atheism is the belief that there is no god.
What is a god?
I suppose if you take a narrow definition of god, something that can be trivially disproven, then you should feel safe in calling yourself Atheist. But you must realize, that for different definitions of god, you are no longer Atheist! At best, you can claim Agnosticism — you do not know, you cannot know. I would hope these people who wallow in ignorance adopt the title “Ignoramus”, but “Agnostic” is certainly a good middle ground. If you are this sort of Atheist, please don’t use that title anymore since it is simply not correct.
Gods can be a tricky thing to define. I guess you could define a god as anything and everything. Ancient people saw gods in death, life, the sun, lightning, and even the trees and wind. If everything is a god, then Atheism is the belief that nothing exists. Obviously, we have to limit our definition of god.
What about defining god as anything people believe to be a god? As long as we eliminate those beliefs which make everything a god, and focus primarily on those gods which have a significant following, then we can limit the possibilities to a finite set of things. So now our definition of Atheism is:
Atheism is the belief that no god of any kind that a large number people believe in exists, excluding those who believe everything is a god.
If you go this route, then you have to take the time to study and learn about the religions people believe in, and not just superficially, but deeply. Once you have come to a very good understanding of what they consider god, then you can go out and attempt to disprove such a thing exists.
Suppose that there is some definition of “god”. How would you go about proving that such a thing doesn’t exist? This is the same problem cryptozoologists have in proving that a legendary animal does not exist. That is, you have to examine every possible location of any instance of the animal at a single point in time. Then, and only then, can you say with certainty that such a creature does not exist.
With gods, who typically have the attributes of existing beyond nature, and have attributes that make them more intelligent and more capable than us, such a process is simply impossible.
You’ll note how much time and treasure was spent trying to find the Higg’s Boson. Bit by bit, physicists could declare where it did not exist, and what properties it did not have. But until they have exhaustively searched every possible hiding place for the particle, they could not declare that it did not exist. Indeed, many physicists grew to believe that the Higg’s Boson was unlikely to exist, because the evidence began to suggest that. However, all it took was on possible sighting to change their minds.
The Higg’s Boson is a much easier thing to find than many of the gods people believe in.
Multiply by the numerous gods in our limited set, by the difficulty of disproving even one of them, and you have created an impossible task.
As such, with this definition, at best Atheists can only claim to believe what they claim, with no certainty whatsoever that their belief is true, and a good chance that they are wrong.
Since Atheists cannot prove that there is no God, what could possibly be the foundation of their certainty? After all, not many Atheists trumpet their doctrine as a belief, but a sure knowledge.
Perhaps we need a different definition for Atheism altogether.
Atheism is the belief that phenomena in nature can be explained without action by any kind of god people believe in.
This is a different kind of mindset than simply “there is no god.” I imagine true-blue believers in Atheism, the sort that are capable of following logical arguments like the one I am making now, begin with the assumption, the belief, that the universe is ordered, along with the other assumptions that lead to modern science, (IE, that the order is logically consistent, that you can observe nature and deduce the order, etc…) This, they say, is enough, and we need no God to explain phenomena in the world around us.
The problem is, they have not begun their reasoning from nothing. Why is the belief, the religion, that the universe is ordered and so on, valid? No one can explain this logically, since is it beyond logical. That is, if you use logic, you are already assuming the conclusion. No such argument could be constructed to explain logically why the universe is logical. We can only believe that it is.
Certainly, God may exist between nothingness and the ordered universe, be the driving cause for order in the universe, the only possible explanation that bridges illogically to logic. How can an Atheist of the sort I just described prove this to not be the case? They simply can’t.
In short, Atheism is at best a belief, and has no certainty whatsoever, and no way of creating certainty of the validity of their beliefs. What a horrible system! A set of assumptions that are never provable! Surely, we must have knowledge as our philosophical foundation, not suppositions!
All of what I have said is enough to destroy anyone’s certainty in Atheism. What I mention now is counter-factual evidence, that is, proof that Atheism’s beliefs simply are not so.
It’s rather simple, actually. All I have to do is demonstrate God.
And here is my counter-factual evidence: I know that God lives. He is real, he talks to people on earth, and he is the same today, yesterday, and forever. His mind is above ours, he comprehends things we cannot conceive of. If my knowledge is real, that is, if things are really the way I say they are, then Atheism is untrue.
How do I “know” the thing to be true? How do we “know” anything? By our observations through our senses. I have felt God the same way I can see a mountain or a microbe, or hear the waves of the ocean or a bell, or touch a kitten, or sense how hot a frying pan is with my hand. To me, the sensation I have felt when God showed himself to me in my life is no different than the above sense. In fact, I have come to learn to trust in this feeling more than my other five senses. Call it the “sixth sense”, I call it the influence of the Holy Ghost. This sense has never lead me astray.
The fact that you can’t see very well doesn’t mean I cannot see; likewise, the fact that your “sixth sense” is dull does not change the fact that my “sixth sense” is very real.
The fact that you have not “felt” God doesn’t mean God doesn’t exist. It simply means you have not felt God. It is the same as if you haven’t been to Paris to see the sights and smell the smells. Because you have not done so does not mean that Paris doesn’t exist. It only means that you haven’t felt Paris. To try and convince someone who has been to Paris that Paris doesn’t exist is simply absurd.
Unfortunately, I cannot give you the same knowledge I have unless you experience it yourself. I can only witness what I have felt. The way, the only way, to experience this is to sincerely pray to the true God and allow himself to manifest himself to you. I suggest finding LDS missionaries, inviting them into your home, and doing everything they ask you to do for an absolute witness.
Maybe I am a liar; maybe I don’t really have a sixth sense but am suffering under some kind of psychotic delusion; This kind of reasoning is just as easily used to confuse eye-witnesses of a crime.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, is the claim that something outlandish is automatically not true until observed to be so. This is absurd reasoning. You might choose not to believe in the outlandish claim, but you must realize that your belief may very well be wrong. Take, for instance, Einstein’s belief that “God does not play dice.” He refused to accept the outlandish claim that events around us are truly born of randomness. And yet, we know that things are that way. It has always been true, even before we conceived of it, and even before we generally accepted it and still considered it outlandish.
There are a lot of things that are true that are inconceivable or outlandish, and you don’t have to go far to find it. When someone comes with a reliable witness that something outlandish is true, go ahead and refuse to believe it at first, but promise yourself to investigate the claims thoroughly if the matter is important to you. I would think that matters about your eternal fate would be important to you, so you shouldn’t wait long before seriously investigating religious claims.
I will accept all logical arguments. All ad hominem or other logical fallacies will simply be ignored or torn to pieces, given my mood. If there is a particular argument you like in favor of Atheism, I’ll show you how I already incorporated it above.