Presented here for your convenience, for the first time ever and after countless hours of painstaking research by eavesdropping on actual cafe conversations and Internet chat rooms, are the top ten reasons I overheard secular Americans give for dismissing faith.
Well, not really, but it sounds about right.
10. “If there truly is an infinitely powerful and all-knowing God, then why can’t I easily understand him right away? He may well be an omnipotent and eternal deity ruling over a universe larger and more complicated than the mortal mind could ever possibly envision, much less comprehend… but I do read The New York Times, you know.”
9. “Why are all Christians such closed-minded morons? Their attitude towards atheism is marked by perpetuating generalized misconceptions about honest seekers of truth like me… often in the form of pitifully sterile insults. They should celebrate those whose opinions differ from their own, like we do. Stupid Christians.”
8. “Completely unlike us, Christians never demand any more evidence for the validity of their belief than bandwagon appeals to common knowledge. Everybody knows this is true. How could anybody even entertain conclusions drawn about an opposing point of view from such ridiculous ignorance? Hypocrites!”
7. “And what about the Bible? If there is a God, reason dictates that the Bible should have compelling, dynamic theological and ethical innovations unlikely to be conceived by human beings alone. It should also offer strong circumstantial support for divine inspiration. Of course it does not. I know this because I heard somebody quote a verse from it once.”
6. “The Bible has been proven many times through scholarly critical analysis to be nothing more than a biased collection of fairy tales written for the sole purpose of subjecting the superstitious masses under a code of moral liberty and civil enlightenment. This conspiracy is what allows monsters like Mother Teresa to rule as the despicable despots they are, breaking the spirits of proactive altruists everywhere.”
5. “Why is there any degree of disorder and injustice in the world? It’s not like a perfectly black and white world would make the existence of God obvious, thus removing our crucial need to develop faith in God and would reduce us to mindless automatons forced into conformity!”
4. “The complex worldview that Christianity posits suggests that humanity is an intricate tapestry of interdependence working towards a fundamentally greater collective good. That selfishness cannot distract us from the more neutral, objective conclusion that life is simply a series of random events, the inevitable result of a physical system that developed completely by chance and that ends in death, rendering life ultimately pointless and devoid of any obligation to improve ourselves or the world in general. I know how ennobling this sounds, but it is merely a fact, unadulterated by any ulterior motive.”
3. “‘By their fruits you will know them?’ So has anyone ever abandoned a materially abundant lifestyle or altered behavior inconsistent with their beliefs because of religious conviction? Nobody that I know of! This is because religion is only a selfish delusion of convenience, not a vigorous and vital dimension of life whose empirical validity empowers adherents to make vastly positive personal change. Their wanton mental self-indulgence is starkly revealed when placed in contrast with those of us who so stoically bear the Spartan torch of atheism.”
2. “I read this in the correspondence of a European philosopher and scientist to his brother in 1895: ‘If there were in existence some Supreme Being, why has he then withheld from his own children that most natural of blessings, automated wheeled transportation? For, as any fool can see, such a marvel absolutely must be commensurate with the existence of God. If not for this insurmountable flaw, however, I would gladly become a Christian.’ This perfectly logical query was never satisfactorily addressed, and he died a happy atheist in 1948.”
1. “Clearly, belief in God amounts to no more than wishful thinking. Simply put, while those of us who accept atheism only do so after the most stringent open-minded research into every possibility, and then often reluctantly, those who embrace any faith-based belief system always do so blindly. The more they explain their opinion, the more they reveal their fundamental ignorance.”
Gently Hew Stone 
7. “And what about the Bible? If there is a God, reason dictates that the Bible should have compelling, dynamic theological and ethical innovations unlikely to be conceived by human beings alone. It should also offer strong circumstantial support for divine inspiration. Of course it does not. I know this because I heard somebody quote a verse from it once.”
I’d just like to address this. I’m not sure how much in jest this post is and how serious it is supposed to be taken, so if I take it too seriously I apologize.
I’ve read the bible. Cover to cover. Twice. Once while I was a Catholic, and once after I became an atheist. Having done so, I still own two copies and reference them often when in discussion with others.
That being said, I have no idea what these “compelling, dynamic theological and ethical innovations” are supposed to be. If you could perhaps list them, I would appreciate it. If you are referring to, say, the Golden Rule, or the Ten Commandments, I’m sorry to inform you that both were created by men far before the bible, OT or NT, was written.
Morse Code, sorry this response is so late; I was out of town over the weekend, if that helps. Hopefully this still finds you.
First, I actually have great respect for atheists, in that they demand that there be reasonable evidence for belief. I completely agree that, though religion might be respected for producing goodness in the world, if it doesn’t stand up to intellectual scrutiny, then it can’t make any claim on us to believe or obey it. Surely, subscribing to any ideology because it “makes sense,” or “makes us feel good,” or because of tradition or cutlural convenience, is foolish. Either a belief accurately describes reality, or it doesn’t. If so, we should submit to it, I say. If not, it may have inspired some nice art, but it’s distracting at best, and insidious at worst.
In fact, if it weren’t for The Book of Mormon, I’d probably be agnostic myself. I don’t think a change of heart can come from logic alone, but I do think that it is a useful start, a way to prepare the skeptical among us to take a chance on experimenting with faith. To that end, I often recommend this excellent collection of evidence for The Book of Mormon’s authenticity. Nobody can honestly disregard God until they can objectively account for these evidences.
Secondly, the point we might be disagreeing about here is subjective. There is, as far a I’m aware, no standard measure for “compelling, dynamic theological innovations” upon which everybody would agree. I could make a strong case for those qualities in the Bible, but you could be perfectly justified in concluding, “I don’t think so.” (And, of course, vice versa.)
Still, for what it’s worth, the moral codes of the OT and NT are verifiably not just copies from contemporaneous or previous cultures. On the originality of the Mosaic code, I’ve always liked this analysis. And this piece is a pretty decent summary of some of Jesus’s most innovative teachings. I’m not sure what you have in mind when you say that his ideas were previously extant: not only was the “positive” formulation of the Golden Rule relatively rare and obscure, but where do you see parallels for the ethics of the Sermon on the Mount? Not even the Stoics went this far! Certainly, Jesus wasn’t just coming up with some easy, obvious, common rule book.
Thanks for your comments!
No offense but if you really had the respect for atheistic arguments you say you do you would have done a much better job presenting them how they actually are. Instead you infused theistic straw men in them, distorting them into something that they are not and thus disingenuously undermining them whether you realize it or not. Further, none of these are actual arguments. They look much more like comments after the argument was made. If you or anyone else wants to see some of these arguments in their actual form, not the distorted misrepresentation you presented here, I would recommend going to youtube and watching clips of maybe The Atheist Experience, AronRa, Thunderf00t, or the many clips by Christopher Hitchens, Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, etc.
Thanks for the good thoughts, Nick.
Most of the atheistic arguments I’ve ever seen, though, are just straw men, or circular (“Religion isn’t true because it’s dumb”). My jokes here are just exaggerations of the kind of points I’ve really heard people make. If you want to put forth, say, three more substantial, compelling arguments, I’ll be happy to have them here and engage them honestly.
Frankly, I’ve always had more respect for agnostics than atheists–agnosticism seems a very tenable position, but how can anyone claim to prove a negative?
Thanks, again!
I still dont get this argument….People say the bible contradicts itself but yet the big bang theory itself does to……That being said the big bang theory go’s against the law. Energy cannot be created nor destroyed. They say the universe was made. Where did this energy come from??? if HUMANS say it cant be created nor destroyed. Sorry if you think im ignorant but i have been pondering this for a long time and yes i do believe in god but i dont go for the nut Christianity. A bunch of my good friends are atheist. LIVE AND LET LIVE. i dont judge =] other than this argument
My bad i left out made by the explosion***