This may seem like a strange place to start for someone who wants to argue against atheism. I’ve included it here because many people’s journey initially focuses on what may appear to be the shortfalls of Christianity and when belief in Christianity wavers, then often one may take a default atheist stand without applying the same rigours of scrutiny about atheistic beliefs.
Of course many atheists believe atheism has no beliefs so as to divert such rigorous scrutiny and this is covered in the section entitled –
If atheism is correct then what we can say is that all that exists in reality is matter and energy (which is a form of matter). This matter (or the material world) only obeys certain necessary laws which can be expressed mathematically which we call Scientific Laws. At present all of the workings of the universe is thought to be expressed and explained by only four universal scientific laws. These are the laws of Gravity, Electromagnetism, Weak nuclear forces and Strong nuclear forces.
So if atheism is correct, all that exists is the material world (what we can see, feel, measure etc) which necessarily obeys universal scientific laws. Because science investigates the material world then the atheist believes science explains everything.
Some argue that this view is a scientific view but on closer inspection it is not. Saying that everything that exists can be explained by say cooking, would not be a ‘cooking view’ or that saying everything that exists can be explained by sports would not be a ‘sporting view.’ Having the belief that everything that exists can be explained by science is not a ‘scientific view’.
It is important to realise that if all that exists is the material world following universal laws then that leaves no room for free will. Since we think with our brains and our brains are made up of matter following necessary scientific laws, that matter will do whatever the scientific laws dictate with no control from any other source (our independent selves for example). Remember, nothing else exists except matter following necessary unimersal scientific laws.
So if atheism is correct, we cannot ‘think for ourselves’ or ‘have freedom to choose’ anything. This includes whether to ‘choose’ to bend down and tie our shoelace, whether to go to the beach or whether in fact to accept atheism. As soon as we say that something other than electrons and protons (which is matter) following universal scientific law is involved in the thinking process, then by definition there must be something more than matter and scientific law and materialistic atheism does not allow this.
Please read the following link to see why the atheist philosophy not only leads to the rejection of free will, love and independent thought but instead embraces delusion :
Atheism and delusion – think about it.
Now I’m sure most people act everyday like they do have a choice in a whole range of situations such as who we would love; what we dislike or admire; how we should spend our time; what we think is reasonable and what we would think is nonsensical. If atheism is correct, then we are wrong to think this about ourselves. The word for that is delusion. According to atheism, we (including atheists) all live our lives under the delusion that we have choice. It is easy to see how in certain environments atheism can promote anti-intellectualism and nihilism if it is fully accepted. See the section on
The Horrors of Atheist Regimes.
A mentally unhealthy situation can develop where we have painted ourselves into a corner where we see everyone as deluded, including ourselves. Quite a few holding such a view seem emotionally driven to castigate one particular ‘delusion’, that is, that there may exist a loving intelligence outside of ourselves which created our physical world. This seems very perplexing that a belief system that says everyone is deluded wants to spend so much time arguing that an external Creator is a delusion. One might ask, if I live my day everyday under the delusion that I have the choice to get out of bed, catch a bus or have a chicken sandwich for lunch, what is the fuss if I also have the much smaller delusion that there is a Creator for the material world I find myself in?
So if materialistic atheism is correct, everyone is constantly living in delusion but many atheists seem particularly obsessively paranoid in spending so much of their time ridiculing one small particular delusion which has actually done so much good in the world. Many holding such beliefs seem to be pathologically allergic to any public demonstration or sharing of Christianity. The quickness, rudeness and often silly derogatory remarks one sees from some militant atheists encountering the name of God spoken seriously reminds one of the Exorcist movie of many years ago where the mere mention of God or the touch of Holy water would send a possessed girl flying to the ceiling and her head spinning.
If materialistic atheism is correct, then atheists are at some conscious level aware that they are themselves delusional and that they argue against the basic existence of intelligence, reason, free choice and love. To the atheist who thinks his belief system through, intelligence, reason, free choice and love are just emergent illusory concepts which appear as the result of matter acting in necessary ways according to scientific laws. Not only is everyone delusional but atheism becomes logically incoherent when it argues for people to be intelligent and choose atheism when that very belief system rules out the existence of independent intelligence and choice to begin with. The militant atheist, I believe, lives a life in two worlds dear reader. One, from the wider inherited Christian civilization where he is an independent caring loving free choosing self and the other, from his atheistic belief system where he says (and often argues very strenuously) that such things are a delusion and simply the outworking of matter acting in a compulsive way.
Dear reader, is not that the way to madness?
For the militant atheist it is even worse. Not just is he delusional, but he is obsessively paranoid in his denouncing of one particular ’delusion’. Because he spends so much time attacking Christianity, an act which would seem pointless under his own belief system, he must train his mind to see Christianity and his own inherited Chrisitan civilisation as inherently bad which then gives him a reason to pursue his obsession. In such a way he is not only training his mind to be scathing and dismissive of other people, but also to be narrow minded in ignoring the good of Christianity. Pyschologically many militant atheists cannot allow Christianity to be seen as reasonable or good for society and so i believe many are pyschologically ripe to be taken in by the anti Christian myths that were spread in our university systems last century, such as Galileo, the Spanish Inquisition and the Crusades.
An atheist has to be careful that by denying the existence of God in favour of a materialist philosophy, he doesn’t end up denying the existence of his independent self and worse the independence and free choice of his neighbour.
An anti ‘Love your neighbour’ philosophy if you will.
Such a philosophy when it becomes widespread can be very detrimental to society and to the continued progression of civilisation.
whatswrongwithatheism 
Comments
I disagree with your initial premise; that atheists believe in science. Although many of them do, it’s not right to say that atheism is in some way defined by the assertion that science is the alternative to the theistic claims of existence.
But even the scientific world-view; that we are defined by physics and chemistry and biology, free-will is allowed for – that is the nature of psychological evolution.
Hi Allallt. It’s interesting that you should think that i am saying Atheists believe in science and that it is the alternative to the Theistic worldview. If you re-read my page you will see that this is described as a superficial view and that the general Atheistic concept of the world is materialisitc not scientific, although many Atheists have trouble telling the difference between the two – hence they associate incorrectly science with their materialistic philosophy. I am very strong in saying that the Atheistic general worldview is not backed by science. In fact science largely makes the materialistic worldview untenable – if only Atheists look far enough into the science to find this out. It is this investigation into science that made me walk away from Atheism. Intellectually, i could never go back unless a comprehensive and logically and empirically backed materialistic philosophy was to emerge. I think our most comprehensive scientific explantions of reality, that is Quantum Physics, makes the materialistic philosophy a disproved notion.
As far as ‘free will being allowed for’ in what you call pyschological evolution – this is evidence of what i spoke about on this page regarding Atheists living in two worlds which i think is a very insecure and contradictory place to be in. If all that exists in reality is the material world obeying scientific law then this position must be held by the materialistic Atheist all the way ‘down the line’. Such studies as ‘psychological evolution’ must be regarded as emergent naturalistic phenomena that is based on materialistic scientific law. Otherwise you have to argue that the way we think is outside of materialistic scientific law which negates materialistic belief and hence the bedrock of Atheistic beliefs. On the one hand many Atheists hold to a materialistic explanation of reality and on the other many atheists want to ‘make allowance for’ their own thinking to be outside of this process and thus participate in the Christian cultural ethos of independent free will, love, intellect and reasoning. An Atheist who thinks his position through has to see that such a belief system is a self contradiction.
The question is that once an Atheist sees this, do they decide to walk away from Atheism or do they decide to hold onto Atheistic beliefs against reason and common sense. This is a very difficult place for an Atheist to be in – a sort of no mans land. Some Atheists decide to accept that there is no independent ‘them’ and that any thoughts they have of an independent self is a delusion. This is also a very uncomfotable place for an Atheist to inhabit and both examples lead to a rejection of independent reason. The smart decision i believe is to walk away from Atheism altogether as an inferior, self defeating and scientifically untenable belief system. In the West, quite a few people have staked their self identity on Atheism as a superior viewpoint which makes it difficult for them to make the smart decision to walk away, to their own personal detriment.
I stumbled on your website, and have found it quite interesting, and completely worthy of any amount of time that would henceforth, be devoted in the surfing of its content.
I must deeply acknowledge your courage in taking up these very sensitive issues and addressing them with such a rare boldness, especially in this period of history of civilisation wherein our world experiences a stunning growth in atheistic persuasion.
There is no doubt that a greater effort is needed to derobe atheism of such vests of ideologies founded on alarming assumptions on the operational dynamics of Christianity for instance, assumptions which fuel their erroneous convictions, and form their minds into closed boxes resistant to any possible penetration of truth.
Continue the good work.