When I debate atheists, from time to time I point out when they commit some of the standard logical fallacies. The genetic fallacy probably comes up as often as any other. This occurs when you incorrectly assume that by proving the origin of a belief, you have thereby disproven the validity of that belief. For example, atheists often claim that morality is merely the byproduct of evolutionary processes. Even if true, however, at best this may show how people arrived at their individual sense of morality. It does nothing one way or the other to demonstrate whether objective morality actually exists independent of our perceptions.
In fairness, though, if the theist is entitled to point out logical fallacies committed by the atheist, they should be permitted to do the same in return. One favorite tactic of many is to claim that in advancing the kalam cosmological argument, Christian apologists like myself commit the “fallacy of composition.”
Before I get into the nature of this fallacy, let me begin by outlining the kalam argument for anyone who may be unfamiliar with it. It deals with the origin of the universe and claims to provide at least some evidence for the existence of God: Continue reading
I was an atheist when I first said that to a Christian more than 40 years ago. I must say it felt pretty good to say those words. It makes one feel superior to tell a person they cannot prove something they believe. Most Christians I said that to personally and on my radio talk show either crumbled or exploded at that point. Either reaction was fine with me.
I am no longer an atheist, but still believe the statement to be true. We cannot “prove” the existence of God, but we don’t have to. Continue reading
Photo Attribution: http://twitpic.com/ajwh7p
Yet another tactic that I see atheists use against God and religion, is visualized in the picture above (You’ll have to click on it a few times to read it) This picture is apparently trying to convey that the quality of life in these societies is better because they’re some of the least religious countries in the world. Such reasoning is quite problematic however, for various reasons. I think one of the biggest issues is finding/proving the causation for this assertion. I would like to know how they linked the two together. Did this study (or studies) take into account: the various cultural, economical, or social issues etc?
Does it follow that since the people in these countries are irreligious, then they are automatically atheists? Were such people specifically polled about their apparent atheism or just their non religious status? To be fair, this might not be the point of the picture (rather, that lacking religion equals a better way of life) but does this make a case for atheism if these people are just not religious, yet not atheists either? It could conceivably be a case against organized religion while being silent for the case of atheism. I know tons of people that don’t consider religion important at all, yet still maintain their religious status (when pressed; yet in a nominal fashion) of their heritage or upbringing. Was this scenario taken into consideration?
Read this Razor Swift article in its entirety at Razor Swift
Richard Dawkins, Richard Carrier, Barry McGowan, Christopher Hitchens, Bertrand Russell, Madalyn Murray O’Hair — they all had one thing in common — they are or were people. They also happen to be or were well-known atheists.
I was quite taken with Madalyn Murray O’Hair at one time. I never met her, but had the opportunity to talk with her more than 40 years ago when she was a guest on a radio talk show I produced. I was a young atheist and looked up to her and Bertrand Russell (he was still alive at the time) as examples of what I wanted to be in society — a freethinker who opened the minds of the masses to think for themselves — unhampered by the dictates of religion. I didn’t think of Madalyn or Bertrand as anything other than people speaking their mind. Continue reading
A common challenge Christian apologists face concerns the atheist’s claim that God doesn’t exist. A more specific variety of this challenge was recently posed by a TilledSoil.org reader concerning an atheist’s use of Russell’s teapot analogy for the non-existence of God. Here is an extract of Bertrand Russell giving the analogy:
“If I were to suggest that between the Earth and Mars there is a china teapot revolving about the sun in an elliptical orbit, nobody would be able to disprove my assertion Continue reading