1. If there is
no God, “the big questions” remain unanswered, so how do
we answer the following questions: Why is there something
rather than nothing? Why is there conscious, intelligent life
on this planet, and is there any meaning to this life? If
these concepts are merely social constructions, or human opinions,
whose opinion does one trust in determining what is good or bad,
right or wrong?
A: Why must everything have been created by
something else, and if so why must it be God? If so, who created
God? Are there one or many? Whose God's morality should we
follow?
There being a God does not mean his values are better, best or
even good. It is not established he is a good God.
All good comes from God and all evil conveniently from Satan. So
in the beginning, there was nothing. Along with the heavens and the
seas, God created Satan.
2. If we reject the
existence of God, we are left with a crisis of meaning, so
why don’t we see more atheists like Jean Paul Sartre, or Friedrich
Nietzsche, or Michel Foucault? These three philosophers, who
also embraced atheism, recognized that in the absence of God, there
was no transcendent meaning beyond one’s own self-interests,
pleasures, or tastes.
A: It is not physically compulsory for meaning
to exist. It is meaningless and self-defeating to imagine a meaning
where none exists.
Does every trivial or tragic occurrence have a divine
meaning?
3. When people have
embraced atheism, the historical results can be horrific,
as in the regimes of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot who saw religion as
the problem and worked to eradicate it.
A: Who was killed in Pakistan last May?
Has more harm been caused or cured by religion? The question is
about men who embrace God and not God himself, but if he is
unwilling to show himself, what have we left to follow?
4. If there is no
God, the problems of evil and suffering are in no way
solved, so where is the hope of redemption, or meaning for
those who suffer? Suffering is just as tragic, if not
more so, without God because there is no hope of ultimate justice,
or of the suffering being rendered meaningful or transcendent,
redemptive or redeemable. It might be true that there is
no God to blame now, but neither is there a God to reach out to for
strength, transcendent meaning, or comfort. Why would we seek
the alleviation of suffering without objective morality grounded in
a God of justice?
A: The existence of God does not solve the
problems of evil and suffering. Nor does it provide proof of
ultimate justice.
It is contradictory to expect justice when an evil believer can
ask for redemption from an all-forgiving God.
Again, are there one or many Gods? Whose God's morality should
we follow? Amputate or absolve? Which regulates society best?
5. If there is no
God, we lose the very standard by which we critique religions and
religious people, so whose opinion matters most? Whose voice
will be heard? Whose tastes or preferences will be
honored? In the long run, human tastes and opinions
have no more weight than we give them, and who are we to give them
meaning anyway? Who is to say that lying, or cheating or
adultery or child molestation are wrong –really wrong? Where
do those standards come from? Sure, our societies might make
these things “illegal” and impose penalties or consequences for
things that are not socially acceptable, but human cultures have at
various times legally or socially disapproved of everything from
believing in God to believing the world revolves around the sun;
from slavery, to interracial marriage, from polygamy to
monogamy. Human taste, opinion law and culture are hardly
dependable arbiters of Truth.
A: If God loves us and wants salvation for us,
and makes His way the only route to salvation, why did he give us
the ability to not follow his opinion?
How do we apply God's law when it is woefully simplistic and
inadequate to cover modern society? Must we govern ourselves, or
did he not intend us to be modern and to live in tents?
6. If there is no
God, we don’t make sense, so how do we explain human longings and
desire for the transcendent? How do we even explain
human questions for meaning and purpose, or inner thoughts like,
why do I feel unfulfilled or empty? Why do we hunger for the
spiritual, and how do we explain these longings if nothing can
exist beyond the material world?
A: Human values such as love and hate, good and
evil cannot be denied to exist. Why must they emanate from God? If
God ceased to exist or He stopped making his presence felt in the
world, would these values cease to exist?
1. The universe exists. So there must be a cause. This is simple
logic. Every effect has a cause. The universe has a beginning and
thus it is an effect and begs a cause. Either the universe
created itself, or it was created by another being. This being
is refered to as God. Asking who created God is NOT the question
that atheists should ask, since atheists declare that there is
no God. Remember, the point of the above questions is to get the
atheists to answer them from their own atheistic viewpoint.
Atheists cannot deflect, shirk or avoid the questions
simply by asking "so who created God?"
2. What do you mean by physically compulsory for
meaning to exist? The fact is that humans attach meaning to things
and events. The question is whether in the atheist viewpoint
there is even such a thing as meaning. Of course you have already
answered it, that being an atheist there is no meaning at all in
life. At least you concede this point. But then, do you
HONESTLY live as though life has no meaning? Why do you do
what you do? Why do you bother to get up in the morning and do
anything at all? Why do you pursue goals and purpose if there
is no purpose? In other words, are you a consistent atheist?
3. The point being made, which I think you missed, is that
atheism cannot point a finger at religious violence while it itself
is guilty of the greatest atrocities in the last century alone. The
death of millions in atheistic regimes in the last century alone is
more than all deaths purportedly attributed to religion.
4. You missed the point of the problem of evil. If there is no
God, then how can an atheist talk about good and evil? Remember,
for an atheist there is no meaning. Good and evil are meaningless
terms in your own atheistic worldview. Again the point of the
questions is to ask the atheist to answer the questions that he
thinks is a problem for those who believe in God.
5. Like the above you also missed the point. You need to answer
from an atheist viewpoint on how to objective mediate between right
and wrong, good and evil. I can of course answer your questions
from my theistic point of view, but that in no way absolves you
from answering the questions from your atheistic point of view.
6. It is good that you do not deny the existence of IMMATERIAL
things like love, hate, good and evil. But the question is, if
there is no God, then there is no basis for all these things. If
man is nothing but evolved pond scum and our thoughts are nothing
but chemical reactions in the brain and genes interacting, then
what is love, hate, good or evil?
Please understand that all the above 6 questions must be dealt
with by BOTH the atheist and the theist. In my experience, most
atheists avoid answering these questions but instead focus on
attacking the theist. It has to be a level-playing field otherwise
there is no intellectual honesty or integrity at all.
