Home > Apologetics > New Atheism

New Atheism

Have Atheists disproved the God of the Bible? Do they need to? It seems that every Atheist I interchange dialogue with will tell me that they do not have to give a reasonable explanation of why their views are true. Nevertheless, they keep telling me that my views are not true. If my views are not true, then why would it be unreasonable for me to demand that my Atheistic friends articulate why I am wrong and they are right?

You see from the time Atheist began to make headway in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, the most popular Atheist recognized that if they were going to deny God, then it was their burden to explain where morality, God consciousness, and the universe originated. Today’s Atheist are not as intellectually inclined and would just rather argue like children by pointing fingers and stating you are wrong, you are wrong, you are wrong, etc……. Yet to call a position wrong does not make it wrong. One must give valid reasons to show why the opposite position is wrong. No Atheist has ever been able to demonstrate, through valid arguments, why the God of the Bible does not exist.


Today I point you to an article by William Lane Craig on “New Atheism and Five arguments for God.”

It’s perhaps something of a surprise that almost none of the so-called New Atheists has anything to say about arguments for God’s existence. Instead, they to tend to focus on the social effects of religion and question whether religious belief is good for society. One might justifiably doubt that the social impact of an idea for good or ill is an adequate measure of its truth, especially when there are reasons being offered to think that the idea in question really is true. Darwinism, for example, has certainly had at least some negative social influences, but that’s hardly grounds for thinking the theory to be false and simply ignoring the biological evidence in its favor.

Read more of this post here.

  1. May 3, 2012 at 8:24 am


    Most, not all, new atheists are intellectually dishonest and very religious. They spend their time on YouTube, Wikipedia and infidels[.]org and as a result they come out with old, poor, and refuted objections which is sad.

    I miss the brilliant atheism of Flew, Nietzsche, Hume and the like.

    I have fail to find one atheist who could explain to me why she/he is an atheist. I explained that even if all the 5 Arguments for Existence of God are false, that by itself is not a proof that God does not exit. A case against Existence of God is needed for one to be a reasonable atheist.

    I hope one will come forward to make his/her case for atheism, otherwise it is, sadly, them that are unreasonable.

    Thank you for a wonderful piece.


    • May 3, 2012 at 9:01 am

      Thank you for your comment Prayson.

      You are correct. Most Atheist today have no intellectual capabilities. I have comments on these type post all the time by Atheist, but do not even approve their comments.

      Why? Because their arguments are like the ones I wrote about in my short comments in this post.

      For instance I have a comment right now by a person who calls themself ‘notascientist’. They should also call themselves ‘notaphilosopher’, ‘notatheologian’, ‘notagiverofareply’ to theologians, etc….

      My post ask for reasons why someone would believe in atheism? ‘notascientist’ states because I have offered no empirical evidence for God’s existence.

      Yet I have pointed to an article by Craig who gives 5 reasons why God exist. These are proofs.

      My friend ‘notascientist’ is using the verification principle. In other words they believe one can only believe in God if one can show proof for him through the five senses. Yet this person is being dishonest because they believe other things that cannot be proven empirically.

      For instance, science itself cannot be proven empirically. The addition problem 2 +2 =4 cannot be proven empirically and whether or not ‘notascientist’ has a mind cannot be proven empirically.

      Yet ‘notascientist’ still told me why I was wrong, but gave no defense for their beliefs. This is because they cannot defend the world view of atheism.

      • May 3, 2012 at 9:20 am

        My best reply to scientism[ic] claims “only what is verifiable is true” is simply asking for scientific/empirical evidences for the truthfulness of its own claim(which when given committed circular reasoning).

        Sadly many atheist believe that atheism is a default position but none can give reason why it is so. I wonder why they believe that Christianity is guilty before proven guilty.

        I am not shocked though, as reformed Christian. The Gospel of Christ is foolish to the perishing and if I were left to myself, I would have been like them, or worst. God has mercy on whom he has mercy. I praise His name, that he granted an ex-atheist, blasphemer and a radically depraved sinner like me the power to see the glory of the crucified God.

        Thank you once again.

      • May 3, 2012 at 11:58 am

        You are correct friend. The ‘verification principle’ itself cannot be proven empirically.

        I to am glad that the Lord saw fit to save this wretch. I didn’t grow up in a Christian home, but instead grew up as a pagan. I committed all types of evil and almost went to prison for attempted murder. I was witnessed to by a Christian, but cared nothing for the message. One day while getting drunk in my front yard I was quickened and it was as if scales fell from my eyes. I confessed my sins and began seeking Christ. I have sought him ever since.

      • May 3, 2012 at 12:11 pm

        One more point:

        If an Atheist demands empirical evidence for God’s existence, but doesn’t demand that same evidence to prove other things that we know, then he is being intellectually dishonest.

        If we need empirical evidence to know everything we know, then George Washington never existed and last weeks race never took place because we cannot prove either empirically.

        The Atheist would state that they could prove the race happened because they have video to prove it. But we do not know for sure, with empirical evidence, if that video is actually a video of the race. Someone might have got a film crew together and nade that video.

        If the Atheist states that he was an eye witness, then he is being dishonest again because he wants us to accept his testimony about the race, yet throws out the testimony of the disciples who saw Christ after his resurrection. Or the tesimony of Moses who saw God’s hind parts.

        You see, we know many things in this world because of someone elses testimony. I have never been to Japan, but I believe Japan exist. I believe it exist because of eye witness testimony.

  2. May 3, 2012 at 6:20 pm

    No intellectual basis? I’m sorry but you believe in the dead coming back to life, talking snakes, virgin births, Noah’s Ark etc and then go and mock atheists?

    Hows this for a disproval: http://robertnielsen21.wordpress.com/2012/05/04/arguments-against-the-existence-of-god-1-the-problem-of-evil/

    • May 3, 2012 at 7:26 pm

      Thank you Robert for your comment.

      In your actual comment here you try to refute what I have said about atheist and their lack of intellectual ability. You do this by mentioning talking snakes, the dead coming back to life, etc…….

      But you are trying to argue against scriptures claims of these things happening. Yet you provide no proof that they haven’t happened. Nor any proof that the Bible isn’t true.

      But we are not discussing whether the Bible is true, but whether God exists.

      You see the intelectual atheist of the 18th through 20th century actually tried to come up with answers to why man is religious, moral, and tried to answer the origins of life; seeing they stated that God was dead or did not exist. Jean Paul Sartre even admitted that if God exist he would by definition have to be sovereign.

      So if God exists, then you could have the dead coming back to life, talking snakes and such.

      Secondly you point us to a small article that tried to make the claim that since evil exist, then God was either not loving or not all powerful. This argument was developed by John Stuart Mills.

      Yet there is no contradiction with an all powerful, all good God existing while at the same time evil existing. Both can logically exist.

      So your article gives no proofs for the non-existence of God.

      Finally you argue that evil exist, so you must recognize that morals do, for evil is a negation or privation of the good. In other words evil is a lack of good. What you must do is give us an argument for the origin of the good. The atheistic world view has no bases for the good. If God doesn’t exist, then morals don’t exist and therefore there would be no such thing as evil. By your admittance of evil, then you are admitting the good and therefore admitting God.

      Friedrich Nietzche actually stated that since God was dead, then there was no good or evil and no meaning and purpose to life.

      • May 3, 2012 at 7:32 pm

        I wanted to make one more point before I close. According to the rules of logic, there is no contradiction between good and evil existing. Nor is it inconsistent with logic that an all powerful, all good God existing while evil exists.

        According to your view good metal and rust could not simultaneously exist.

  3. Tafacory
    May 3, 2012 at 9:09 pm

    Who are these Atheists that you speak of? None of the Atheists I know put forth old, obsolete, easily refutable arguments. You’re right in demanding answers from Atheists, but I doubt they are as foolish as you paint them to be. If Theists and Atheists want to make progress, we have to attack arguments, not each other. Ad hominem attacks do not get us anywhere. Focus on the arguments.

    • May 4, 2012 at 2:23 am

      Thank you for your comment.

      Who are these Atheist I speak of?

      Well you commented without giving any arguments for your world view.

      You say the Atheist arguments are old and easy to refute. This is quite true and a lot of times Atheist have refuted other Atheist in their arguments. Such as many in the 18th century and 19th century tried to explain why the tomb of Christ was empty. One developed one theory, another Atheist would refute it.

      Finally ad hominem arguments have not been used here. An ad hominem argument is one that attacks the character of the opponent instead of his arguments.

      I have pointed to five arguments by William Lane Craig and only one Atheist tried to argue against these five arguments by arguing for the existence of evil. But I attacked that argument and not his character.

      If I state that Atheist in general, those of which I have had comments from on my regular post, are not intelletually capable of presenting a foundation for their own world views, then I haven’t attacked the character of any individual.

      All an Atheist would have to do to prove me wrong is show me, from his world view, where the origins of the universe originated, where life originated, give a reason for where morals come from, etc……

      But he can’t borrow from my world view to do it. That would be cheating.

  4. May 10, 2012 at 9:44 am

    If a person allows an argument such as, the problem of evil, to shake his faith, then he never had any faith to begin with. Faith is a gift from God given to his elect. A man may claim to believe in the God of the Bible, but if he falls and never returns, then his faith wasn’t genuine saving faith.

    (The problem of evil isn’t really an argument against God’s existence. This is not to say that it isn’t a problem, but just not an argument that would present evidence against God existing.)

  5. August 15, 2014 at 7:37 am

    I have a resource that may help you in finding intelligent atheists who give well thought-out arguments for their view points. Please check it out when you get the chance. I think it’s unfair to paint them all with the same brush based on your own experience: http://www.atheist-experience.com

    Hope this helps.

    • August 24, 2014 at 7:47 am

      Thank you for visiting my blog and commenting. Welcome.

      I am not so much looking for atheist, as they are for me. I was just expressing the fact that those who visit my blog do not seem to be able to defend their position well.

      Thanks for the link.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: