Conservapedia:Atheism

A point-by-point discussion/refutation of Conservapedia's article on Atheism.

Table of Contents

Introduction:	Introduction
Types of Atheism:	Atheism and Which God or gods? - Atheism and Why do Atheists State They Disbelieve? - Manifestations of Atheism
	Attempts to Dilute the Definition of Atheism - Biblical Statements Regarding Atheism - Tenuousness of Atheism in Prominent Atheists - Claims of the Conditionality and Nonconditionality of Atheism - Atheism and Communism
Criticism of Atheism:	Arguments Against Atheism and For Theism - Christian Apologetics Specifically Addressing the Issue of Atheism - Atheism and Mass Murder - Atheists in America and Charity - Atheism and Immoral Views - Atheism and Miracles - Atheism and Questions of Origins

Conservapedia's Atheism text, verbatim and complete	RationalWiki Responses
Introduction Atheism, as defined by the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy and the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy, is the denial of the existence of God.[2][3] The atheistic worldview has a variety of effects on individuals and society at large which will be elaborated on shortly. In regards to individuals adopting an atheistic worldview, atheism has a number of causal factors that influence its origination in individuals which will be addressed. In addition, critiques of atheism will be offered and some of the historical events relating to atheism will also be covered.	Introduction By framing atheism as "the denial of the existence of God," CP's definition posits the existence of God as being an established fact, putting the onus of proof on the atheist who is denying that which exists. This, of course, conveniently bypasses the need to objectively prove that God exists, something which, to date, no-one has managed to do, or even come close to doing.
Types of Atheism There are different types of atheism, based on different answers to the following questions: What God or gods does the atheist deny? Why does the atheist deny? How does the atheist's denial manifest itself?	Types of Atheism All of them, from Allah through Zeus. (Most Christians deny all these gods except ONE, thereby making them essentially Atheists who are just afraid to take that last step.) There may be as many reasons for this as there are atheists, but for most atheists, it probably comes down to the lack of convincing evidence. Varies wildly, from indifference to hostility to condescending pity.
Atheism and Which God or gods? Since atheism is denial of the existence of God or gods, it is important first to identify in which God and/or gods the atheist denies. In ancient times, for example, Christians were accused of being atheists because of their denial of the pagan gods, even though they believed in the Christian God.[4] Socrates was also accused of atheism, although references to God run throughout his recorded statements. [5] Also, Albert Einstein and Baruch Spinoza professed belief in "God," but they defined "God" as the cosmos as a whole, and without personality.	Atheism and Which God or gods? Not much to say here that isn't already addressed above, except the passage seems to be very unsure as to whether Einstein and Spinoza were atheists or not, but lumps them in the same category as people who were 'accused' of atheism, even though, according to the article, those people clearly believed in a god.
Atheism and Why do Atheists State They Disbelieve? Atheists claim there are two main reasons for their denial of the existence of God and/or disbelief in God: the conviction that there is positive evidence or argument that God does not exist (Strong atheism which is also sometimes called positive atheism), and their claim that theists bear the burden of proof to show that God exists, that they have failed to do so, and that belief is therefore unwarranted (Weak atheism).	Atheism and Why do Atheists State They Disbelieve? See below, under 'Attempts to Dilute the Definition of Atheism'.
Manifestations of Atheism There are three ways that atheism manifests itself: Militant atheism which continues to suppress and oppress religious believers today especially in Communist countries. Theoretical atheism: atheism of the mind -- that is, believing that God does not exist. Practical atheism: atheism of the life - that is, living as though God does not exist. [6]	Manifestations of Atheism Militant atheism: The charge that "militant atheists" are responsible for suppressing and oppressing religious believers is not backed up by any evidence. It would appear that the article is trying to link garden-variety atheists with the most murderous ideologies of the twentieth century, such as Maoism and Stalinism, which is intellectually dishonest in the extreme for two reasons: First, just because some remarkably bad people were atheists doesn't mean atheism or atheists writ large share their moral flaws. This would be akin to arguing that the Pogroms are representative of Christianity or that Osama bin Laden is representative of Islam. Second, this argument, such as it is, tries to reduce communism--a complex set of political/economic/historical and ideological beliefs--to atheism, which is a small part of what communism is about, and discounts Liberation Theology and other ways in which communism and religion have historically co-existed. Perhaps most importantly, this analysis overlooks the far more common historical phenomenon of murderous religious suppression and oppression by theists - as practiced by Christians against Jews and witches, and Muslims against Christians, Hindus and Jews, etc, etc... Theoretical atheism: Here, the article appears to be advancing the startling revelation that atheists do not believe that God exists. Practical atheism: Here, the article appears, again, to be advancing the startling revelation that those who do not believe that God exists do not pay any attention to what He supposedly said.
Attempts to Dilute the Definition of Atheism Although atheist Charles Bradlaugh in 1876 proposed the idea that atheism does not assert there is no God (by doing so he attempted to dilute the definition of atheism), since 1979 many proponents of atheism have been frequently attempting to dilute the definition of atheism to mean a mere lack of belief there is a God or gods.[7][8] One of the reasons why many proponents of atheism have been attempting to dilute the definition of the term atheism with greater frequency is to shift the burden of proof regarding the existence of God. [7] In the article, Is Atheism Presumptuous?, atheist Jeffery Jay Lowder, a founder of Internet Infidels which is one of the principle websites for atheists, agnostics and skeptics on the internet, states that "I agree (with Copan) that anyone who claims, "God does not exist," must shoulder a burden of proof just as much as anyone who claims, "God exists." [7] In short, the attempt to redefine atheism is merely an attempt to make no assertions so no facts need be offered. [7] The attempt to redefine atheism, however, is not in accordance with the standard definitions of atheism that encyclopedias of philosophy employ which is that atheism is a denial of the existence of God or gods. [2][3][7]	Attempts to Dilute the Definition of Atheism Note that this appears to contradict the passage that defines the difference between 'strong atheism' and 'weak atheism' (Atheism and Why do Atheists State They Disbelieve?). That makes it clear that 'weak atheism' is that there is no evidence of the existence of God, so belief in God is unwarranted, yet still accepts this as a form of atheism. This passage dismisses that as not really atheism (and, incidentally, fails to say what this state of affairs actually is). This passage also fails to make a coherent argument as to why, exactly, atheists should bear the burden of proving the non-existence of God, but seems to take it as given that a simple lack of evidence for Him existing is not enough to fail to believe in Him. In addition, in the quote attributed to Jeffery Jay Lowder, it fails to spot that he appears to be referring to people who make a positive assertion that God definitely does not exist, rather than people who say that God probably does not exist, as there is zero evidence of Him.
Biblical Statements Regarding Atheism Image:134t.gif The psalmist David wrote: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.'"The writers of the Bible considered the existence of God to be self-evident and Moses simply wrote: "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." (Genesis 1:1). [9] Accordingly, the psalmist David wrote the following: "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." - Psalms 14:1 (KJV) The psalmist David also stated that "The heavens declare the glory of God..." - Psalms 19:1 The Apostle Paul wrote to the Romans that the creation testifies the existence of God, when he wrote the following: "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse. For the invisible things of him from the creation of the world are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even his eternal power and Godhead; so that they are without excuse..." - Romans 1:19-20 (NKJV)	Biblical Statements Regarding Atheism Using the Bible to criticize atheism is an example of the fallacy of appeal to authority. What is particularly striking is that the authority being appealed to is a book that is by definition irrelevant to atheist. Essentially,the argument here is: "Here's what a god that does not in fact exist has to say about your positing its non-existence." This means that this is about as relevant as the various passages about infidels and unbelievers in the Qu'ran would be to an article on Christianity - interesting, perhaps, but completely irrelevant as to whether or not Christianity is a valid belief system. "The fool saith in his heart, "There is no God"; The wise man says it to the world."
Tenuousness of Atheism in Prominent Atheists The atheism of notable people who claimed to be atheists has had the characteristic of tenuousness in regards to maintaining thoughts in accordance with atheism. For example, Jean-Paul Sartre was one of the leading proponents of atheism of the 20th Century. Yet Jean-Paul Sartre made this candid confession: “ As for me, I don’t see myself as so much dust that has appeared in the world but as a being that was expected, prefigured, called forth. In short, as a being that could, it seems, come only from a creator; and this idea of a creating hand that created me refers me back to God. Naturally this is not a clear, exact idea that I set in motion every time I think of myself. It contradicts many of my other ideas; but it is there, floating vaguely. And when I think of myself I often think rather in this way, for want of being able to think otherwise.[10] ” Charles Darwin wrote in his private notebooks that he was a materialist which is a type of atheist.[11][12] The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy states the following: “ In 1885, the Duke of Argyll recounted a conversation he had had with Charles Darwin the year before Darwin's death: In the course of that conversation I said to Mr. Darwin, with reference to some of his own remarkable works on the Fertilization of Orchids, and upon The Earthworms, and various other observations he made of the wonderful contrivances for certain purposes in nature — I said it was impossible to look at these without seeing that they were the effect and the expression of Mind. I shall never forget Mr. Darwin's answer. He looked at me very hard and said, “Well, that often comes over me with overwhelming force; but at other times,” and he shook his head vaguely, adding, “it seems to go away. ”(Argyll 1885, 244) [13]	Tenuousness of Atheism in Prominent Atheists First of all, suggesting that notable atheists were insincere or plagued with doubt is quite an odd way of criticising atheism itself, but not exactly surprising, given that throughout the article the author heavily implies that atheism is a childish attack on faith instead of a valid viewpoint. Whatever the purpose of this section, the momentary doubts of well-known atheists in history are completely irrelevant to the arguments behind atheism itself, and if the author's aim was to suggest that atheists do not believe their own opinions, perhaps he should have provided more than two examples. Secondly, the idea that many prominent people have trouble becoming strong atheists, but have no problem accepting God is absurd. God is not a doctrine which one believes blindly, and if one sees the problem in blindly believing this, but has some tenuousness in fully renouncing faith, one is still not accepting it. This attempts to say that "since you're not against us you're with us," and is one of the many conservative methods of promoting a black-and-white dichotomy. This may play into their section below, "Denials that Atheists Exist." A further example of incorrect black-and-white description is this quote from Darwin, that he was a materialist. This can be refuted in one, simple, concise phrase: materialism does not equal atheism.
Claims of the Conditionality and Nonconditionality of Atheism Henry More wrote the following: "In agony or danger, no nature is atheist. The mind that knows not what to fly to, flies to God." Reverend William T. Cummings is famous for stating that "There are no atheists in foxholes". Chaplain F.W. Lawson of the 302d Machine Gun Battalion, who was wounded twice in wartime, stated "I doubt if there is such a thing as an atheist. At least there isn't in a front line trench." On he other hand, the news organization MSNBC featured a story in which atheist veterans claimed that there are atheists in foxholes.	The Conditionality and Nonconditionality of Theism There is, in fact, a monument to and organisation of Atheists and Freethinkers in foxholes, and many atheists have cited, amongst other things, the horrors of war as having driven their realisation that a moral God could not exist.
Atheism and Communism Karl Marx said "Religion is the opium of the people" and "Communism begins from the outset (Owen) with atheism; but atheism is at first far from being communism; indeed, that atheism is still mostly an abstraction." Vladimir Lenin similarly wrote: "A Marxist must be a materialist, i. e., an enemy of religion, but a dialectical materialist, i. e., one who treats the struggle against religion not in an abstract way, not on the basis of remote, purely theoretical, never varying preaching, but in a concrete way, on the basis of the class struggle which is going on in practice and is educating the masses more and better than anything else could." The theory of evolution played a prominent role in regards to atheistic communism. Communists, in particular Stalinists, favored a version of Lamarckism called Lysenkoism developed by Trofim Denisovich Lysenko. . Lysenko was made member of the Supreme Soviet and head of the Institute of Genetics of the Soviet Academy of Sciences. Later Lysenko became President of the All-Union Academy of Agricultural Sciences. Many geneticists were imprisoned and executed for their bourgeois science, and agricultural policies based on Lysenkoism that were adopted under Stalin and Mao caused famines and the death of millions.. The atheism in communist regimes has been and continues to be militant atheism and various acts of repression including the razing of thousands of religious buildings and the killing, imprisoning, and oppression of religious leaders and believers. In regards to atheism, North Korea is a repressive communist state and is officially atheistic. The North Korean government practices brutal repression and atrocities against North Korean Christians. China is a communist country that is also officially atheistic. In 1999, the publication Christian Century reported that "China has persecuted religious believers by means of "harassment, prolonged detention, and incarceration in prison or `reform-through-labor' camps and police closure of places of worship." In 2003, owners of Bibles in China were sent to prison camps and 125 Chinese churches were closed. China continues to practice religious oppression today.	Atheism and Communism Marx may not have been as negative about religion as some speculate. A somewhat longer quote reads: "Religious suffering is, at one and the same time, the expression of real suffering and a protest against real suffering. Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people." Furthermore some sources translate the final sentence as "an opium for the people". Many theorists regard Communism as a memeplex sharing many features with religion, including prophecy, belief in something greater than oneself, a promised land, individuals to whom the truth has been revealed, heretics, groups of true believers setting fire to other groups of different true believers, adherence to crackpot theories like Lysenkoism rather than real, objective, testable science, and a complete inability to connect to the real world.
Criticism of Atheism Arguments Against Atheism and For Theism In regards to theism vs. atheism, theists often criticize atheism as being contrary to persuasive argument and have a number of arguments against atheism. Arguments for the existence of God include: Teleological argument: The universe exhibits overwhelming evidence of deliberate, intelligent, purposeful design, which implies an intelligent designer Cosmological argument: Every event in our universe necessarily has a cause. However, it is impossible that there should be an unending chain of causes going back. Therefore, there necessarily must be a cause distinct from the universe as we know it which is capable of causing all things and is itself uncaused. Atheism denies that that First Cause is God. Ontological argument: Since existence is inherent to the definition of God, it is impossible to conceive of God without conceiving of Him as existing; Historical arguments for the existence of God. For example, arguments stemming from historical accounts such as Christian historical apologetics and archaeological evidence such as Bible archaeology; Experiential arguments for the existence of God: Arguments based on personal experience and human intuition. According to philosopher Alvin Plantinga belief in the existence of God exists is a "properly basic" belief and not based on inference from other beliefs but is rationally justified due to one's circumstances of immediate experience of God. Presuppositional Apologetics	Criticism of Atheism Arguments against Atheism and for Theism, and what's wrong with them Teleological argument: Scientific principles such as Evolution and the various iterations of physics demonstrate how the appearance of design can occur without a designer; for a simple demonstration of this, pour sand out of a bucket onto the same spot; if the bucket is held steady, the sand is poured onto a flat surface, and no other factors disrupt the process, a near-perfect cone will form. Who designed that cone? No one. It came into existence through the operation of the laws of physics. Cosmological argument: Arguing that God caused the universe begs the question: What caused God? And if God can occur uncaused, why not the universe, a much simpler system? This of course assumes everything needs a cause, which is actually false (see quantum mechanics) Ontological argument: The ontological argument was defined by Bertrand Russell as mostly stemming from bad grammar. This one is fallacious due to the lack of rigorous definitions for terms used as well as the assumptions it requires, most notably, the assumption that real things are "greater" than things that aren't real. Historical arguments for the existence of God. For example, the fallible word of mentally unstable individuals living in a far more credulous time. Experiential arguments for the existence of God: Mystical experiences can be triggered by influences such as LSD, strong magnetic fields, starvation, and societal pressures, and the kind of God one believes in can be traced to genetic and epigenetic factors. Presuppositional Apologetics: God exists because people who assume God exists assume he exists.
Christian Apologetics Specifically Addressing the Issue of Atheism In respect to atheism and Christianity, while there have been numerous notable books by Christian apologists addressing the various issues in regards to atheism and Christianity (Creation Science, Bible Archaeology, etc.) there also number of books that have addressed the general issue of atheism in relation to Christianity. A notable book of this type is Dr. Norm Geisler's and Frank Turek's book entitled I Don't Have Enough Faith to Be an Atheist. In addition, two notable works were produced by Ravi Zacharias entitled A Shattered Visage: The Real Face of Atheism and Can Man Live Without God? Also, Josh McDowell and Don Stewart coauthored a work entitled Understanding Secular Religions . Lastly, Alister McGrath wrote a book entitled The Twilight of Atheism.
Atheism and Mass Murder In respect to atheism and mass murder, Christian apologist Gregory Koukl wrote that "the assertion is that religion has caused most of the killing and bloodshed in the world. There are people who make accusations and assertions that are empirically false. This is one of them." Koukl details the number of people killed in various events involving theism and compares them to the much higher tens of millions of people killed under regimes which advocated atheism. Koukl summarized by stating: “”It is true that it's possible that religion can produce evil, and generally when we look closer at the detail it produces evil because the individual people are actually living in a rejection of the tenets of Christianity and a rejection of the God that they are supposed to be following. So it can produce it, but the historical fact is that outright rejection of God and institutionalizing of atheism actually does produce evil on incredible levels. We're talking about tens of millions of people as a result of the rejection of God. Nobel Prize winner Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn was asked to account for the great tragedies that occurred under the brutal communist regime he and fellow citizens suffered under. Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn stated the following in relation to atheism: “”Over a half century ago, while I was still a child, I recall hearing a number of old people offer the following explanation for the great disasters that had befallen Russia: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened. Since then I have spend well-nigh 50 years working on the history of our revolution; in the process I have read hundreds of books, collected hundreds of personal testimonies, and have already contributed eight volumes of my own toward the effort of clearing away the rubble left by that upheaval. But if I were asked today to formulate as concisely as possible the main cause of the ruinous revolution that swallowed up some 60 million of our people, I could not put it more accurately than to repeat: "Men have forgotten God; that's why all this has happened."	Atheism and Mass Murder This section says that arguments linking religion to horrific crimes committed in the name of religion are spurious, but arguments linking atheism to horrible crimes committed in the name of a philosophy that calls itself atheist (see "Atheism and Communism", above) are completely valid.
Atheists in America and Charity In regards to atheism and uncharitableness, charitable giving by atheists and agnostics in America is significantly less than by theists, according to a study by the Barna Group: “”The typical no-faith American donated just $200 in 2006, which is more than seven times less than the amount contributed by the prototypical active-faith adult ($1500). Even when church-based giving is subtracted from the equation, active-faith adults donated twice as many dollars last year as did atheists and agnostics. In fact, while just 7% of active-faith adults failed to contribute any personal funds in 2006, that compares with 22% among the no-faith adults. Atheists and agnostics in America generally give significantly less to charity than theists Arthur C. Brooks wrote in Policy Review regarding data collected in the Social Capital Community Benchmark Survey (SCCBS) (data collected by in 2000 by researchers at universities throughout the United States and the Roper Center for Public Opinion Research): “”The differences in charity between secular and religious people are dramatic. Religious people are 25 percentage points more likely than secularists to donate money (91 percent to 66 percent) and 23 points more likely to volunteer time (67 percent to 44 percent). And, consistent with the findings of other writers, these data show that practicing a religion is more important than the actual religion itself in predicting charitable behavior. For example, among those who attend worship services regularly, 92 percent of Protestants give charitably, compared with 91 percent of Catholics, 91 percent of Jews, and 89 percent from other religions. ABC News reported the following in respect to atheism: “”...the single biggest predictor of whether someone will be charitable is their religious participation. Religious people are more likely to give to charity, and when they give, they give more money: four times as much. And Arthur Brooks told me that giving goes beyond their own religious organization: "Actually, the truth is that they're giving to more than their churches," he says. "The religious Americans are more likely to give to every kind of cause and charity, including explicitly non-religious charities."	Atheists in America and Charity This section is problematic in that it does not define "charity" clearly enough. While it must be admitted that a number of religious groups often perform tasks of immense social value, not all donations to church charities are completely altruistic in nature. For example, a donation to a church to put a new roof on their building would count as a charitable donation, as would monies raised to send missionaries to Africa to convert more people to Christianity - both causes are, as far as the church is concerned, completely self-serving and not "charitable" in the same way as money given, say, to support AIDS or breast cancer research. Secondly, this argument assumes that atheists don't give as much cash to charities (if this is in fact the case) because they are atheists, without providing any sort of causal link between the two phenomena. While we're on the subject of correlations between religion and other things, what's the relationship between religion and the likelihood of going to prison?
Atheism and Immoral Views In regards to atheism and morality, the Barna Group also found that those who hold to the worldviews of atheism or agnosticism in America were more likely, than theists in America, to look upon the following behaviors as morally acceptable: illegal drug use; excessive drinking; sexual relationships outside of marriage; abortion; cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage; obscene language; gambling; pornography and obscene sexual behavior; and engaging in homosexuality/bisexuality. Dr. William Lane Craig states the following regarding the comments of debater Dr. Kai Nielson who advocates atheism: “”He doesn’t really defend his point there, but he says, "I have a reason why we should be moral." He says, "It’s in our self-interest to be moral." I was really surprised to hear that coming from him. That sort of purely self-interested motivation for morality is, I think, fatal to the atheistic position because for someone who is sufficiently powerful not to be worried about what others do, self-interest can only lead to a sort of self-aggrandizing hedonism. It leads to the kind of life of a Marcos, a Papa Doc Duvalier, a Mbbutu, and so forth. Self-interest will never be able to justify an ethic of compassion. And so I think that was a fatal admission on Dr. Nielsen’s part for the atheistic worldview. Dr. Phil Fernandes states the following regarding atheism and moral relativism: “”Friedrich Nietzsche	Atheism and Immoral Views The alleged immorality of many of the activities listed is debatable - Illegal drug use is illegal by definition, but that doesn't make it immoral, The same with excessive drinking - alcoholism is considered a disease by the medical community. Sexual relationships outside of marriage are not necessarily immoral. Abortion is morally difficult for some, but not for all. Cohabitating with someone of opposite sex outside of marriage is not immoral to many if not most people in this day and age. Obscene language, well, shucks, darn gee willikers, it could be in poor taste sometimes, but that does not make it immoral. Gambling: like at church bingo? Pornography and obscene sexual behavior are left open and undefined, and what counts as sexual immorality for one may be a harmless kink for another as long as it involves consenting adults. Engaging in homosexuality/bisexuality - nothing immoral about that.
Atheism and Miracles In regards to atheism and miracles, modern scholars are divided on the issue of whether or not David Hume was an atheist. With that caveat in mind, Hume is well known for arguing that it is always more probable that the testimony of a miracle is false than that the miracle occurred. Christian apologists William Lane Craig, Norman Geisler, C.S. Lewis, JP Holding, and others have shown the inadequacy and unreasonableness of Hume's position regarding miracles. </ref>	Atheism and Miracles Atheists don't believe in miracles. The point of this particular section is lost on me, personally. The assertion that disbelief in miracles is absurd because a sophomoric apologist like C. S. Lewis says so is more absurd than the assertion it is trying to refute. The atheist world view, unlike the fundamentalist Christian world view, is built on facts. Science does not accept eyewitness accounts, for good reasons, and miracles are never more than eyewitness accounts.
Atheism and Questions of Origins See Also: Atheism and Evolution Creationist scientists state that the first law of thermodynamics and the second law of thermodynamics argue against an eternal universe or a universe created by natural processes and argue for a universe created by God. A majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the evolutionary position which employs methodological naturalism since World War II have had the worldview of atheism. Creationist scientists assert that the theory of evolution is an inadequate explanation for the variety of life forms on earth. In addition, the current naturalistic explanations for the origin of life are inadequate.	Atheism and the question of origins The assertions that the laws of thermodynamics prevent an evolving universe is patently absurd; growth and development from an embryo to a fully-grown human being comes up against the same difficulties as apply to the increasing complexity of the universe, and no creationist would deny that they have grown since they were in the womb. Several defenders of evolution, such as Francis Collins, are devout Christians, who obviously don't count because they're not the right type.
Reasonable Explanations for Atheism For More Information Please See: Causes of Atheism There are a number of reasonable explanations for atheism: Rebellion: Atheism stems from a deliberate choice to ignore the reality of God's existence (If there was a God, there wouldn't be so much suffering.) Moral depravity: Moral depravity has been demonstrated in the atheist community through history and through various studies. The Bible asserts that "The fool has said in his heart, 'There is no God.' They are corrupt, they have done abominable works, there is none that doeth good." (Psalms 14:1 (KJV)). The biblical fool is said to be lacking in sound judgment and the biblical fool is also associated with moral depravity. For example, the biblical book of Proverbs states: "A wise man is cautious and turns away from evil, But a fool is arrogant and careless. A quick-tempered man acts foolishly, And a man of evil devices is hated. The naive inherit foolishness, But the sensible are crowned with knowledge."(Proverbs 14:16-18 (NASB)). The book of Proverbs also has strong words regarding the depravity of biblical fools: "The desire accomplished is sweet to the soul: but [it is] abomination to fools to depart from evil." (Proverbs 13:9 (KJV)). Regarding the deceitfulness of fools Proverbs states: "The wisdom of the sensible is to understand his way, But the foolishness of fools is deceit." (Proverbs 14:8 (KJV)). Noted Bible commentator and clergyman Matthew Henry wrote regarding atheism: "A man that is endued with the powers of reason, by which he is capable of knowing, serving, glorifying, and enjoying his Maker, and yet lives without God in the world, is certainly the most despicable and the most miserable animal under the sun." Superficiality: Noted ex-atheist and psychologist Dr. Paul Vitz has stated that he had superficial reasons for becoming an atheist such as the desire to be accepted by his Stanford professors who were united in disbelief regarding God. Error: Some argue that atheism partly stems from a failure to fairly and judiciously consider the facts State churches: Rates of atheism are much higher in countries with a state sanctioned religion (such as many European countries), and lower in states without a sanctioned religion (such as the United States). Some argue this is because state churches become bloated, corrupt, and/or out of touch with the religious intuitions of the population, while churches independent of the state are leaner and more adaptable. It is important to distinguish "state-sanctioned churches," where participation is voluntary, from "state-mandated churches" (such as Saudi Arabia) with much lower atheism rates because publicly admitted atheism is punishable by death. Poor relationship with father: Some argue that a troubled/non-existent relationship with a father may influence one towards holding the position of atheism. Dr. Paul Vitz wrote a book entitled Faith of the Fatherless in which he points out that after studying the lives of more than a dozen leading atheists he found that a large majority of them had a father who was present but weak, present but abusive, or absent. Dr. Vitz also examined the lives of prominent theists who were contemporaneous to their atheist counterparts and from the same culture and in every instance these prominent theists had a good relationship with his father. Dr. Vitz has also stated other common factors he observed in the leading atheists he profiled: they were all intelligent and arrogant. Division in religion: According to Francis Bacon, atheism is caused by "divisions in religion, if they be many; for any one main division addeth zeal to both sides, but many divisions introduce atheism." Learned times, peace, and prosperity: Francis Bacon argued that atheism was partly caused by "Learned times, specially with peace and prosperity; for troubles and adversities do more bow men’s minds to religion." Negative experiences with theists The advance of scientific knowledge: Science has in many ways become a new God.	Duh? Rebellion: Atheism stems from a deliberate choice to accept the reality of God's nonexistence (If there was a God, there wouldn't be so much suffering.) Moral depravity: See "Atheism and Immorality" above. Superficiality: Noted ex-atheist and psychologist Dr. Paul Vitz has stated that he had superficial reasons for becoming an atheist such as the desire to be accepted by his Stanford professors who were united in disbelief regarding God. This would point to Dr Vitz having been a closet theist rather than having actually become an atheist; though this may seem like a "No True Scotsman" fallacy, "Atheist" is predefined as someone who accepts the nonexistence of God, rather than someone who has had this view pushed upon them. Error: Some argue that atheism partly stems from a failure to fairly and judiciously consider the facts. These people are idiots. Fairly and judiciously considering the facts is what leads most people to atheism. State churches: Rates of atheism are far higher in every country except the US which has freedom of religion enshrined in its laws. The US is often regarded as a special case due to societal influences. Many of these other states do indeed have established churches, but this is a correlation, not necessarily a causation. Poor relationship with father: Anecdotal evidence suggests that many born-again Christians take to religion as a substitute for an absent or abusive father. So really, not much either way here. Division in religion: Since there has never been a test case of one monolithic religion without the death sentence for atheism, this has never been examined as more than a thought experiment. Learned times, peace, and prosperity: Francis Bacon argued that atheism was partly caused by "Learned times, specially with peace and prosperity; for troubles and adversities do more bow men’s minds to religion." So basically when you have the evidence in front of you and leisure time to examine it, you're less likely to believe in God? I can get with that. Negative experiences with theists: Many atheists have had negative experiences with theists. Many theists have had negative experiences with theists of other kinds. This is because theists tend to be intolerant. The advance of scientific knowledge: Science has provided us with a way of understanding the world which is more satisfying than Goddidit.
Atheism and the Existence of Evil For More Information Please See: Atheism and the Problem of Evil Those who advocate atheism commonly state that the existence of evil is a problem for theism which holds to a good and powerful God. Theodicy is the branch of study in theology and philosophy that defends the goodness of God despite the existence of evil. In traditional Christianity and Judaism the book of Job is used to explain the existence of evil. In recent times Christian apologists often cite Alvin Plantinga's free will defense in regards to the existence of evil. The work of St. Augustine is also cited in regards to theodicy. Dr. Ron Rhodes of Reasoning from the Scriptures Ministry states regarding this issue regarding the existence of evil in relation to atheism: “”...it is impossible to distinguish evil from good unless one has an infinite reference point which is absolutely good. Otherwise one is like a boat at sea on a cloudy night without a compass (i.e., there would be no way to distinguish north from south without the absolute reference point of the compass needle). The infinite reference point for distinguishing good from evil can only be found in the person of God, for God alone can exhaust the definition of "absolutely good." If God does not exist, then there are no moral absolutes by which one has the right to judge something (or someone) as being evil. More specifically, if God does not exist, there is no ultimate basis to judge the crimes of Hitler. Seen in this light, the reality of evil actually requires the existence of God, rather than disproving it.	Refute!
Atheism and the Foundation of Modern Science The birth of modern science occurred in Christianized Europe. Sociologist Rodney Stark investigated the individuals who made the most significant scientific contributions between 1543 and 1680 A.D., the time of the Scientific Revolution. In Stark's list of 52 top scientific contributors, only one (Edmund Halley) was a skeptic and another (Paracelsus) was a pantheist. The other 50 were Christians, 30 of whom could be characterized as being devout Christians. Sir Francis Bacon, sometimes referred to as "the Father of Modern Science", wrote in his essay entitled Of Atheism the following: "I had rather believe all the fables in the Legend, and the Talmud, and the Alcoran, than that this universal frame is without a mind." ‎In False conflict: Christianity is not only compatible with Science--it created it Stark writes in relation to atheism the following: “”Recent historical research has debunked the idea of a "Dark Ages" after the "fall" of Rome. In fact, this was an era of profound and rapid technological progress, by the end of which Europe had surpassed the rest of the world. Moreover, the so-called "Scientific Revolution" of the sixteenth century was a result of developments begun by religious scholars starting in the eleventh century. In my own academic research I have asked why these religious scholastics were interested in science at all. Why did science develop in Europe at this time? Why did it not develop anywhere else? I find answers to those questions in unique features of Christian theology. Even in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, the leading scientific figures were overwhelmingly devout Christians who believed it their duty to comprehend God's handiwork. My studies show that the "Enlightenment" was conceived initially as a propaganda ploy by militant atheists attempting to claim credit for the rise of science. The falsehood that science required the defeat of religion was proclaimed by self-appointed cheerleaders like Voltaire, Diderot, and Gibbon, who themselves played no part in the scientific enterprise...... Dr. Charles Thaxton states in relation to atheism the following: “”P. E. Hodgson in reviewing Stanley Jaki's Science and Creation said: "Although we seldom recognize it, scientific research requires certain basic beliefs about the order and rationality of matter, and its accessibility to the human mind . . . they came to us in their full force through the Judeo-Christian belief in an omnipotent God, creator and sustainer of all things. In such a world view it becomes sensible to try and understand the world, and this is the fundamental reason science developed as it did in the Middle Ages in Christian Europe, culminating in the brilliant achievements of the seventeenth century."	Refute!
Atheism and Debate Although atheists claim there are reasonable arguments for atheism, the quality of atheist debate has been quite poor from the proponents of atheism. Below are some examples which demonstrate the unreasonableness of atheist debaters. Doug Jesseph In October of 1997, atheist Jeffrey Jay Lowder, a founder of Internet Infidels, stated that he believed that in regards to atheism "the most impressive debater to date" was Doug Jesseph. Yet Doug Jesseph claimed in a debate with William Lane Craig in 1996 that the origin of life had a detailed atheistic explanation(s). In 1996, John Horgan wrote the following regarding what the highly respected origin of life researcher Stanley Miller believed to the case regarding naturalistic explanations of the origin of life: "Miller seemed unimpressed with any of the current proposals on the origin of life, referring to them as “nonsense” or “paper chemistry.”" In addition, in 1996, John Horgan wrote the following in Scientific American: "The origin of life is a science writer's dream. It abounds with exotic scientists and exotic theories, which are never entirely abandoned or accepted, but merely go in and out of fashion."	Refute!
Gordon Stein Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the man atheists fear most" due to Michael Martin's cancellation of their scheduled debate. In 1985, Christian apologist Dr. Greg Bahnsen and prominent proponent of atheism Gordon Stein had a debate at the University of California, Irvine regarding the positions of atheism and theism. John Frame wrote regarding the debate in which Dr. Bahnsen used the transcendental argument for the existence of God that "In the end, Stein walked and talked like a broken man." The Greg Bahnsen-Gordon Stein debate was recorded and transcribed and was dubbed "The Great Debate".	Refute!
Greg Bahnsen and Michael Martin Dr. Greg Bahnsen became known as the "man atheists fear most". This is because Harvard-educated Dr. Michael Martin was scheduled to debate Bahnsen but pulled out of the debate at the "eleventh hour". A press release at the time said that Dr. Martin offered ruses on why he pulled out and didn't want the scheduled debate recorded but the real reason was that "...Michael Martin is afraid that he will be publicly humiliated just as his friend and fellow atheist, Dr. Gordon Stein, was..." Martin later released his transcendental argument for the non-existence of God (TANG) in 1996 which was rebutted by Christian apologists.	Refute!
Creation Scientists tend to win creation-evolution debates As noted earlier, a majority of the most prominent and vocal defenders of the naturalistic evolutionary position since World War II have been holders of the world view of atheism. Creation scientists tend to win the Creation-Evolution debates and many debates have been held since the 1970's particularly in the United States.	Creation Scientists tend to "win" Creation-Evolution debates Gee, well in that case they must be right. Ever heard of the Gish Gallop? Debates are not where science is settled, because human factors disturb the results. Science is settled in written fora, where nothing matters but the evidence. Even so, Cdesign Proponentsists tend to lose debates when the evolutionist keeps their head and calmly refutes them point-by-point, an admittedly gargantuan task.
Notable Incidences of Atheists Converting to Theism In respect to the issue of ex-atheists there have been some notable incidences of atheists converting to theism. Lee Strobel converted from atheism to Christianity and then became a Christian apologist. Before investigating the claims of Christianity Strobel had obtained a undergraduate degree in journalism and also obtained a law degree from Master of Studies in Law degree from Yale Law School. Strobel was an award-winning legal editor of the Chicago Tribune also won Illinois’ top honors for investigative reporting (which he shared with a team he led) and public service journalism from United Press International. After a nearly a two year investigation of the evidence for Christianity Strobel became a Christian. C.S. Lewis abandoned his atheism and became a Christian and he was very much influenced by the writings of George MacDonald and G. K. Chesterton. In Surprised by Joy Lewis says: "In reading Chesterton, as in reading MacDonald, I did not know what I was letting myself in for. A young man who wishes to remain a sound Atheist cannot be too careful of his reading. God is, if I may say it, very unscrupulous." British philosopher Anthony Flew abandoned atheism and became an deist after as a result of the intelligent design issue. According to the news organization MSNBC, Flew became a deist because he believed a super-intelligence was the only good explanation for the origin of life and the complexity of nature. In 2006, Flew and 12 prominent academics urged that intelligent design be taught in British government schools. The work of ex-atheist and psychologist Dr. Paul Vitz is often cited in regards to atheism. As alluded to earlier, Dr. Vitz wrote the work Faith of the Fatherless.	Conversions from Atheism to Theism We could do a whole article on just this, but it would prove nothing. Most atheists have in fact been raised as theists, and then realised they don't believe in God and "converted". Instead, examine the four examples given. Only one scientist, a psychologist; the rest are two philosophers and a lawyer. Four examples does not an argument make. On the other hand... (examples, please? More than four would be great. Stick to scientists and theologians!) In any case, the argument is not whether people can convert, but what their reasons for converting are. We believe the reasons for converting from Theism to Atheism are more compelling than vice versa.
Atheism and its Decline as a Theoretical Position According to Munich theologian Wolfhart Pannenberg "Atheism as a theoretical position is in decline worldwide." Oxford scholar Alister McGrath agrees and has stated that atheism's "future seems increasingly to lie in the private beliefs of individuals rather than in the great public domain it once regarded as its habitat." Views on Atheists In regards to various views on atheists, research in the American Sociological Review finds that among several groups listed, those who hold the position of atheism are the group that Americans relate least to in terms of their vision of American society and are the group most likely to be mentioned as one that Americans would not want to have marry into their family. Position: This group does not at all agree with my vision of American society: I would disapprove if my child wanted to marry a member of this group: Atheist 39.6% 47.6% Muslim 26.3% 33.5% Homosexual 22.6% NA Conservative Christian 13.5% 6.9% Recent Immigrant 12.5% Not Asked Hispanic 7.6% 18.5% Jew 7.4% 11.8% Asian American 7.0% 18.5% African American 4.6% 27.2% White American 2.2% 2.3%	Atheism as a way of life It is perfectly correct that Atheism is in decline as a theoretical position, as it becomes instead a normal lifestyle choice, perfectly valid and accepted by people without having to be defended. It is, after all, the default position. Views on Atheists Examined closely, this is quite shocking. Atheists, a group of mostly peaceful, well-educated people, are more hated than any religious group, including one that has killed hundreds of thousands if not millions of people, having many of them tortured or burned to death, and has dragged back human progress by hundreds of years? I'm not talking about Islam, either. Nor Teh Gheys.
Brights Movement Richard Dawkins]] is listed as an enthusiastic bright by the Brights Movement website. The Brights Movement was started in 2003 by Paul Geisert and Mynga Futrell in 2003 in order to assist in the advocacy of a naturalistic worldview. The Brights movement had a media campaign and was announced in Wired magazine (by evolutionary biologist Richard Dawkins), Free Inquiry (by Richard Dawkins), and on the New York Times op-ed page (by the philosopher and atheist Daniel Dennett). However, according to a 2004 Skeptical Enquirer article the movement the "Brights label" reinforced a longstanding stereotype. Atheists already have a terrible rap for being coldhearted rationalists who attend Mensa gatherings and dismiss religious believers as simple-minded fools." In October of 2003 in a article in the Guardian Dawkins associated being a "bright" with being an intellectual. Chris Mooney wrote in his Skeptical Enquirer article the following: “”..a recent attack on the Brights movement in The Wall Street Journal by the conservative thinker Dinesh D'Souza confirms my worst fears (D'Souza 2003). The article blithely ignores a key caveat that the Brights defenders have explicitly laid out-namely, that the label isn't meant to suggest that religious doubters are smarter than everyone else. But I actually think this misrepresentation ought to be blamed more on Dennett, Dawkins, and the original founders than on D'Souza--for reasons I will explain. In his original New York Times op-ed announcing the Brights label, Dennett wrote, "Don't confuse the noun with the adjective: 'I'm a Bright' is not a boast but a proud avowal of an inquisitive world view." That's certainly nice in principle. But who did Dennett think he was kidding? How could anyone hear the label Bright and think anything but that atheists were claiming to be smarter than everyone else? As ABC commentator John Allen Paulos remarked of the Brights campaign, "I don't think a degree in public relations is needed to expect that many people will construe the term as smug, ridiculous, and arrogant" (Paulos 2003).	The Brights Movement Yes, Atheists occasionally make bad PR moves. What of it?
New Atheism Dissent Magazine stated the following regarding the "New Atheism": “”A number of prominent authors and scientists have published books in the past year that advocate a "New Atheism." The books, which include Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell, Richard Dawkins's The God Delusion, and Christopher Hitchens' God is Not Great, have sparked considerable public controversy across the political spectrum. Dr. Alfred Mohler Jr. describes some of the key attributes of the "New Atheism": “”Now, WIRED magazine comes out with a cover story on atheism for its November 2006 issue. In "The New Atheism," WIRED contributing editor Gary Wolf explains that this newly assertive form of atheism declares a very simple message: "No heaven. No hell. Just science."... Wolf accomplishes a great deal in his article, thoughtfully introducing the work of militant atheists such as Dawkins, Harris, and Dennett. At the same time, he probes more deeply into the actual meaning of the New Atheism as a movement and a message. At the beginning of his article, he gets right to the point: "The New Atheists will not let us off the hook simply because we are not doctrinaire believers. They condemn not just belief in God but respect for belief in God. Religion is not only wrong; it's evil. Now that the battle has been joined, there's no excuse for shirking."	New Atheism Yes, some Atheists think that a philosophy which results in burning and torturing innocent people to death is just a little bit evil. Just a little.
Impact of the New Atheism The "New Atheism" has not had much of an impact in terms of gaining new adherents to atheism. In a March 10, 2008 USA Today article Stephen Prothero stated the following regarding the impact of the "New Atheism": “”Numbers lie, but they also tell tales untrustworthy and otherwise. So the key question stirring around the much discussed U.S Religious Landscape Survey released in late February by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life is what tale does it state about the state of the union. For some, the story of this survey, based on interviews in multiple languages with more than 35,000 adults, is the strength of American Religion. Not too long ago, I wrote that American atheism was going the way of the freak show. As books by Christopher Hitchens and other "new atheists" climbed the best seller lists, I caught a lot of flak for that prophecy. But atheist make up only 1.6% of respondents to this survey.... A prime reason for the ineffectiveness of the "New Atheism" is the shallowness of its material. For example, even atheist philosopher Michael Ruse stated that that Richard Dawkins' book The God Delusion made him "embarrassed to be an atheist". The "New Atheism" largely has a unfavorable view outside the United States as well. The liberal leaning British publication the Guardian stated the following regarding the "New Atheism": “”Anti-faith proselytizing is a growth industry. But its increasingly hysterical flag-bearers are heading for a spectacular failure... These increasingly hysterical books may boost the pension, they may be morale boosters for a particular kind of American atheism that feels victimized - the latest candidate in a flourishing American tradition - but one suspects that they are going to do very little to challenge the appeal of a phenomenon they loathe too much to understand.	Refute!
Atheism and the Bible In respect to atheism and the Bible, atheists and skeptics have been disputing the reliability of the Bible for centuries. Christian apologist JP Holding rightly states that Bible exegesis and Bible exposition is a multi-disciplinary pursuit and often critics of the Bible have not done a fraction of the due diligence required when making a allegation regarding the Bible. JP Holding states the following: “”Having now been engaged in apologetics for eight years actively and more years than that on the side, I have long since come to a conclusion that I have shared with others, but will now present in a systematic form here for the first time. My conclusion is a warning that is appropriate for any new readers (hence I link this article from my front page) and will be familiar to veteran ones. I'll sum it up to begin: Whenever you run across any person who criticizes the Bible, claims findings of contradiction or error -- they do not deserve the benefit of the doubt. They have to earn it from you. Here's why. It doesn't take very long to realize that a thorough understanding of the Bible -- and this would actually apply to any complex work from any culture -- requires specialized knowledge, and a broad range of specialized knowledge in a variety of fields.... Not even most scholars in the field can master every aspect -- what then of the non-specialist critic who puts together a website in his spare time titled 1001 Irrefutable Bible Contradictions? Do these persons deserves our attention? Should they be recognized as authorities? No, they deserve calculated contempt for their efforts. (By this, I do not mean emotional or behavioral contempt, but a calculated disregard for their work from an academic perspective.) They have not even come close to deserving our attention, and should feed only itching ears with similar tastes. Christian theologian and apologist Bernard Ramm wrote regarding the Bible and its critics the following in his often cited work Protestant Christian Evidences: “”A thousand times over, the death knell of the Bible has been sounded, the funeral procession formed, the inscription cut on the tombstone, and committal read. But somehow the corpse never stays put. No other book has been so chopped, knifed, sifted, scrutinized, and vilified. What book on philosophy or religion or psychology or belles lettres of classical or modern times has been subject to such a mass attack as the Bible? With such venom and skepticism? With such thoroughness and erudition? Upon every chapter, line and tenet? The Bible is still loved by millions, read by millions, and studied by millions. In regards to the proponents of atheism, Christian apologists have responded to their various claims that the Bible contains errors or contradictions.	Refute!
Internet Infidels and other Atheist Websites As mentioned previously Internet Infidels (also known as the Secular Web) is one of the principle websites for those who advocate atheism, agnostics and Philosophical skeptics on the internet. Christian apologist JP Holding has stated regarding the website Internet Infidels the following: "The Secular Web has a few intelligent people, but overall has long been a haven for every skeptical know-it-all to pronounce judgments upon matters outside of their expertise." Although JP Holding has written rebuttals of the more well known members of the skeptical community such as David Hume, Friedrich Nietzsche and G.A. Wells, Holding has also written rebuttals of lesser well known members of the secular community who publish and/or are featured on Internet Infidels such as: Earl Doherty Richard Carrier Dan Barker Stephen Carr Jeffery Jay Lowder Acharya S Kyle Gerkin Farrell Till Targeting of Young People by Atheists on the Internet In 2007 WorldNetDaily feature a column by Chuck Norris which stated the following regarding atheism and the internet: “”Atheists are making a concerted effort to win the youth of America and the world. Hundreds of websites and blogs on the Internet seek to convince and convert adolescents, endeavoring to remove any residue of theism from their minds and hearts by packaging atheism as the choice of a new generation. While you think your kids are innocently surfing the Web, secular progressives are intentionally preying on their innocence and naivete. What's preposterous is that atheists are now advertising and soliciting on websites particularly created for teens. The London Telegraph noted that, "Groups including Atheists for Human Rights and Atheist Alliance International – 'Call 1-866-HERETIC' - are setting up summer camps and an Internet recruiting campaign." YouTube, the most popular video site on the Net for young people, is one of their primary avenues for passing off their secularist propaganda.	Refute!
Atheism in Academia In 2001 philosopher Quentin Smith stated the following in respect to atheism: “”Naturalism	Refute!
Denials That Atheists Exist Some have asserted that atheists do not exist. In regards to a biblical statement on atheism Sir Francis Bacon stated in his essay Of Atheism the following regarding atheism: “”The Scripture saith, The fool hath said in his heart, there is no God; it is not said, The fool hath thought in his heart; so as he rather saith it, by rote to himself, as that he would have, than that he can thoroughly believe it, or be persuaded of it....It appeareth in nothing more, that atheism is rather in the lip, than in the heart of man. In addition, philosophers and Christian apologists Dr. Cornelius Van Til and Dr. Greg Bahnsen argued there are no atheists and that atheists are actively suppressing their belief and knowledge of God and enigmatically engage in self-deception. The English poet Edward Young wrote in his famous work Night Thoughts that "By night, an atheist half-believes a God." The Christian Cyclopedia states regarding the atheism the following: “”It is not possible for a man to be an atheist, in the commonly accepted sense, in his innermost conviction. No amount of reasoning will erase from the human heart the God-given conviction that there is a Supreme Being; those who theoretically deny God's existence replace Him with something else.	Refute! The first thing you should notice is that no actual evidence is presented outside their own religious views (that didn't even come from their holy book). Sir Francis' quote is another case of severely reinterpreting the Bible to suit one's views, in this case the twisting comes from two simple words that likely would be used interchangeably in this context by someone without an agenda to push. Though its probably better for his case as the existence of atheists (and there's plenty evidence of it) would under his interpretation imply the fallability of the Bible. The Cyclopedia quote doesn't even have a Bible verse to be butchered like the above one, rather its just one unfounded assertion.
Atheist population as a percentage of various countries' populations For more information please see: Atheist Population In regards to the atheist population as a percentage of various countries' populations, specific research on atheists conducted in 2006 suggests that the true proportion of atheists is 4% in the United States, 17% in Great Britain and 32% in France. A survey published in the 2005 Encyclopedia Britannica stated that 2.3% of the world's population consists of individuals who profess "atheism, skepticism, disbelief, or irreligion, including the militantly antireligious." In regards to the 2.3% figure just mentioned, the 2005 survey cited by Encyclopedia Britannica survey did not include Buddhist in regards to the 2.3% figure and Buddhism can be theistic or atheistic.	Refute!
Other Well Known Proponents of Atheism Prominent holders of the position of atheism and atheist schools of thought have been or include: Carvaka school: an atheistic and materialistic offshoot of Hinduism in the 6th century B.C. Samkhya school: an atheistic school of classical Indian philosophy, originating in the 6th century B.C. Diagoras: Greek philosopher who denied the existence of the Greek pantheon Lucretius: Greek philosopher espousing materialism, and stated that man should not believe in the gods because their ideas about the gods and their fear of death made men unhappy Friedrich Nietzsche: Prominent 19th century atheist philosopher Mao Zedong: Chinese Communist leader Benito Mussolini Paul Kurtz: founder of the Council of Secular Humanism Bertrand Russell Ayn Rand Isaac Asimov John Dewey Douglas Adams Ernest Hemingway	Refute!
Atheism Quotes For more atheism quotes please see: Atheism Quotes "Atheism is so senseless. When I look at the solar system, I see the Earth at the right distance from the Sun to receive proper amounts of heat and light. This did not happen by chance." - Sir Isaac Newton "I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily. Opposition to godliness is atheism in profession and idolatry in practice. Atheism is so senseless and odious to mankind that it never had many professors." - Sir Isaac Newton "The Seventh Judicial Circuit of the Court of Appeals of the United States held that atheism is a religion and therefore it cannot be promoted by a public school. Currently public schools are promoting atheism through a dogmatic and uncritical teaching of materialistic theories of origins." - John Calvert, Intelligent Design leader "Atheism is a disease of the soul before it becomes an error of understanding." - Plato "Maybe the atheist cannot find God for the same reason a thief cannot find a policeman." - Francis Thompson "The atheists are for the most part imprudent and misguided scholars who reason badly who, not being able to understand the Creation, the origin of evil, and other difficulties, have recourse to the hypothesis the eternity of things and of inevitability." - Voltaire "Atheists put on false courage and alacrity in the midst of their darkness and apprehensions, like children who, when they fear to go in the dark, will sing for fear." - Alexander Pope "An atheist’s most embarrassing moment is when he feels profoundly thankful for something,but can’t think of anyone to thank for it." - Mary Anne Vincent If there were no God there would be no atheists." - G. K. Chesterton (1874 - 1936) "Nobody talks so constantly about God as those who insist there is no God." - Heywood Broun "Atheism is a crutch for those who cannot bear the reality of God." - Tom Stoppard "I gave in, and admitted that God was God." - ex-atheist C.S. Lewis, On relinquishing atheism at age 31 in 1929 "A little philosophy inclineth man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men's minds about to religion." - Sir Francis Bacon In his essay rebutting a work of atheist Jeffery Jay Lowder Christian apologist JP Holding wrote the following: "...I find that there is no such thing as "reasonable non belief." The litany of excuses, wild speculations, and other absurdities ground out by skeptics and critics doesn't deserve the adjective "reasonable"." "An atheist is a man who believes himself an accident." — Francis Thompson "To be an atheist requires an indefinitely greater measure of faith than to receive all the great truths which atheism would deny." - Joseph Addison, The Spectator, Mar. 8, 1711 "It is hard to see how a great man can be an atheist. Without the sustaining influence of faith in a divine power we could have little faith in ourselves. We need to feel that behind us is intelligence and love. Doubters do not achieve; skeptics do not contribute; cynics do not create. Faith is the great motive power, and no man realizes his full possibilities unless he has the deep conviction that life is eternally important, and that his work, well done, is a part of an unending plan." - Calvin Coolidge, speech, Jul. 25, 1924 "Among the repulsions of atheism for me has been its drastic un-interestingness as an intellectual position. Where was the ingenuity, the ambiguity, the humanity of saying that the universe just happened to happen and that when we're dead we're dead?" - John Updike "God never wrought miracles to convince atheism, because his ordinary works convince it." - Sir Francis Bacon "The habit of arguing in support of atheism, whether it be done from conviction or in pretense, is a wicked and impious practice." - Marcus Tullius Cicero (106–43 B.C.), Roman orator, philosopher, statesman "How to trap an atheist: Serve him a fine meal, then ask him if he believes there is a cook." — Source Unknown "I once wanted to become an atheist but I gave up . . . they have no holidays." - Henny Youngman	Refute!