Designing the Designer — Incoherent Atheism

Christians who have spent any time in forums, on social(ist) media, and even in person defending the faith have encounterd professing atheists who play word games. We are commanded to spread the faith (Matt. 28:18-20, Acts 1:8) and to defend it (Jude 1:3, 1 Peter 3:15, Eph. 6:10-12). There are many times that misotheists are not asking honest questions, and we can see that they are dealing from the bottom of the deck, so we should walk away. Having a basic knowledge of logical fallacies is extremely useful, as many of their challenges are trash.

Two examples of trash arguments used by atheists. One is asking who designed the Designer, another is the absurd claim that atheism is more rational.
Image by Cowboy Bob Sorensen
Ever notice that atheists cannot take a good-natured joke but have no qualms about firing off caustic humor about Christians? But I digress — sort of.

Straw man arguments, often including personal attacks and statements railing against Christianity, are common. Others and I have countered some of these "arguments" with facts. Challengers often lie further (it's a lie when the truth is known and ignored). Extremely common is when someone will bypass the truth, then change the subject to continue hating. (For example, this tinhorn attacked on of my posts and humiliated himself with his own comments. When corrected, he kept going.) I think they know that atheism is irrational and incoherent, and suppress this along with the knowledge of the truth (Romans 1:18-23). What follows is a detailed response to an off-the-rails diatribe against God which begins with asking a variation on a child's question.
This week’s feedback comes from a Peter C. of New South Wales, Australia, who was really spoiling for a fight without bothering with the most basic research. The question was ostensibly about the old ‘who created God?’ argument, but it was really a smokescreen for resentment against Christianity. The resentment was mainly about things Christianity hasn’t even done, but also about its alleged control. Ironically, like many atheistic regimes of the last century, he supports quite a lot of coercive control himself. Dr Jonathan Sarfati responds point-by-point.

To read the rest of this eye-opening article, click on "The old ‘Who created God?’ canard revisited — Who designed the Designer?" Be sure to come back for a related article.

Some of the points here will be expanded upon in the article linked below.

Misotheists do not seem to understand their own worldview, and cannot provide answers to legitimate challenges. Everyone has a worldview whether they have actively considered it or not. All have presuppositions (axioms) which are assumed to be true without scientific support. The Christian worldview is rational and consistent, but atheism relies on fallacies, arbitrary self-serving assertions, and intimidation, but it falls apart under scrutiny.

They have an axiom to grind (heh!) because the established definition of atheism as the denial of the existence of God could not be logically defended, so they disingenuously redefine it to mean "lack of belief." That cannot stand on its own, either. Indeed, many get obstreperous, insisting that this lack of belief idea is the real definition of atheism. Several years ago, the Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy was not giving credence to "lack of belief." Then they insisted that they had the right definition, but showed signs of wavering. In 2023, "lack of belief" is right up there.

Atheism is a great worldview for the intellectually lazy and dishonest. Atheists sit back and say, "Give me scientific proof that God exists" (which is the logical fallacy of the category error), then reject every kind of evidence that a Christian who is foolish enough to fall into their manipulative trap can muster. When one shows evidence against evolution, their origins myth, and presents evidence for biblical creation, the claws and fangs frequently come out.

It seems to me that by calling themselves "freethinkers" and that atheism makes them "rational," (indicating that theists are somehow irrational), is a form of the genetic fallacy. By rejecting God, somehow they become the intellectual elite — which is news to atheists who have become not only Christians, but biblical creation scientists! What I call the "No True Atheist Fallacy" is invoked. Yes, I have seen it.

By necessity, atheists are materialists (matter is all that exists). This opens up a prairie schooner-full of problems, including accounting for love, morality, and even appreciating poetic expressions in songs. They claim to appreciate logic, but that is not consistent with their beliefs. Also, logic is impossible without God! As you can see, atheism cannot hold its own as a tenable philosophy of life.

From T.B. of the UK, who is actually a fairly friendly atheist. His letter illustrates the way that many atheists try to shift the goalposts of the debate in their favour. Dr Jonathan Sarfati, Creation Ministries International, Queensland, Australia responded to show that Christians need not play by self-serving new rules made up by their opponents. Ellipses (…) at the end of T.B.’s paragraphs signal that a mid-sentence comment follows, not an omission.

 The details reside at "Atheism is more rational?"