Why Atheism Is A Religion

What is religion?

According to Merriam-Webster Dictionary;

1 a : the state of a religious, eg. a nun in her 20th year of religion

b (1) : the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2) : commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

2 : a personal set or institutionalized system of religious attitudes, beliefs, and practices

3 archaic : scrupulous conformity : conscientiousness

4 : a cause, principle, or system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith — re·li·gion·less adjective (emphasis mine)

Please observe definition #4. Even though religion is commonly known to only be associated with belief in God or some higher power, by definition, it does not have to be. Any cause! Any principle! Any system of beliefs held to with ardor and faith is RELIGION. Now check this out....

Richard Dawkins - Scholar, Best Selling Author of "The God Delusion", Renowned Atheist Thinker

Here's an interesting excerpt from an interview with leading atheist Richard Dawkins;

In Dawkins' view, there is a battle taking place in Britain between the forces of reason, and religious fundamentalism and it is far from won. He is one of its most famous and prolific combatants - but the question might be whether he is among its most effective. The God Delusion's stated aim was to "convert" readers to atheism - but he admits that as a proselytising tool it has broadly failed. "Yes," he smiles. "I think that was a bit unrealistic. A worthwhile aim, but unrealistic."

In fact, Dawkins has been described as "the biggest recruiter for creationism in this country". Critics accuse him of an imaginative failure when it comes to human nature's susceptibility to the comfort of irrational thought. They say his intellectual intolerance alienates people, and have questioned his wisdom in attacking a target such as the comedian Peter Kay, for admitting to finding faith comforting. "How can you take seriously," Dawkins notoriously scorned, "someone who likes to believe something because he finds it 'comforting'?" (emphasis mine)

Source - 'People say I'm strident'; An Interview with Richard Dawkins by Decca Aitkenhead, The Guardian, Saturday 25 October 2008  

Richard Dawkins is an atheist. He is also religious. His admittedly failed attempt to "convert" readers to atheism with the book "The God Delusion" was a perfect example. Our religion believes in God. His religion does not. Atheism is not anti-religion. It's anti-religions that believe in God. As long as the object of a religion is not any form of God it offers no challenge to atheism. Hence, Dawkins is a religious leader with a faithful following of believing "non-believers".


His war against "religion" is really not a war against "religion" because that doesn't make any logical sense. If it was, then he would be at war with himself. In fact, maybe he is. Maybe that's the answer. He's as much conflicted as the people he desires to enlighten. Since he cannot prove God's non-existence, his disbelief of God's existence and adamant opposition to the belief of others is a religious position. I'm religious and I have no problem with that. At least I'm not denying it.


Atheism is defined in the Merriam-Webster Dictionary as;

a : a disbelief in the existence of deity
b : the doctrine that there is no deity


We believe in God! Atheists don't! We have our doctrines! They have theirs! The war between Christianity and Atheism is not a war between religion and reason. It's another religious war like the one against Islam but in the end there will be only one winner.

Here's another quote from the interview with Richard Dawkins;

Does he ever, I ask, envy people who believe in God?

"No." He shakes his head firmly. Even though faith is said to be so famously comforting?

"You see," he says, "I'm so eager to say well maybe it is comforting but so what? I suspect that for every person who is comforted by it, there will be somebody else who is in mortal fear of it." Does he not envy those who manage not to find God mortally fearful?

"If I envied them that, then I'd have to envy people who are on some drug, which just makes them feel good. So to the extent that religion's comforting, it's probably not ..."

Dawkins likes to joke that old people go to church because they're "cramming for the final". He never worries that one day in old age he may wake and find himself feeling drawn towards faith, though. If he did, he would put it down to senile dementia. He seems much more worried about spurious reports of a fictitious deathbed conversion being put about by his enemies after he dies. He is probably not joking at all when he says "I want to make damn sure there's a tape recorder running for my last words." (emphasis mine)

Source - 'People say I'm strident'; An Interview with Richard Dawkins by Decca Aitkenhead, The Guardian, Saturday 25 October 2008

Wanna be sure a tape recorder's running as you lay in your deathbed? Oh, that won't be a problem. :-)

Matthew 12:36-37(NLT) - And I tell you this, you must give an account on judgment day for every idle word you speak. The words you say will either acquit you or condemn you.”

The Death of an Atheist

Christopher Hitchens - British/American Intellectual, Writer, Renowned Atheist (13 April 1949-15 December 2011)

Last year, I was fascinated by a heated public debate between Christopher Hitchens and Tony Blair entitled, "Is Religion A Force For Good In The World?" As the former Prime Minister of Great Britain, Blair was already a global household name but it was really that debate which made me take notice of Hitchens. Blair argued for the affirmative while Hitchens vigorously opposed.

Both men exhibited unusual intelligence and presented compelling arguments which kept me riveted to the television screen. However, Blair was no modern-day Apostle Paul with a comprehensive understanding of Apologetics so Hitchens seemed to have the upper hand. Nonetheless, I actually learned a few things that I plan to use to my advantage in future debates of my own.

Here's what Paul Harris of The Guardian, UK had to say in the article; "Christopher Hitchens 1-0 Tony Blair"

Both men were unabashedly stalwart in their positions. Hitchens, one of the leading "new atheists" and author of the hit book God Is Not Great, slammed religion as nothing more than supernatural gobbledegook that caused untold misery throughout human history. "Once you assume a creator and a plan it make us subjects in a cruel experiment," Hitchens said before causing widespread laughter by comparing God to "a kind of divine North Korea".


Blair, perhaps not surprisingly, was a little less forthright. On the backfoot for much of the debate he kept returning to his theme that many religious people all over the world were engaged in great and good works. They did that because of their faith, he argued, and to slam all religious people as ignorant or evil was plain wrong. "The proposition that religion is unadulterated poison is unsustainable," he said. Blair called religion at its best "a benign progressive framework by which to live our lives".

Christopher Hitchens died last week after battling with cancer. For him the debate is now over and that's no laughing matter. 

Here's a short excerpt from his orbituary at BBC News;

Religion, or rather his complete rejection of it, would remain a target throughout his life. After being diagnosed with cancer in 2010, he told one interviewer: "No evidence or argument has yet been presented which would change my mind. But I like surprises."

SURPRISE!

Hebrews 9:27(KJV) - And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:

When people die, there is no more need for compelling arguments or reliable evidence. The truth is laid bare before their eyes. There will be no more need for discussion. It's a harsh reality that some are yet to grasp.

Here's a simple argument. What if The Bible's wrong and there's nothing after death? At least we who believed, enjoyed full lives on earth benefiting from a fictitious relationship with a God who seemingly was actively involved in our daily lives. However, what if The Bible's right? Life on earth regardless of what it is like will be the best time ever for everyone who rejects Christ. Why? Nothing's worst than the eternity they will spend in hell. There's only one way to prove who's right. DIE!

1 John 2:1(KJV) - My little children, these things write I unto you, that ye sin not. And if any man sin, we have an advocate with the Father, Jesus Christ the righteous:

Finally, Scientists Have "Found" The God Particle!

It's official. Scientists are one step closer to discovering God.... um... The God Particle.

Here's what Makiko Kitamur of Bloomberg News had to say yesterday, Tuesday, December 13th in "Scientists Get Closer to Locating ‘God Particle’ in Collider Experiments." Pay close attention to the phrase in bold print.

Scientists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research have narrowed the range where the hypothetical “God particle” created at the beginning of the universe may be found, closing in on evidence of its existence.

The particle, also known as Higgs boson, most likely has a mass in the region between 116 and 130 gigaelectronvolts of energy being studied by one research team and between 115 and 127 gigaelectronvolts under observation by another team, according to data presented today by the Geneva-based research institute. Independent measurements point to a range of 124 to 126 gigaelectronvolts, researchers said.

The Higgs boson, named after U.K. physicist Peter Higgs, in theory allows other particles to have mass. Finding the Higgs boson could be a gateway to discovering new physics, such as superparticles or dark matter, part of the universe’s building material that went missing at the beginning of time. While the scientists found “tantalizing hints” of the particle, it’s too early to say whether it exists, the scientists said. (emphasis mine)

OK, maybe they didn't actually find The God Particle but I guess now they have a better idea of where to look. :-)

From Faith Science - Where Faith and The Scientific Method Collide;

Scientists at the European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN) in Geneva along the Franco-Swiss border with the Large Hadron Collider and Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory (FERMILAB) near Chicago, Illinois, with the Tevatron Collider have been actively involved in some important research. In an effort to identify the source of mass, they are currently seeking ways to definitively isolate the Higgs Boson, or God Particle. According to the Merriam Webster Dictionary, the Higgs Boson is “a hypothetical elementary particle that has zero spin and large mass that is required by some gauge theories to account for the masses of other elementary

particles.”

Therefore, they are attempting to prove what has been accepted theoretically for a long time. Apparently, elementary particles essentially have no measurable mass without the Higgs Boson. Thus, the absence or presence of measurable mass does not define the existence of a particle. Based on this theory, all particles actually exist apart from mass that can be quantified. If you can understand this simple fact, it will revolutionize the way you think about everything in life. We have always known that visibility does not define existence because many essential elements in life are invisible, like the air we breathe.

Yet, it was understood that even invisible elements have some level of infinitesimal mass. Now scientific researchers are out to prove that particles in existence can be both invisible and massless. When God created the earth, could it be that he combined the Higgs Boson with invisible, mass-less particles that were already in existence? Why not? If that’s what gives a particle its mass, isn’t every particle in existence essentially mass-less apart from the Higgs Boson? So when we consider items with mass to be more real than items without mass, we make as much scientific sense as a person who concludes that something doesn’t exist because it can’t be seen.

The Danger of "Thinking" Christians

Proverbs 25:2(MSG) - God delights in concealing things; scientists delight in discovering things.

God knows all things and by His design, we don't. However, the goal of scientists is to discover truth. Well, at least it should be. Sometimes, it's the real truth but many times it's the desired truth. When we're presented with evidence, we don't always believe what we see but we do see what we believe. Therefore, what really matters in science is not just the presentation of evidence but the interpretation of the presented evidence. Anyway, people of faith can learn a thing or two from scientists.

Facing religious arguments against his scientific pursuits, 15th century Italian physicist Galileo Galilei said “I do not feel obliged to believe that the same God who has endowed us with sense, reason, and intellect has intended us to forgo their use.”

Job 35:9-11(MSG) - "When times get bad, people cry out for help. They cry for relief from being kicked around, But never give God a thought when things go well, when God puts spontaneous songs in their hearts, When God sets out the entire creation as a science classroom, using birds and beasts to teach wisdom.

Join me as we enter God's science classroom.

Ex nihilo nihil fit–Latin, “Out of nothing, comes nothing” a phrase originated by the Scholastics in claiming that the universe needs God as its cause because something cannot be created out of nothing.

Source: A Dictionary of Common Philosophical Terms, Gregory Pence, published by Mc Graw-Hill

Something from nothing. Life from non-life. Non-directed order from total chaos. Universal moral law but no law-giver. Simple, logical ideas that strengthen the secular position don't seem so logical after all, don't they? If we really want to push the issue there is a lot of low hanging fruit out there for us to pick on.

That's why "thinking" Christians are so dangerous. The same way critics use logic to pick apart the Christian position, "thinking" Christians can return the favor. Why not?

Will the world end in 2012?

Matthew 24:30(KJV) - And then shall appear the sign of the Son of man in heaven: and then shall all the tribes of the earth mourn, and they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven with power and great glory.

I remember when the rumor surrounding 2012 began to spread like wildfire across the globe. It was a hit in Hollywood with even a movie of the same name. "Scientists" supported the idea. It was the talk of the town. Even popular Christian televangelists jumped on the bandwagon. However, I did not even consider it until people started contacting our ministry with questions a few years ago. 

Then in 2009, NASA took the time to analyze the issue and posted the results on their official Government website, NASA.GOV in the article, 2012: Beginning of the End or Why the World Won't End?

Here's a short excerpt;

Remember the Y2K scare? It came and went without much of a whimper because of adequate planning and analysis of the situation. Impressive movie special effects aside, Dec. 21, 2012, won't be the end of the world as we know. It will, however, be another winter solstice. 

Much like Y2K, 2012 has been analyzed and the science of the end of the Earth thoroughly studied. Contrary to some of the common beliefs out there, the science behind the end of the world quickly unravels when pinned down to the 2012 timeline. Below, NASA Scientists answer several questions that we're frequently asked regarding 2012. -

Source - 2012: Beginning of the End or Why the World Won't End?

One of the main pieces of evidence put forth to support the claim of a 2012 Apocalypse was the end of the Mayan Calendar. Apparently, the calendar ends on December 21, 2012 so it was assumed that we would end with the calendar. Few publicly questioned the evidence nor the interpretation until Wednesday when Sven Gronemeyer of La Trobe University in Australia put it to rest.

Here's what ADRIANA GOMEZ LICON of Associated Press had to say in the article, "Expert: Mexico glyphs don't predict apocalypse."

MEXICO CITY (AP) — The end is not near.
At least that's according to a German expert who says his decoding of a Mayan tablet with a reference to a 2012 date denotes a transition to a new era and not a possible end of the world as others have read it.
The interpretation of the hieroglyphs by Sven Gronemeyer of La Trobe University in Australia was presented for the first time Wednesday at the archaeological site of Palenque in southern Mexico.
His comments came less than a week after Mexico's archaeology institute acknowledged there was a second reference to the 2012 date in Mayan inscriptions, touching of another round of talk about whether it predicts the end of the world.
Gronemeyer has been studying the stone tablet found years ago at the archeological site of Tortuguero in Mexico's Gulf coast state of Tabasco.
He said the inscription describes the return of mysterious Mayan god Bolon Yokte at the end of a 13th period of 400 years, known as Baktuns, on the equivalent of Dec. 21, 2012. Mayans considered 13 a sacred number. There's nothing apocalyptic in the date, he said.
The text was carved about 1,300 years ago. The stone has cracked, which has made the end of the passage almost illegible.

Source -  "Expert: Mexico glyphs don't predict apocalypse." by Adriana Gomez Licon, Associated Press

Matthew 24:35-37(KJV) - Heaven and earth shall pass away, but my words shall not pass away. But of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not the angels of heaven, but my Father only. But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.

So... will the world end in 2012? The Mayans didn't know then. NASA doesn't know now. Neither do we! However, that doesn't mean your world can't end. What do you plan to do about that?

Hebrews 9:27(KJV) - And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment: