Why do atheists preach?

[EpistemiX]

I was musing this question a few weeks ago. Dawkins, Krauss, etc, they literally preach atheism under the guise of science. Not only is this "scientism" (yes it's a valid term, check if you don't believe me) but preaching atheism is also not a very "atheist" thing to do. Let me explain, if I may.

An atheist simply lacks belief in a deity or deities - including but not limited to - his own lack of belief. In short, an atheists position is one of uncertainty. So why then, do they preach? I believe it is because they are not essentially atheist, but rather, misotheist. Misotheism is an hatred of God(s) and a love of, and for, anything Godless.

I postulate, that it is not atheists who preach, but misotheists who claim to be atheist!

Further, just now I wrote above that an atheist simply holds a position of "uncertainty". Unlike the Agnostic, who hasn't resigned from searching for answers, the atheist has resigned his or herself from learning other ways to substantiate their belief, or lack thereof in God(s). I recently found a verse in the Qur'an in chapter 52 verse number 35 and 36:

35: Or were they created by nothing, or were they the creators [of themselves]?
36: Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Rather, they are not certain.

I found this to be of damning relevance. The unique and marvelous rhetoric in these two verses is simply, masterful. Verse 35 poses two questions, each referring to the creation of the human being.

Or were they created by nothing? Nothing being the absence of everything, including the metaphysical. So there is no idea mind! Even a child can tell us, "from nothing, nothing comes" (yes I know, I'm also quoting a certain philosopher) so the answer to this first question, is a loud resounding NO. From Nothing, Nothing Comes!

or were they the creators [of themselves]? Paradox, it's kike saying "a mother gave birth to her self" - so again, the answer is NO.

Next, the following verse takes the attention away from the human and towards the universe itself.

Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Any of us would concede here the answer is again NO. But it's an humbling turn of rhetoric. How mankind has deluded himself into thinking he is all important, the genesis of wisdom, the accumulated total of knowledge - when in reality, man only has a pixellated insight - blindsided by hubris.

The final part of this verse is what really tickles my brain though: Rather, they are not certain God revealed this over 14 centuries ago! The atheist hinges his whole belief on the principles of uncertainty. But at least he's honest with that. The misotheist (Dawkins, Krauss et al) just hates God(s) and pushes his/her world view onto everyone else, without realizing they have turned into what they themselves mock - preachers!

This video just came out, I've finished watching it now and it's a real gem!

Your thoughts, please!

 

[Helioform]

I don't know about all atheists but Dawkins is most definitely a "misotheist"! He even shows it in his books by intentionally making fun of biblical beliefs/verses.

What I have found is that most people who do not want God to exist, like the misotheists, believe this because they want to be free to do just whatever the heck they want. Why would morality matter after all, if life just rises up from a puddle of slime? Why would it matter when life is produced from "Selfish Genes" as in Dawkins book? The answer is that it would not matter.

Then there are others who refuse to believe God exists just because the world doesn't seem to be "fair" and evil is allowed to run rampant. These don't realize that some day all that was covered up will be uncovered and justice will prevail--maybe on this Earth or on another planet. Truth always emerges in the end.

 

[EpistemiX]

I'm pleased to read you Helioform, spot on fella!!

I think you will love the video (especially around the 18 minute mark - the build up to that is very much on point).

God bless,

 

[Red Sky at Morning]

Ravi Zacharias is very good on Dawkins and Atheism - he does some great in depth talks but this short gives a flavour...

 

[elsbet]

Like misogynists, they tend to be very angry people, I think. Seems like they believe in God, they just dont like Him.

 

[EpistemiX]

Like misogynists, they tend to be very angry people, I think. Seems like they believe in God, they just dont like Him.

I remember watching a film in the 90's titled "The Usual Suspects". In this movie, Kevin Spacey plays the role of someone called Verbal Kent. Now, Verbal has this one line in the movie which I fixated on for a long time. "Keaton always said, I don't believe on God, but I'm afraid of him" The interesting thing here is, Keaton had to be a misotheist. Simply because one cannot fear something one does not believe to exist. So Keaton is actually claiming that God does exist but he doesn't want to "believe in God" and that's why he is "afraid of him"! As misotheist an admission of ones position as they come!

 

[EpistemiX]

Islam or Atheism? which makes more sense? - that's the title of the video.

I watched this a few days ago, it's a real gem of a video. The speaker, Imran Hussein, really goes to town on the inconsistent nature of naturalism and other atheist ism's.

 

[AspiringSoul]

What can happen is, if i bring up astral projection a materialist athiest will just post some info on how 'itis not a real out of body experience, but the brain makes you think so' on account of scientific experiments. but that doesn't negate the core experience itself... or they'll throw in eastern athiestic thought ie the denial that reality is reality afterall... the ones who've crossed over and experienced the astral plane, become eastern athiest ie they perceive all reality as an illusion inc self. although it's a paradox ie God is only as real as the 'self' is, yet they can deny God but acknowledge their own existence all the time. When it comes to the core experiences pertaining to astral projection, there are many people with shared experiences. This imam back in the day used to do muraqaba (meditation) in the early hours and during it he would visit me ie on the astral, which in turn i would experience in my dreams. What he was trying to do was take me to a meeting on that level with his sheikh. What he was trying to do was make me forge a connection to the sheikh and that way the sheikh would become conscious of me and hence seek me out in the physical. The problem was i didnt like his sheikh at all and each time i saw him and his crowd on the astral i would 'walk away'.....the last time i had those experiences with the imam were when i stuck the middle finger at his sheikh IN the dream which of course the imam personally saw and didnt like. However my conviction was accurate, it took a number of years until the imam saw his sheikhs true colours and this is a guy he'd followed for over 50 years. it's crazy how this reality (nasut) is absorbed by what goes on in the higher reality (malakut) and our ability to explore it. obviously there's a lot of new age ideas in that anyway ie the law of attraction. Although on that note @Serveto remember once those stories i told you about 'visualisation' and the law of attraction? i was driving on that road only a few days ago and i was half asleep, but i just remembered 'that car' experience from months back, whilst i was driving along that same road only to see IT appear and go right past me a few seconds later literally on the same spot as before. maybe it was really a coincidence? but it can't be on account of the other experiences too, but i also know i can't just will it to happen when i want it to. I was tired at the time, half asleep, maybe it's connected with brainwave states but again if i was actively persuing the experience i would not occur. i tend to have them when im not all conscious. There are thousands of people who have shared experiences via guided meditation. it's something that has to be explored for what it is. what is preventing these people? they dont believe in demons or God, then why not just seek out the experiences and see what happens?

 

[JoChris]

I was musing this question a few weeks ago. Dawkins, Krauss, etc, they literally preach atheism under the guise of science. Not only is this "scientism" (yes it's a valid term, check if you don't believe me) but preaching atheism is also not a very "atheist" thing to do. Let me explain, if I may.

An atheist simply lacks belief in a deity or deities - including but not limited to - his own lack of belief. In short, an atheists position is one of uncertainty. So why then, do they preach? I believe it is because they are not essentially atheist, but rather, misotheist. Misotheism is an hatred of God(s) and a love of, and for, anything Godless.

I postulate, that it is not atheists who preach, but misotheists who claim to be atheist!

Further, just now I wrote above that an atheist simply holds a position of "uncertainty". Unlike the Agnostic, who hasn't resigned from searching for answers, the atheist has resigned his or herself from learning other ways to substantiate their belief, or lack thereof in God(s). I recently found a verse in the Qur'an in chapter 52 verse number 35 and 36:

35: Or were they created by nothing, or were they the creators [of themselves]?
36: Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Rather, they are not certain.

I found this to be of damning relevance. The unique and marvelous rhetoric in these two verses is simply, masterful. Verse 35 poses two questions, each referring to the creation of the human being.

Or were they created by nothing? Nothing being the absence of everything, including the metaphysical. So there is no idea mind! Even a child can tell us, "from nothing, nothing comes" (yes I know, I'm also quoting a certain philosopher) so the answer to this first question, is a loud resounding NO. From Nothing, Nothing Comes!

or were they the creators [of themselves]? Paradox, it's kike saying "a mother gave birth to her self" - so again, the answer is NO.

Next, the following verse takes the attention away from the human and towards the universe itself.

Or did they create the heavens and the earth? Any of us would concede here the answer is again NO. But it's an humbling turn of rhetoric. How mankind has deluded himself into thinking he is all important, the genesis of wisdom, the accumulated total of knowledge - when in reality, man only has a pixellated insight - blindsided by hubris.

The final part of this verse is what really tickles my brain though: Rather, they are not certain God revealed this over 14 centuries ago! The atheist hinges his whole belief on the principles of uncertainty. But at least he's honest with that. The misotheist (Dawkins, Krauss et al) just hates God(s) and pushes his/her world view onto everyone else, without realizing they have turned into what they themselves mock - preachers!

This video just came out, I've finished watching it now and it's a real gem!

Your thoughts, please!

Anti-theists preach** because they know deep down they deserve punishment from a Holy God and they hate him for it.
They do everything to convince themselves and others of the excuses/ worldview they have constructed to 1. deny reality 2. justify their rebellion against God 3. provide loophones to continue in their sins.

--
** just like Gnostic ANTIChristian Bishop's shallow and repetitive arguments on every forum he vists

 

[Hubert]

an atheist simply holds a position of "uncertainty". Unlike the Agnostic, who hasn't resigned from searching for answers, the atheist has resigned his or herself from learning other ways to substantiate their belief, or lack thereof in God(s).

You have this backwards. I am an atheist, and I am certain that there are no gods, just like I am certain that there are no unicorns. Agnostics specifically reject this certainty.

Remember everyone is an atheist in respect to all gods other than their own. Committed atheist are just willing to go one god further.

 

[Serveto]

... Although on that note @Serveto remember once those stories i told you about 'visualisation' and the law of attraction? i was driving on that road only a few days ago and i was half asleep, but i just remembered 'that car' experience from months back ...

Please stop driving anywhere when you are half asleep. Astralplaning, similar to hydroplaning but without water, at 70 mph, is ill advised for both theists and atheists alike .

 

[manama]

Richard Dawkins is a completely different case, he is a straight up sociopath. He does not and never will actually debate against actual known imams or preachers because he is a coward so he sticks to some random guy on streets. He knows that most high and wellknown preachers have been doctors, surgeons, engineers, pilots, soldiers etc and if he debates against them, he will be roasted.
He recently distributed free copies of his stupid book because arabs were reading/getting the pirated pdf. He thought that since they are probably unable to get the original book lets give it to them for freee.
What kind of moron fails to realize that the reason people werent buying the book was because they didn't want to support him lol.

He is nothing more than a biologist who failed to make it big in science so now he is finding profit everywhere else.

 

[Serveto]

Remember everyone is an atheist in respect to all gods other than their own. Committed atheist are just willing to go one god further.

Allow me to be the first convinced theist, though not particularly religious in a traditional sense, to acknowledge the general validity of your statement. I hope it contributes to a productive, civil discussion here between the two (and more) parties.

 

[Karlysymon]

Why do atheists preach? Because they need to fill up the ranks.

“It is philosophically impossible to be an atheist, since to be an atheist you must have infinite knowledge in order to know absolutely that there is no God. But to have infinite knowledge, you would have to be God yourself. It’s hard to be God yourself and an atheist at the same time!”

In order to remain philosophically consistent, the atheist must conclude that s/he is god.

 

[EpistemiX]

You have this backwards. I am an atheist, and I am certain that there are no gods, just like I am certain that there are no unicorns. Agnostics specifically reject this certainty.

One of the core logical principles of science is as follows: "An absence of proof does not necessarily prove an absence". So do tell me - How can you be so "certain" ???

Remember everyone is an atheist in respect to all gods other than their own. Committed atheist are just willing to go one god further.

I'm a believe in the One God! Not an atheist. Loving the mental gymnastic you tried though. Just doesn't work because you're attempting to split an hair on what atheist means, rather wishfully.

 

[EpistemiX]

In order to remain philosophically consistent, the atheist must conclude that s/he is god.

Beautiful! Quran chapter 52 verse 35 and 36 as explained above: "were they created by nothing? or were they the creators [of themselves] or did they create the heavens and the earth? rather, they are not certain" This rehtoric is masterfully simple and a direct philosophical blow to the atheist position.

 

[EpistemiX]

Knowing that modern day atheists preach their belief is not altogether different to how Darwin preached in his day, his belief in evolution.

But what many don't realise is that Darwin, near the end of his life, was rather religiously orientated.

 

[Karlysymon]

Beautiful! Quran chapter 52 verse 35 and 36 as explained above: "were they created by nothing? or were they the creators [of themselves] or did they create the heavens and the earth? rather, they are not certain" This rehtoric is masterfully simple and a direct philosophical blow to the atheist position.

That's why I'd never subscribe to atheism because it is illogical. Because once you deny the existence of a Creator, you deify yourself, (un)wittingly committing Deicide. There is no other logical conclusion to atheism. All this talk about how we should become our own absolute moral authority, that we don't need God to tell us what is right and wrong, is a call for each one if us to apotheosize. Which is ridiculous because the prerogatives of God are : immortality, creatorship, foresight. We are all mortals and are lacking of the aforementioned.

Nevermind that man is a spiritual being (which aspect of man, atheism won't acknowledge), self-creation demands self-salvation. Since man acquires physical scars; mental and emotional scars, it would stand to reason that his spiritual self cannot escape scathes because we live in an imperfect world. And if that is the case,then i would argue that since a physical or emotional deficiency demands a physical/emotional remedy, certainly a spiritual deficiency demands a spiritual remedy. And that is something he cannot provide himself just as food doesn't grow in his body. He has to reach out to the Source of that remedy to attain healing for his spiritual self. If man can faint from want of food, then it is possible for him to spiritually faint from want of spiritual food.

Atheism is more like believing a lie too long to be true. Its a shame Darwinism passes for truth.

 

[EpistemiX]

An interesting turn of events happened in the life of Darwin, when his accomplice and co-founder of the theory of natural selection, a certain Alfred Russel Wallace did a 180 on the very theory he co-founded. Thus, the theory also became known as a religiously inspired belief titled Darwinism.

 

[Karlysymon]

Knowing that modern day atheists preach their belief is not altogether different to how Darwin preached in his day, his belief in evolution.

But what many don't realise is that Darwin, near the end of his life, was rather religiously orientated.

Engineering Evolution: The Alchemy of Eugenics

"In the dark past of human civilization, the ruling class controlled humanity largely through religious institutions and mysticism. However, the turn of the century witnessed the epistemic transformation of the elite’s religious power structure into a “scientific dictatorship.” The history and background of this “scientific dictatorship” is a conspiracy, created and micro-managed through the historical tide of Darwinism, which has its foundations in Freemasonry."