Why Atheism Is Wrong

Atheism is defined as a lack of belief in a supernatural being, creator, or deity. Briefly, it is a lack of belief in God.

It is one of the major opponents of the Christian Church and Christian beliefs. It has always been diretly related to materialism. Summed up, the more materialistic a society is, the less spiritual it becomes. The less spiritual it becomes, the stronger atheism affects that society.

Therefore, the more materialistic a society becomes, the more atheism strengthens over it.

Atheism relies mostly on logic, analysis, and science. They do not believe in faith, nor the miracles of the Bible.

Atheism, though has major flaws. At first glance, it seems atheism has a strong, irrefutable, non-debatable position. Like so many things in this world, it looks good only on the outside, but actually is weak on the inside - a foundation built on sand.

Atheism has three major flaws:

Atheist Statement No. 1 - "Atheism declares it does not believe in faith, that science is the way to truth because it does not rely on faith unlike religion. Science does not rely on faith and therefore cannot be biased."

Christian answer: Even in science, we still need a certain degree of faith in scientists and researchers since we ourselves cannot possibly verify all their findings to prove that what they are saying is true.

Unless you can verify scientists' findings one by one for yourself, you will have to accept their "word" at face value. You will have to believe that what they're saying is true. You will have to have "faith" in their words.

Look. In the past, we've had "scientific errors" committed by scientists. Errors such as scientific facts that were declared as truth but were later found out to be false or in doubt.

Among numerous examples, one example is found in medical science. For many years, scientists/researchers have always declared that damage to the human spinal cord was permanent and irreversible. This was a scientific fact, established as the truth before.

However, only recently, this previous scientific fact was proven to be, well, untrue. Modern findings have proven that the human spinal cord does regenerate, albeit, in a very slow manner. A lot of people with damaged spinal cords have been able to walk, much against the declaration of their doctors that all hope was lost.

That science is not based on faith is totally false. Therefore, this refutes the first statement of atheism.

As St. Francis of Assisi wisely said "Faith is higher than reason. Reason is useless.... unless you believe."


Atheist Statement No. 2 - "Science is based only on purely objective facts, while religion is partially subjective and therefore cannot be purely objective. "

Christian answer: Science relies on objectivity, and needs to utilize a method called the "scientific method". The scientific method relies on observation, experimentation, data-gathering, etc.

Once science loses its objectivity, or becomes partially subjective, it loses its credibility as a discipline.

Therein lies the problem. The scientific method does provide purely objective data, BUT scientists still have to "interpret them. Since scientists are only human, the interpretation of the data becomes mixed with personal opinions and become "partially subjective". This cannot be avoided.

Scientists are human beings with different beliefs, religions, philosophies, and come from various countries and cultures throughout the globe.

Take for example the debate on the origin of the universe. This major debate has been going on for centuries, and has divided the scientific community into "creationist scientists" and "evolutionist scientists".

The creationist scientists believe that the universe has order, design, and was created by an intelligent, omnpiotent being, a god. God is the creator of the universe.

The evolutionist scientists believe otherwise. They state that the universe has no design, has no order and is random. They reject the idea of a god, a creator of our universe.

And it doesn't even matter who has more numbers on either side. The truth is never based on "majority wins".

Say for example, my friend and I hid a silver coin inside a box. Now, we make a survey and ask all people around the world if they believe a coin exists in the box or not.

Even if all people around the world said they don't believe a coin exists in the box, the truth is not affected by their numbers. My friend and I know the truth that a coin does exist because we hid it ourselves! So truth is not based on majority opinion.

Atheist statement number 2 is therefore false.


Atheist Statement No. 3) "Science is better than religion because it relies on an objective method - the scientific method. This method produces truth because it is based on objective data, experimentations, logic, etc. Religion does not use an objective method and is based on opinion, speculation, etc. It lacks "scientific proof", on "miracles" in the Holy Bible."

Christian answer: Science does rely on an objective method, but by what authority does the "scientific method" produce truth? By what authority does science possess when it says we must believe science because it utilizes the "scientific method"?

I mean you cannot state that science is an authority of truth simpy because it uses the scientific method. It's like saying "I therefore conclude that science produces truth because it uses the scientific method."

By what authority?

How will you prove using the scientific method does produce truth? Because it's "scientific"? Because science said so? Again, the question "By what authority does science have by proclaiming to be the truth than religion"?

The statement "The results of the scientific method should be followed" is unscientific because it is a value statement that does not get its authority from anywhere but itself.

"We should use the scientific method." Why should we? "It proves itself." How does it prove itself? "It uses the scientific method."

Atheist Statement: "The scientific method is true because it works and because it is axiomatic (self-evident)."

Christian answer: Sounds a lot like faith to me. Who decides what is axiomatic? does the scientific method decide it? That makes it circular if it does. If not, then it is not scientific itself.

I would have to do all the experiments to come to that conclusion. Other than that, I take it on faith that all of the scientists who did the experiments and reviewed them and tested them are not lying to me. That is my point.

You cannot use the "scientific method" as a reason to make science as an authority of truth, simply because the only way to prove science as the truth is to use the "scientific method"! The logic is circular.

And yes, the miracles in the Bible have been verified by both atheist (for objectivity) and theist (God-believing) scientists as true historical events. Events such as the Exodus from Egypt, David slaying Goliath, parting of the Red Sea, etc. were tested and researched using modern scientific methods. Watch "Secrets of the Bible" at Cable TV's "Discovery Channel".

At a different cable channel, underwater cameras showed pictures of ancient relics -particularly a large "chariot wheel" deep beneath the Red Sea. When traced back, the design of the wheel was identical to the chariots used in Egypt at around the time Moses' parting of the Red Sea occurred!

God has been so gracious as to provide solid, irrefutable evidence to believers and non-believers alike.

Atheist statement number 3 is therefore false.