"10 Questions Atheists Cannot Truly and Honestly REALLY Answer", Truly and honestly answered.

I have been meaning to do a blog in a long time surrounding some of those "questions atheists cannot answer" posts.  It took me a while to find a decent one, as some have such asinine questions that I frankly refuse to waste my time upon them.  No, I'm not ducking difficult questions, but when people ask things like "If God doesn't exist then why do we go to church on Sunday?" then they are frankly not worth debating.

Finally, I found one in Christian Today which while it still contains some foolish questions, makes the assertion that no atheist can "truly and honestly REALLY answer"  Challenge duly accepted.  So without further ado, here are my answers to those 'unanswerable' questions.

 *

1. How did you become an atheist?

I thought these questions were meant to be unanswerable, yet the the writer kicks off with the easiest of all.

I was born atheist, just as all babies are; atheism is the default belief system of human beings.  However, like most humans I was indoctrinated to believe in a god.  What followed was a lifetime "spiritual quest" to find enlightenment.  Whichever faith I followed, it failed to satisfy me and answer my questions, and I have been through the gamut of them, from Christianity through spiritualism to Wicca.  In the words of John Lennon, "I've seen religion, from Jesus to Baal."  In all these religions I explored I never, not once, found any evidence of the existence of any god(s).  In fact, many of them actually destroy their own arguments for god(s) through contradictions and claims which lack evidence.  So it was at the age of 47 I realised that what had always been missing was God, and in effect, I have always been an atheist.

2. What happens when we die?
I don't know for sure, and neither does the questioner.  The theist assumes that there is an afterlife they are going on to, but there is absolutely no evidence to support that assumption.  I have never seen any proof offered that "messages from beyond" are genuine, but I have personally witnessed cold reading done by charlatans.  And even when those giving readings are genuine, well-meaning and wholeheartedly believe in what they are doing, even if they don't charge for their services, I'm sorry but they are going to have to go a long way to convince me.

Likewise, the questioner, being of the Christian persuasion, assumes and promises an afterlife, with no evidence to back that up.  If they have proof, bring it on.  And no, I don't mean the Bible.  That is not the evidence - that is the claim.

3.  What if you're wrong?

Ugh!  Pascal's Wager!  How I HATE Pascal's Wager.  The question is so-named because it was proposed by 17th-century mathematician and theologian Blaise Pascal, and is defined in philosophy thus;

"the argument that it is in one's own best interest to behave as if God exists, since the possibility of eternal punishment in hell outweighs any advantage in believing otherwise."

Even when I were a Baptist Christian, I deeply disliked Pascal's Wager and strongly disapproved of other Christians using it, for it relies upon individuals making a pretence of belief, rather than having a living faith.  Note that it states it is in the individuals best interest to behave as if God exists.  That is more or less assuming that the omnipotent, omniscient God which Christians believe in would be fooled by such a pretence.

For the atheist, Pascal's Wager is equally absurd.  Some have answered to theists "What if you're wrong?" to which the theists smugly reply they have lost nothing.  But it could be reworded to the theist "What if you have the wrong faith?  What if the Muslims are right?  Or the Hindus?  Or the Scientologists?"  Basically Pascal's Wager falls down on it's own argument.

And what if I am wrong?  You want an honest answer?  I will be wrong, and I will pay for that.  But if you are asking me to make a pretence of faith through fear, when I do not truly believe, then I would argue that not only is that an extremely poor argument for faith, but any such pretence would never fool an omnipotent and omniscient deity.

4. Without God, where do you get your morality from?

The question immediately assumes objective morality, that our moral compass comes from God.  I could (and intend to) write an entirely separate blog on why this is not only mistaken, but that morality is a manmade cultural concept, which changes through time and between cultures, and which in reality does not exist.

What we call morality has evolved through time and comes through cultural and societal influences, which have absolutely no need for God.  One would imagine that the questioner is asserting not only that morality comes from a god, but from the Judeo-Christian God of the Bible.  If that were the case, then consider that when white, European, Christians started exploring the globe, they encountered other cultures which followed and exhibited the same mores as those of Judeo-Christian culture; that murder, theft, cheating, and lying were wrong, they revered and respected their elders, they protected and nurtured their children, many of them covered their genitalia, and most of these cultures did not practice incest or sex with minors (which is much more than can be said for the culture of the Old Testament).  So if the Judeo-Christian God alone gives morality, just where then did they get their morality from?  I recall putting this very question to a Christian online, who replied that they were of the lost tribes of Israel, and as such had an in-built and inherent moral code given to them by the God of Moses and Abraham. Having obviously rethought this, he removed his reply before I could answer it.

It is self-evident we do not have an inherent moral code, and if we did, then that would put millions of security guards, police, lawyers, prison officers, and armed forces personnel around the world out of work.  Consider if a young child hitting or biting another child or an adult.  They have to be taught that is wrong.  As the child grows, they are equally taught that lying, cheating, and stealing are all wrong, and being kind and loving is good.  They are taught right from wrong, and it does not require any god(s) to teach them that.  In fact, it is (and should be) the parents who instill right from wrong, and few make any mention nowadays of god in that equation.  Rather modern parenting relies upon teaching children that they would not like their wrongdoing to be visited upon them.  My own girlfriend's three kids were brought up pretty much without god(s).  They are far from perfect - being human they are as flawed as the rest of us - and they have at times done things I could have personally slapped the stupid out of them for, but they are good kids who are (too) fast growing into respectful, kind and thoughtful adults - much more so than the arrogant little brats of some theists I could mention.

So, basically morality evolved.  Whether we like it or not, all 'morality' is self-seeking; we do not do wrongs to others because we wouldn't want those things done to us, and we do kindness to others in the hope that kindness shall be returned, even if we do so subconsciously.  It does not take a genius to work out that killing, stealing, lying and cheating not only others but ultimately hurts ourselves, and that's why most of us largely behave "morally".

Compare that with theist morality, which is done with no thought for others, but purely to score Brownie points with the Invisible Sky Pixie, for fear of retribution, and we see that it is actually theist morality which is no morality at all.

5.  If there is no God, can we do what we want?  Are we free to murder and rape, while good deeds are unrewarded?

Not only is this the same question as question 4, it is worded in a rather disturbing fashion.

No, of course we cannot do what we want.  We are bound by the laws of our countries, by societal mores and culture, and by familial upbringing and obligations.

I find it strange that a Christian, who presumably believes their God gave mankind free will, should ever ask such a question, for surely their own faith would say that we are.  Do they not all too often hide behind the "God gave us free will" argument?  In reality, whilst there is free will to a degree, it is bound by personal responsibility.

For anyone to murder and / or rape, the compulsion to do so would have to be there in the first place.  But even if that compulsion exists, then no god(s) stops people from doing so.  In fact, where those particular crimes are concerned, not even the laws of the land are any deterrent from doing so in the majority of cases.  The person intent on murder will kill, the rapist will rape, regardless of what their faith, the law, society, culture, or even their family may have to say against such horrible crimes.

Belief in God has certainly been no obstacle to a great many clergy who have sexually molested children.  In fact, many of those who do so think themselves so 'elect of God' that they can do no wrong - one only needs to read case studies to see how prevalent this view is.  And the same can be said of killing.  The sixth commandment plainly says "You shall not kill.".  That's all it says, no more, no less.  Yet it is today interpreted as being purely a commandment against murder, when it does not say that.  Similarly there are those who claim that because Jesus overturned the tables of the moneychangers, and said he had come with a sword, that he then allows for war, and completely ignore Jesus allegedly saying "Blessed are the peacemakers" and "he who lives by the sword shall die by the sword.", or that the overwhelming narrative of Jesus is one of peace and forgiveness.

I would suggest that the questioner read The Private Memoirs and Confessions of a Justified Sinner by James Hogg.  It is a disturbing novel based around not an atheist who thinks they are free to do what they will, but rather of a fundamentalist Christian who believes they are so elect of God, that they can do whatever they want without any consequences, as their sins were paid for.  Hogg published that work anonymously in the early 19th century, but it is unsettling just how many Christians (and other theists) seem to be of exactly that mindset.

Therefore, as an atheist I fully realise the consequences of my actions, I know I am bound by the law, society, culture, and family, and I certainly have absolutely no wish to murder and / or rape.

As for good deeds going unrewarded, if you seek reward, then your actions are empty.  Truly good deeds are done by those who seek no reward.  However, it has happened since time began, and shall happen as long as mankind thrives.  And all too often, those doing good deeds have their work undone, or are otherwise suppressed by politicians who proclaim to have a living faith in their god(s).

6.  If there is no God, how does your life have any meaning?

Simply answered, it has none.

The only meaning anyone's life can ever have is that which they create for themselves.  No baby is born with meaning.  No child really has any true 'meaning'.  It is only upon becoming adults that we set out on a path of life which defines us as individuals and we find that meaning which is true to each of us; the meaning of one's life is never the same meaning of that of another.

For the theist, meaning involves following their god(s) and faith and staying true to that.  Best of luck to them.  If they are happy in that, then it's none of my business.  For me, my meaning is to seek truth, to constantly learn and inform myself.  My meaning to my life is to think deeply, to write poetry, and ultimately, to make others happy (I rarely succeed, but that does not stop me trying).

Seeking the meaning of life is of course also the ultimate philosophical question of all time, which much greater minds than mine (or that of the questioner) have pondered long and deep ever since our species learned to communicate.  I have often encountered theists who, unable to explain things, simply say "God did it.", without offering any evidence.  That they should try to apply that argument to the meaning of life seems not only ignorant, but displaying an argument which is beyond belief.

7.  Where did the universe come from?

Truly speaking, this question is irrelevant to atheism.  Atheism merely means lacking a belief in god(s), and comes with no additional baggage. Some atheists are interested in cosmology and physics, some know nothing about them, some couldn't give a toss.

However, the simplest, most honest, most accurate answer that anyone can give to this question is "I don't know."  I do not know where the universe came from - and neither does the questioner, nor any other theist for that matter.

If the questioner is suggesting that as the universe apparently came out of nothing, then there must have been an intelligence behind it, and that intelligence was not only a god, but their own particular God, then I for one would like to see the evidence for such an arrogant claim.

I prefer to apply the logic of Charles Hoy Fort (1874-1932), a writer on anomalous phenomena, who once said "One measures a circle beginning anywhere."  In other words, unless something can be conclusively proven, or one particular explanation is the greatest likelihood, then all hypotheses have validity (although not necessarily equal validity).  Therefore, where the beginning of the universe is concerned, it may be part of a multiverse, it may always have been here, it may continually expand and contract over and over, the entire universe may be lying in some being's petri dish in a laboratory, it may have been aliens, it may have been sneezed out of the nose of the Great Green Arkleseizure, and it may have been a deity.  We simply do not know. But because we do not know by no means invalidates the science which is looking into it, nor does at all validate the baseless claim that the the universe was poofed into existence by the Judeo-Christian God.

And theists, if you think I am being obtuse by bringing in the petri dish, aliens, or the Great Green Arkleseizure, just bear in mind that you are the ones claiming that your God brought the universe into existence, without offering one shred of evidence to back up that assumption, without one iota of proof to back up your claim.  It seems to me then that the above claims, all of which can be found in books, have absolutely equal validity to your claims, which are found in your 'holy' books.

Anyone who looks at the question of where the universe came from, and unable to explain it automatically assumes "God did it." is frankly exhibiting the same amount of logic as our early ancestors who saw an avalanche and said "The Mountain Gods are angry."

8. What about miracles?  What about all the people who claim to have a connection with Jesus?  What about those who claim to have seen saints or angels?

I love how the questioner says 10 questions, then throws three questions into one.  As ever, the theists always try to skew the argument in their favour.

What about miracles?  Got any proof of them ever being genuine?  Nope, you have not.  If there were proof of miracles, then there would be no atheists, for we would know for sure that a god exists.  Theists may claim that miracles have taken place, but once people start questioning the validity of such, they immediately become extremely circumspect, often abusive, or just resort to telling lies.

So if you have proof of miracles, bring it on.  I'd love to see it.

Tell you what, you maintain that miracles are real, then why doesn't your god heal amputees?

Have you ever noticed those who claim to have a personal connection with Jesus, or and by extension, God, seem to have a connection with a deity whose views are are shared with their own?  The connection is not one with Jesus or God, but with their own ego.  The theist may hate gays, and strangely enough, their Jesus / God also hates gays.  The theist may be against abortion, and their Jesus / God will equally be against abortion.  They may even simply don't like rock music, and surprise, surprise, their Jesus / God will also hate rock music.  And of course, if the theist with such a delusion approaches someone who rejects them, they will immediately accuse the individual of rejecting their god, when in fact no such rejection has taken place.  The excellent YouTube atheist cartoonist, DarkMatter 2525, once covered this in a video, The Real God: An Epiphany far more profoundly and eloquently than I ever could.

I would also turn the question right back on the questioner and ask them what of Muslims who claim to have a personal relationship with Mohammad / Allah?  What of Hindus who claim to have a personal relationship with their multitude of gods?

So what about people who claim to have seen saints or angels?  Proof?  None.  In another guise, I am a paranormal investigator, which has often brought me into contact with some deeply disturbed people.  These include people who claim to have seen ghosts, demons, UFOs, aliens, etc.  I even know people who claim to have been abducted by aliens, and who say they have had radios and even cameras implanted in their bodies.  Where they are not outright lying, those who claim such have severe psychological problems - I happen to know one very brave chap who openly admits to being diagnosed as a paranoid schizophrenic.

Even where the cases are not so deep, they may still point to underlying mental problems.  In 1979 Robert Taylor, a forestry worker in West Lothian, Scotland, stumbled into a police station, his clothes in shreds, claiming that some strange robotic machines had tried to abduct him into a larger craft.  Bob went on to describe the 'craft' and other ball-like machines in detail.  When police investigated the site where he was attacked, they found pitting and track marks on the ground.  Bob Taylor never courted publicity - I personally tried to interview him three times and was turned down every time.  He was quoted as saying he wished it would all "just go away".  He certainly never made any money out of his story.  Today, the attack has been logically explained, yet Bob Taylor went to his grave, still adamant that aliens tried to abduct him in 1979.  In other words, for Bob, the events of that evening were true, as he remembered them, and nothing would shift him on that.  Yet in the cold light of evidence, the events were nothing more than an invention of his own imagination.  I am not by any means deriding Bob Taylor for that, merely stating the facts.

Likewise, when people claim to have had visions of 'saints' or 'angels' - or ghosts, aliens, demons, Jesus, the Virgin Mary, etc, etc, we only have their word for that, and even discounting the frauds, for those who remain, even when their visions can be logically explained away, for them those visions will always be the truth.

9.  What is your view of Dawkins, Hitchens and Harris?

I thought these questions were supposed to be unanswerable?

I find Dawkins highly intelligent.  Do I follow him sheeplike?  No, I do not.  Just out of interest, I have never read The God Delusion right through, only excerpts. 

I truly admire the intelligence of Richard Dawkins, but I strongly dislike his public persona, which I find to be arrogant, elitist and condescending.  There's one man who really needs a PR makeover, because I often feel like punching that self-satisfied face more than theists do.  I REALLY dislike Sam Harris, because he leans so far right politically and has come out with comments which can be construed as religiously bigoted, racist, sexist, and even ableist.  Of the three, the late Christopher Hitchens was probably the most reasonable, but even he could have his moments with outbursts against theists.  That's not my way - if you're happy with your faith, stay happy in it, keep it out of my face, don't try and indoctrinate kids with it, and you and I shall get along just fine.

Let's get this straight; if I will not bow to your god(s), then I am not about to bow to the altar of Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris, or anyone else.

Just because I no longer have and god(s) in my life does not mean I have a hole which needs to be filled.  There is no such hole and I, like every other atheist, came to the conclusion there is no god through my own observations and experience, and certainly not by being indoctrinated by the views of another.

10.  If there is no God, then why does every society have a religion?

Because of course, weight of numbers makes it true.  Except it does not.  Strangely enough, every culture on the face of the earth has folklore tales of "Wee people". Because of such weight in numbers, does that make leprechauns, brownies, fairies, elves and imps equally true?  The Yeti, Bigfoot / Sasquatch, Skunk Ape, The Big Grey Man of Ben MacDhui - many cultures have their own version (I recently saw a claim of a Spanish one).  Does that make such creatures real?  Can we say the same for sea / lake / loch monsters?

Nonetheless, it is an interesting question, and a good one to end on, because yes, I do have an honest, true, logical answer, which can be summed up in one word: culture.

This question, coming from a Christian, actually destroys the questioner's own argument.  For if their God is the one and only true God, then why are so many different religions in the world?  Even within Christianity, why should their denomination, among the 400,000 - yes, there are that many - differing denominations of Christianity?

They only think their faith is the true one because that is the one they are used to, the one they have been taught, the one they have been indocrinitated in, the one they were more than likely brought up in.

Most children all over the world are told the stories of their family's faiths from an earliest age.  From when children are old enough to understand here in the culturally Christian west, they are taught about the Baby Jesus, and to believe in a big, kind, happy God.  Even although we skirt round the nasty bits in the Old Testament, most kids are taught about Noah's Ark, and may even have a toy ark with animals to put in it.  Many kids will be sent to Sunday School, and even those who don't will often be indoctrinated with Christianity at school and in youth organisations.  And of course, when December trundles around, kids are told the pretty story about Mary and Joseph, and even take part in Nativity plays.

So it is that Christianity is self-perpetuating, with upcoming generations being taught to believe by their parents and society, who in turn were taught to believe by their parents and society, etc, with few, even if they are not overtly religious, even stop to think or question what they are being taught.  But this happens all around the world, in different cultures, with different faiths.  People largely stick to the faith of their ancestors, not really through any devout belief, but rather because it is what they are comfortable with, what they are familiar with, what they feel safe within, as they do with so many other aspects of their culture.  If this were not the case, then one would expect to see people from other faiths turn to the "one true faith" - say Muslims turning to Christianity (or vice-versa) - en masse. 

That they do not tells its own story; strongly suggesting that faith, whatever that faith may be, is a purely cultural concept. And which of course, far from offering proof for the existence of god(s), completely quashes any and all such claims.

*

And so, there it is; 10 questions which the Christian questioner suggested that no atheist could truly and honestly really answer, truly, honestly and roundly answered by this atheist.  And given that I am by no means any great academic or professor of philosophy- just an ordinary guy - the questions and claims have been completely destroyed, even if I do say so myself.