• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Why Do Atheists Preach??

Spiderman

Veteran Member
There is a significant difference between inaccuracy and stupidity.
True!
But if there really is a creator who wants his human creatures to have faith in him, it would seem very foolish to put so much time and energy into convincing people that he/it doesn't exist.

It makes sense to be an atheist though, beings that God is silent and most people never hear a clear message from him or witness medical and scientific miracles.

So, I'm not by any stretch saying atheists don't have sufficient reasons for their disbelief, or that anyone is stupid.

But if God were to exist, i would not see it as being wise to dedicate oneself to proving he/it doesn't exist.
 

SomeRandom

Still learning to be wise
Staff member
Premium Member
"Dawkins preached against stupidity?"
Im sure sometimes he did.

But for all we know he may have been speaking falsehoods and therefore was himself preaching stupidity.

We simply don't know one way or the other!
Pretty sure when a qualified person in a field of science speaks on the discipline of science they themselves studied, it's a pretty safe bet to say they know what the hell they are talking about.
Dawkins has gotten more curmudgeonly of course.
But come on. This is like ignoring what a medical professional has to say about medical science because "we simply don't know one way or the other."
Seriously mate, I'm all for rebelling against authority, but even I draw the line at pretending to know more than actual professionals. That's sheer hubris.
 

Spiderman

Veteran Member
Pretty sure when a qualified person in a field of science speaks on the discipline of science they themselves studied, it's a pretty safe bet to say they know what the hell they are talking about.
Dawkins has gotten more curmudgeonly of course.
But come on. This is like ignoring what a medical professional has to say about medical science because "we simply don't know one way or the other."
Seriously mate, I'm all for rebelling against authority, but even I draw the line at pretending to know more than actual professionals. That's sheer hubris.
I've met with many proffesionals, and sometimes they make things worse, and have met non-proffesionals who are far more helps, free of charge.

It just makes me less confident that a person necessarily knows what they are talking about because they spent their lives studying something or have a license.
 

dianaiad

Well-Known Member
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!


I see. No True Atheist would preach that atheism is the only possible approach to the idea of deity.
 

GoodbyeDave

Well-Known Member
The real question is not why atheists preach, but why they don't advance any arguments.

What's the difference between some-one who defends their beliefs by saying "the church teaches it" and another who says "most members of the National Academy of Science teach it"? The members of the US NAS have as much right to pontificate on religion as the US evangelical christians have to pontificate on science: none.

I've said it before but I'll say it again. I've looked on this site and elsewhere on the internet, I've read books by atheists (by real scholars, not journalists like Dawkins), and I cannot find any valid argumets. They have criticisms of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam — most of which I actually endorse! But they have no refutation of religion. And if any of the shrill preachers here claim they have such arguments, lets be having you!
 

Audie

Veteran Member
The real question is not why atheists preach, but why they don't advance any arguments.

What's the difference between some-one who defends their beliefs by saying "the church teaches it" and another who says "most members of the National Academy of Science teach it"? The members of the US NAS have as much right to pontificate on religion as the US evangelical christians have to pontificate on science: none.

I've said it before but I'll say it again. I've looked on this site and elsewhere on the internet, I've read books by atheists (by real scholars, not journalists like Dawkins), and I cannot find any valid argumets. They have criticisms of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam — most of which I actually endorse! But they have no refutation of religion. And if any of the shrill preachers here claim they have such arguments, lets be having you!

A bit shrill yourself, bud!

Of course they dont refute religion. This is equivocation
on your part, auto-confuse. :D

Cant refute "religion". See dictionary.
No more than they can refute football, or
music.

What do you expect?

All but one religion is automatically shown to
a phony, if only one can be true. Right?

Now, which is the right one?

Everyone points to theirs. Tres amusant.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
In short, an atheists position is one of uncertainty.
That's your first mistake. I'm sure there will be others.

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.
That didn't take long. That's your 2nd mistake. I don't even hate you. I have disdain for you based on what you have posted so far in this thread, but disdain isn't hatred. Actually, I love many people who believe in a god.

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).
Wrong again. I am always finding new evidence against the existence of gods.

This video just came out, I've finished watching it now and it's a real gem!
Ahh, a gem. Bet if I watch it, I'll probably find even more reasons to hold some religious people in disdain.
 

Vee

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
To be fair and democratic, if I want to have the right to preach what I believe I have to accept the fact that other people also have the same right.
Everyone should be entitled to the same freedom of speech and if atheists want to express their views, even if they might use "preachy" ways, they have the right to do it. It's up to people if they want to listen or not.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
Good question. They not only preach. They also are self appointed teachers of science, the scientific method, evolution theory... etc. :eek:
By "self appointed teachers of science" are you referring to people, atheists, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus etc who take to time to go to good schools and get good educations? Are these in comparison to people who read and believe thousands year old stories written by people ignorant of all sciences?

Ain't nuttin' wrong with that.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
That's not true.

Celebrity atheists frequently talk about the harms of religion, why we would be better off without it, why people are religious, etc. which require speculation and reflect subjective value judgements and ideological preference.

I'm not a celebrity atheist but I'll state we would be better off without religion.

People are religious because their parents, grandparents, aunts and uncles, siblings and peers are religious.
People are religious because they are indoctrinated from birth into beliefs in a god.
People are religious because all their lives they are exposed to the "factuality" of GOD.

None of the above required speculation or subjectivity. None of the above is based on value judgments or ideological preferences.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
By "self appointed teachers of science" are you referring to people, atheists, Muslims, Christians, Jews, Hindus etc who take to time to go to good schools and get good educations? Are these in comparison to people who read and believe thousands year old stories written by people ignorant of all sciences?

Ain't nuttin' wrong with that.

Worse than that.
The old stories are made up.

And so is each " believer's inerrant readin'
of what it means. God shows them how.

How nice, you just cast your eyes upon
the page, and enlightenment doth flow
into your brain. All it takes is the right attitude!

Study? That is work, for what? Who does that?
Atheist chumps, and all they get
is Satan's cunning lies.
 

Audie

Veteran Member
Wouldn't it be equally unwise to believe in the wrong God?

Absolutely!

I may want to switch to ALLAH
at the last moment, ask for forgivenness,
I been letting MEN see my HAIR in public!!

Allah gonna hang me by my hair in e-ternal
fire for that! Will it save me if I say super
duper sorry-ah?

But which way to jump? Saying Allah at
the last minute might be what gets me
on the hair rack. If I say hey hey yaw whatevs,
YOU help me out here, I dont like that hair
rack very much, but it is really the big A
involved? Or if i say i am sorry I sinned and
it is really Satan running the show and I just
renounced him?

Pascals wager indeed!
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
If someone is going to be a believer in an omnipotent God they have already swallowed a lot of misconceptions about reality, and they become like a runaway freight train spreading their convictions as with authority to do so.

Naturally people are going to spread their convictions!, why should atheists be any different? Those TED talks are a shining example that everybody loves to preach, and a knowledge hungry society loves to listen. Earnest advocation is what everybody does. People also love the entertainment of the preaching spectacle. Naturally people of the choir are going to flock to their favorite preachers.

Preaching never bothered me, and i dont know why it bothers so many people that those they disagree with preach.

So whether one calls it preaching, or advocacy, its all doing the same thing. It takes courage to do it. And i would rather hear someone out for who they are, then stifle it because it makes people less stranger or alien.

So its worthy.
 

ecco

Veteran Member
and I cannot find any valid argumets. They have criticisms of Christianity, Judaism, and Islam — most of which I actually endorse! But they have no refutation of religion. And if any of the shrill preachers here claim they have such arguments, lets be having you!

Are you asking for refutation of religion or refutation of gods?

If you just want refutation of religion you should be seeking out members of specific religious sects and asking them the basis for refuting other specific religious sects. I'm sure Southern Baptists can give you a whole bunch of refutations of Mormon or Catholic religious views. I'm sure Shiites can give you a whole bunch of refutations of Sunni religious views.

Martin Luther gave a long list of things refuting Catholicism over five Centuries ago. Have you ever read any of his works?
 
Top