Atheism vs Theism: Which is More Dynamic in Understanding the World?

The difference between American Capitalism and Kremlin Communism is that the former was far more dynamic than the latter, and it was precisely that dynamism that allowed one to reign victorious over the other in November 1989.  Today, we see that same difference between Atheism and Theism, with one seeking to enlighten our understanding with what it discovers (like a child rushing home to show his Dad the cool stuff he learned in science class) while the other seeks only to see the world through the past (like the boy's Dad beating the child for daring to think differently than God allows). 

Like Wikipedia vs Microsoft's Encarta, or Open Source code Operating Systems like Linux vs Microsoft's Windows, however, atheism has no centralized hierarchy of power, or dogmas or sacred cows to bow down to, and allows anyone who counts themselves an atheist the freedom to change their opinion and beliefs about anything, regardless of what the evidence has to say on the matter.  And for doing as they please, atheists are quite willing to accept anyone's opinion about anything, except those opinions that one person uses to hold dominion over another.

Theism, however, is forced everywhere to defend its slippery premise that God exists and that justice and morality only have meaning if he does, and we also have free will. And as such, theism wars with natural human skepticism by imposing its "beliefs" on anyone who is devilish enough to doubt them, and treating like Christ anyone who dares to disagree with its authority to speak for God oh high.

To force people to accept ideas of God and "free will," theists nail themselves to the cross of their ideas with God on the one hand, and free will on the other. Atheists, on the other hand (is that too many hands?), are free to believe whatever they wish about such ideas. No Atheist Inquisition is appointed to make sure that all atheists are adhering to proper atheistic dogma, concerning free will or determinism, and no one will be tortured to death for honestly having no opinion about either one. 

Christians, however, like to condemn “atheism” as simply a “religion” (because apparently dragging atheism down to their own level of uncritical thinking makes “theists” feel intellectually superior), but then deny that “atheism” can ever do what Christians so proudly proclaim they do whenever they cast stones at anyone who fails to live up to their Christian ideas of morality. For when the Christian condemns anyone, especially an atheist or a “sinner,” they claim to only condemn the sin, not the sinner (unless you live in Texas, of course).

But if an atheist ever dares to exercise their own “religion” in the very same way as Christians, by pointing out that an atheist who converts to “theism” – like C.S. Lewis – may never have been a true“atheist” to begin with, Christians attack those atheists who dare to engage in such a "defense of the faith" for acting like the Spanish Inquisition.

Those same Christians then go on to proclaim that all ‘atheists’ everywhere, demand absolute dogmatic devotion to Darwin and the supremacy of doubt over everything else, even though it is the “theist” who prefers martyrdom to admitting they may be only human. In fact, Christians have very often tortured and killed anyone who dares to show a mere fraction of the amount of doubt toward their own Christian beliefs as those same Christians show to every other belief there is or has ever been – regardless of how much evidence undermines the one and supports the other.

In short, the theist mercilessly condemns anyone who dares to be as skeptical of them as they are of science and practically everyone else.   





Comments

Popular posts from this blog

An Atheist view of Miracles

The Paradox of Perfection - The Dilemma of Degrees of Perfection