By James Bishop

Source: http://reasonsforjesus.com/90-atheist-quotes-every-christian-atheist-need-to-read/

"What follows is a compilation of honest atheist quotes I’ve collected over the years from reading books, watching debates etc. I hope they, as well as the links provided, prove informative for all readers."

The quotes are divided into 23 batches, and I'm gonna be posting them gradually. You can click on the link above if you want to read all of them at once. The references for the quotes are also in the link above.

1. Not all atheists are bigots like Dawkins and Harris.

Atheist humanist philosopher Richard Norman believes that we need to work together as religious and non-religious people if progress is to ever take place in dialogue. In this case simple, inaccurate generalizations will not help:

“Humanism is more than atheism, it is about putting humanist beliefs and values into practice and trying to make the world a better place. And that is impossible unless we’re prepared to cooperate with others who share those values, including those for whom the values are inseparable from a religious commitment . . .

We have problems enough in the world. The threats of climate change, global poverty, war and repression and intolerance can never be countered unless we are prepared to work together on the basis of a shared humanity. Simplistic generalizations about religion don’t help”.

2. The question of God’s existence is no trivial matter.

Whether one believes in God or not, God’s existence is a crucial matter for it has huge ramifications to many, if not all, aspects of human life ranging from questions of value, morality, to purpose & meaning.

Richard Dawkins captures this:

“THE QUESTION OF WHETHER THERE EXISTS A SUPERNATURAL CREATOR, A GOD, IS ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT THAT WE HAVE TO ANSWER”.

Widely read atheist existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre explains what he believes the consequences are if one rejects belief in a creator God; he claimed that “If God does not exist… man is in consequence forlorn, for he cannot find anything to depend upon, either within or outside himself”.

3. Many atheists are critical of fundamentalist New Atheism.

Not much is new about the New Atheists other than their increased intensity of vitriol and anti-religious polemic. But such tactics don’t hold water with everyone, many atheists included. According to atheist Gary Wolf:

“The New Atheists have castigated fundamentalism and branded even the mildest religious liberals as enablers of a vengeful mob. Everybody who does not join them is an ally of the Taliban. But so far, their provocation has failed to take hold… I take this as good news. Even those of us who sympathize intellectually have good reasons to wish that the New Atheists continue to seem absurd.

If we reject their polemics, if we continue to have respectful conversations even about things we find ridiculous, this doesn’t necessarily mean we’ve lost our convictions or our sanity. It simply reflects our deepest, democratic values. Or, you might say, our bedrock faith: the faith that no matter how confident we are in our beliefs, there’s always a chance we could turn out to be wrong”.

According to the “father of secular humanism” Paul Kurtz: “I think they are atheist fundamentalists. They’re anti-religious and they’re mean spirited, unfortunately. Now, they are very good atheists and very dedicated people who do not believe in God. But you have this aggressive and militant phase of atheism, and that does more damage than good”.

Likewise philosopher Michael Ruse has been one of the most skeptical voices on New Atheists such as Dawkins. Ruse would say that:

“THE GOD DELUSION MAKES ME EMBARRASSED TO BE AN ATHEIST AND THE MCGRATHS SHOW WHY”.

Michael Shermer notes the existence of atheistic fundamentalism within science; he complains that “Since the turn of the millennium, a new militancy has arisen among religious sceptics… Whenever religious beliefs conflict with scientific facts or violate principles of political liberty, we must respond with appropriate aplomb. Nevertheless, we should be cautious about irrational exuberance”

4. Atheism is a hopeless worldview without purpose.

This was made quite clear in a debate the atheist activist Dan Barker had with a Christian apologist by the name of James White; Barker remarked: “There is no purpose to life, and we should not want there to be a purpose to life because if there was that would cheapen life”.

It is also evident that many atheists also feel the nihilistic force behind their philosophy, as in the words of the late William Provine:

“Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me.

THERE IS NO ULTIMATE FOUNDATION FOR ETHICS, NO ULTIMATE MEANING TO LIFE, AND NO FREE WILL FOR HUMANS, EITHER".

Provine would also say that “No inherent moral or ethical laws exist, nor are there any absolute guiding principles for human society. The universe cares nothing for us and we have no ultimate meaning in life”.

Further, after Richard Dawkins had penned his best seller The God Delusion he recounts some concerns forwarded to him by his readers; Dawkins recounts:

“A foreign publisher of my first book confessed the he could not sleep for three nights after reading it, so troubled was he by what he saw as its cold, bleak message. Others have asked me how I can bear to get up in the mornings.

A teacher from a distant country wrote to me reproachfully that a pupil had come to him in tears after reading the same book, because it had persuaded her that life was empty and purposeless. He advised her not to show the book to any of her friends, for fear of contaminating them with the same nihilistic pessimism”.

Yet despite such existential nihilism Dawkins tries to lessen its effects: “Presumably there is indeed no purpose in the ultimate fate of the cosmos, but do any of us really tie our life’s hopes to the ultimate fate of the cosmos anyway?”

If that’s not enough, the atheist chemist Peter Atkins goes as far as to call us “children of chaos,” and that “the deep structure of change is decay. At root, there is only corruption, and the unstemmable tide of chaos. Gone is purpose; all that is left is direction. This is the bleakness we have to accept as we peer deeply and dispassionately into the heart of the Universe.”

Jon Casimir, as cited by Marsden, is forthright: “Here’s what I think. There is no meaning of life. The whole thing is a gyp, a never-ending corridor to nowhere. What is passed off as an all-important search is basically just a bunch of philosophers scrabbling about on their knees, trying to find a lost sock in the cosmic laundromat”.

Existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre goes on to articulate his nihilistic epiphany:

“I EXISTED LIKE A STONE, A PLANT, A MICROBE… I WAS JUST THINKING… THAT HERE WE ARE, ALL OF US, EATING AND DRINKING, TO PRESERVE OUR PRECIOUS EXISTENCE AND THERE’S NOTHING, NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FOR EXISTING”.

Similarly depressing is philosopher Thomas Nagel’s words; he explains that “It is often remarked that nothing we do now will matter in a million years. But if that is true, then by the same token, nothing that will be the case in a million years matters now. In particular, it does not matter now that in million years nothing we do now will matter”.

In another of his works Nagel believes that “Even if life as a whole is meaningless, perhaps that’s nothing to worry about. Perhaps we can recognise it and just go on as before”

5. Objective moral values do not exist on atheism.

This is quite significant as if this logic follows then it would not be possible to make objective moral claims; morality becomes relative. In other words, that one atheist thinks beating elderly people is a good thing because it provides him with entertainment such an act cannot be deemed to be objectively wrong by another atheist.

Why? Simply because it’s one’s opinion against another. However, not all atheists view moral values as relative, but many do. The atheist activist and president of American Atheists David Silverman says:

“THERE IS NO OBJECTIVE MORAL STANDARD. WE ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OUR OWN ACTIONS….” “THE HARD ANSWER IS IT [MORAL DECISIONS] IS A MATTER OF OPINION”.

Atheist nihilist philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche would also claim that “When one gives up Christian belief one thereby deprives oneself of the right to Christian morality. For the latter is not self-evident… Christianity is a system”.

Nietzsche would go on to see that if God does not exist then “everything is permitted”.

Arguably, philosopher Julian Baggini captures this best: “If there is no single moral authority [i.e. if there is no God, then] we have to in some sense ‘create’ values for ourselves… that means that moral claims are not true or false in the same way as factual claims are…

moral claims are judgments [that] it is always possible for someone to disagree with… without saying something that is factually false…you may disagree with me but you cannot say I have made a factual error”.

Secular writer for American Thinker John Steinrucken believes that atheists should do some self-reflection:

“Those who doubt the effect of religion on morality should seriously ask the question: Just what are the immutable moral laws of secularism? Be prepared to answer, if you are honest, that such laws simply do not exist!”.

Philosopher Michael Ruse concludes by claiming that our “sense” of morality is a byproduct of socio-biological evolution:

“In an important sense, ethics as we understand it is an illusion fobbed off on us by our genes to get us to co-operate… Ethical codes work because they drive us to go against our selfish day to day impulses in favour of long-term group survival and harmony…

Furthermore, the way our biology forces our ends is by making us think that there is an objective, higher code to which we are all subject…

ETHICS IS A SHARED ILLUSION OF THE HUMAN RACE”.

6. Moral values and duties can only be grounded in God.

According to philosopher Richard Taylor: “to say that something is wrong because… it is forbidden by God, is…. perfectly understandable to anyone who believes in a law-giving God. But to say that something is wrong… even though no God exists to forbid it, is not understandable… The concept of moral obligation [is] unintelligible apart from the idea of God. The words remain but their meaning is gone”.

DoctorAlien:
4. Atheism is a hopeless worldview without purpose.

This was made quite clear in a debate the atheist activist Dan Barker had with a Christian apologist by the name of James White; Barker remarked: “There is no purpose to life, and we should not want there to be a purpose to life because if there was that would cheapen life”.

It is also evident that many atheists also feel the nihilistic force behind their philosophy, as in the words of the late William Provine:

“Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me.

THERE IS NO ULTIMATE FOUNDATION FOR ETHICS, NO ULTIMATE MEANING TO LIFE, AND NO FREE WILL FOR HUMANS, EITHER".

Provine would also say that “No inherent moral or ethical laws exist, nor are there any absolute guiding principles for human society. The universe cares nothing for us and we have no ultimate meaning in life”.

Further, after Richard Dawkins had penned his best seller The God Delusion he recounts some concerns forwarded to him by his readers; Dawkins recounts:

“A foreign publisher of my first book confessed the he could not sleep for three nights after reading it, so troubled was he by what he saw as its cold, bleak message. Others have asked me how I can bear to get up in the mornings.

A teacher from a distant country wrote to me reproachfully that a pupil had come to him in tears after reading the same book, because it had persuaded her that life was empty and purposeless. He advised her not to show the book to any of her friends, for fear of contaminating them with the same nihilistic pessimism”.

Yet despite such existential nihilism Dawkins tries to lessen its effects: “Presumably there is indeed no purpose in the ultimate fate of the cosmos, but do any of us really tie our life’s hopes to the ultimate fate of the cosmos anyway?”

If that’s not enough, the atheist chemist Peter Atkins goes as far as to call us “children of chaos,” and that “the deep structure of change is decay. At root, there is only corruption, and the unstemmable tide of chaos. Gone is purpose; all that is left is direction. This is the bleakness we have to accept as we peer deeply and dispassionately into the heart of the Universe.”

Jon Casimir, as cited by Marsden, is forthright: “Here’s what I think. There is no meaning of life. The whole thing is a gyp, a never-ending corridor to nowhere. What is passed off as an all-important search is basically just a bunch of philosophers scrabbling about on their knees, trying to find a lost sock in the cosmic laundromat”.

Existentialist Jean-Paul Sartre goes on to articulate his nihilistic epiphany:

“I EXISTED LIKE A STONE, A PLANT, A MICROBE… I WAS JUST THINKING… THAT HERE WE ARE, ALL OF US, EATING AND DRINKING, TO PRESERVE OUR PRECIOUS EXISTENCE AND THERE’S NOTHING, NOTHING, ABSOLUTELY NO REASON FOR EXISTING”.

Similarly depressing is philosopher Thomas Nagel’s words; he explains that “It is often remarked that nothing we do now will matter in a million years. But if that is true, then by the same token, nothing that will be the case in a million years matters now. In particular, it does not matter now that in million years nothing we do now will matter”.

In another of his works Nagel believes that “Even if life as a whole is meaningless, perhaps that’s nothing to worry about. Perhaps we can recognise it and just go on as before”

jobless doctor. This early morning na atheists discussion be your problem.

When copy pasting an article, its important to search Nairaland first by copying a sentence in the article and searching for it, with this you'll see if such had been posted before so we don't keep beating the same dead decomposing horse


https://www.nairaland.com/3210922/some-honest-atheist-quotes-every

hopefulLandlord:
When copy pasting an article, its important to search Nairaland first by copying a sentence in the article and searching for it, with this you'll see if such had been posted before so we don't keep beating the same dead decomposing horse


https://www.nairaland.com/3210922/some-honest-atheist-quotes-every

you dey pay attention to that jobless doctor?

^^^^^
||||||||

It is painful to some people

Awon atheist MayWeather

butterflyl1on:
^^^^^
||||||||

It is painful to some people

Awon atheist MayWeather

segunojo866:
you dey pay attention to that jobless doctor?

he may not really be a doctor, I met an Indian who is naked "Doctor", I mean his parent given name and I met a south African Madrid fan who also bears the name

and he may not be jobless either

segunojo866:
you dey pay attention to that jobless doctor?

he may not really be a doctor, I met an Indian who is named "Doctor", I mean his parent given name and I met a south African Madrid fan who also bears the name

and he may not be jobless either

hopefulLandlord:


he may not really be a doctor, I met an Indian who is naked "Doctor", I mean his parent given name and I met a south African Madrid fan who also bears the name

and he may not be jobless either

maybe o

7. Atheism remains a minority worldview.

It would seem that claims of God’s death have been proven to be somewhat premature, as Wilson diagnoses: “Naturalistic atheism remains the orthodox worldview of Western intellectual culture, despite the fact that its advocates constitute ‘a tiny minority of the world’s population”.

8. Evil’s existence is not incompatible with the existence of an all-powerful God.

Philosopher William Rowe is responsible for the concept of the “friendly atheist” which is an atheist who accepts that some theists are justified in believing in God even if it is the case that God doesn’t exist. Rowe argues:

“Some philosophers have contended that the existence of evil is logically inconsistent with the existence of the theistic God [who is all-powerful and all-good]. No one, I think, has succeeded in establishing such an extravagant claim. Indeed… there is a fairly compelling argument for the view that the existence of evil is logically consistent with the existence of the theistic God”.

9. Belief in God is still very much alive.

Michel Onfray in his book In Defense of Atheism writes that: “Never more than today has there been such evidence of vitality in… the return to religious thinking, proof that God is not dead but that he was merely and briefly dozing… The trend has escalated to such an extent that we are now obliged to take up old defensive positions”.

Likewise founder of founder of The Skeptics Society Michael Shermer explains that:

“At the beginning of the twentieth century social scientists predicted that belief in God would decrease by the end of the century because of the secularization of society. In fact… the opposite has occurred… Not only is God not dead, as Nietzsche proclaimed, but he has never been more alive”.

Gavin Hyman, in Atheism in Modern History, similarly believes that “although modernity has undoubtedly witnessed a turn from tradition-based religious commitment, this has not resulted in the widespread atheism that many had previously predicted.” Hyman also notes dissatisfaction many people have with atheism’s prospects:

“In fact, outright atheism remains a minority confession, and the modern Western world has witnessed the proliferation of alternative ‘spiritualities’ of various kinds,” and a major reason for this is that

“MANY, IT SEEMS, ARE DISSATISFIED WITH ATHEISM AS THE ‘FINAL TRUTH’ OF THE HUMAN CONDITION”