Why is it that whenever we see an attack on the Christian faith, it is always telling the holes in theism and never the
strengths of atheism? Is there one person on this planet who can logically defend atheism?
Consider many works out
there. George Smith wrote a book titled "Atheism: The Case Against God." Why not call it "The Case for Atheism?" His attack
is on the Christian Bible. What's to keep him from being pantheist? There are many different faiths. Does he successfully
destroy all of them?
if you go to a website like "infidels" you will find that they tend to attack the theistic approach.
What happened to the defense of the atheistic approach? Why is it always on the offensive?
The truth is, they are attacking
theism on the grounds that theism is logically indefensible, if that is so, why be atheist since there has never been a logical
defense on atheism.
The case is always, destroy theism and atheism wins by default. But which theism? Primitive peoples
have had a belief in a god of some sort. Are you going to prove all of them wrong? You must before you can be atheist by that
And who's to say the theists are making the assertion so the burden of proof is on them? Michael Martin asks
1.6 billion people to drop irrational beliefs. He means Christianity. It's a shame. He should have moved on to say 90% of
the human race because roughly 90% have had some belief in some sort of god. Does Martin ever work on them or just Christian
I can't help but wonder if I will ever see a defense of atheism instead of just an attack on theism. I see
theism logically defended. I never see atheism logically defended. Could it be because it can't be?
Suggestions? Questions? (insults were due yesterday)