Atheism and the Lure of Religion

14 Jun Atheism and the Lure of Religion

Dear Atheist,

You don’t make any sense to me.

Most people who know me know that I’m agnostic. They also know that I try my best to have respect for all religions… even Scientology. However, Atheism doesn’t make any sense to me.

By dictionary.com definition, there is a difference between an atheist and an agnostic:

a·the·ist [ey-thee-ist] – (noun): a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings.

ag·nos·tic [ag-nos-tik] – (noun): a person who holds that the existence of the ultimate cause, as God, and the essential nature of things are unknown and unknowable, or that human knowledge is limited to experience.

I am agnostic not because I’m trying to keep my feet on both sides of the fence or I’m holding onto some sort of insurance policy if heaven exists, but because there is a rule in science that states lack of evidence doesn’t necessarily prove or disprove a theory.

Scientifically, there is no concrete evidence that a deity exists, neither is there concrete evidence that a deity does not exist. There is only faith. I don’t have such faith. Religious people have faith, and I sort of understand why and how faith can be somewhat appealing, but it just doesn’t work for me.

Just as religious folks are in awe of, and are humbled by their faith, I am humbled by the fact that it is a pure unknown. I am humbled by the possibility of something bigger than us, even though I don’t concretely know what that something is. I think it’s because of this I cannot conform to any religion. I cannot conform to the answers that mankind has made up in an attempt to account for instances and things we just don’t know and don’t understand. I’m not going to make up an answer or whip up a story of an omnipotent being just because I don’t know. I’d rather admit my ignorance and be humbled by that, than to ride the wave of religious convention.

“Just because it cannot be scientifically proven, that doesn’t mean it is automatically scientifically disproved”

With all that being said, I could still see why people will adopt a religion. I sort of get it. However, I don’t get an atheist. There is a major flaw to atheism. A flaw that is even exponentially more enormous than the flaws of religion. And this flaw is the scientific contradiction. Most people who claim they are atheist will state that they are an advocate of science, and that there is an immense lack of empirical evidence pointing towards the existence of a deity. The problem with that is the basic scientific rule that states lack of evidence doesn’t prove or disprove a theory. That is the equivalent of a thirteenth century man stating that the world is flat because at that time, in his civilization, there wasn’t enough evidence to prove that it is indeed a sphere. Just because it cannot be scientifically proven, that doesn’t mean it is automatically scientifically disproved.

And this mildly upsets me about atheists. Religious people have faith, and there is no logical way to argue with faith. There is none. Once someone has faith they see and feel something that someone like myself doesn’t see or feel. Atheists have no faith, and arguably they also have no science… which makes no sense to me whatsoever.

“Religious people have faith, and there is no logical way to argue with faith”

Even most world-renowned scientists who once claimed they were atheist, like Richard Dawkins, publicly changed their point of view to purport that they are agnostic because it is a viewpoint that is much better aligned with the proponents of science. To be an atheist is to be so far on one end of the spectrum where one is certain a deity does not exist, that it is ironically comparable to someone on the opposite end of the spectrum who is wholeheartedly convinced, without a shadow of a doubt, that there is a god.

I think Bill Maher said it best when he stated that he’s not an atheist because being atheist is having a certainty about god’s non-existence that is as strong as a religious person’s certainty of god’s existence. Such certainty, on either side, is impossible.

Although I am not religious at all, I still see the appeal, the lure and the functionality of religion, but it’s hard for me to truly respect the views of an atheist… especially one who uses poor, unsubstantiated, sub-scientific notions to attempt to state their claim.

Sincerely,

Aaron