Why Atheism?

“Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe that there are fairies at the bottom of it too.” – Douglas Adams

I’m an atheist. I’d like to tell you why. Most of the arguments for being an atheist point to how it is more scientific or probable. I’m sure you’ve heard those before, so I’m not going to touch them. Instead, I’d like to focus on the reasons atheism can lead to a greater quality of life.

That said, I’m not here to convert anyone, just expose people to different ideas. I’m not on a crusade against religion. I’ve read many different books on various world religions. Even if I disagree with some of the founding points, the exposure to those ideas improved my philosophy towards life.

Common Arguments Against Atheism

I’d like to start by giving my rebuttal to many of the common arguments against atheism. I’m not even going to touch the circular logic of going to Hell or blasphemy. But here are some of the supposedly sensible objections to denying the existence of a god:


Morality doesn’t need to come from the threat of divine punishment. Religion can do much good, but it can be twisted to do evil as well. I believe ethics come from society. It comes from the basic principles of respecting the rights of others, service and altruism. You don’t need a god to explain morality anymore than you need Zeus to explain lightning bolts.


Another common objection is that in not believing in a god, you believe death creates infinite nothingness. I don’t have space to fully explain different theories on the life and death, but this doesn’t need to be so. Atheism only suggests that death is a current unknown.

Scott Adams suggested another possibility in his book God’s Debris. Your consciousness is based on a pattern stored on neurons in your brain. If this is the case, dying would simply pause the pattern and it would resume sometime in the future. With no delay being seen from the observer this would essentially mean you couldn’t experience death.

I’m not arguing that this theory is the way reality works, just that atheism isn’t surrendering to a nihilistic view of life. Instead, it is opening yourself to many different possibilities.


This is an argument I’ve never quite understood. It basically goes that if you don’t believe in God, isn’t life meaningless? I think this is a rather weak argument since it assumes that meaning can’t be self-determined. It also assumes that without an invisible spirit watching you, life doesn’t have a purpose.

I pick a meaning for my life and I believe it is just as satisfying without conjuring a notion of a god. I believe a god can actually become a distraction from meaning since it causes you to focus on a divine overlord instead of what really matters – the other people and beings you share the world with.

Atheism for a Greater Quality of Life

Aside from being an atheist, I’m also a vegetarian. Beyond putting myself in two self-selected minorities, many of the arguments I’ve seen against vegetarianism are similar to those against atheism. A common cited reason people I know don’t want to eat meat is because they enjoy it too much. They don’t want to sacrifice.

This is hard to explain until you’ve tried both sides, but I don’t see avoiding meat as a sacrifice. Instead I see it as an opportunity to live a healthier life, reducing my chances of many chronic diseases and giving me more energy to do what I love. I also see it as removing the environmental and ethical discomfort in supporting an industry with questionable practices.

Similarly, I think a lot of believers don’t rationally believe in a god. But they don’t want to sacrifice the comforting notion that a being greater than themselves is watching down on them and helping them out.

But in focusing on that one benefit, you miss on the potential benefits of not believing in a deity:

  • Freedom – The mental freedom to explore your world, learn and challenge your own assumptions. Instead of rejecting evidence that doesn’t fit your notion of a god, you can embrace everything with curiosity.
  • Self-Reliance – Temporarily focusing on a god may keep you happy, but what about the long-term? Instead of expecting divine intervention to let everything work out, I focus on my own abilities and reasoning to improve my experience of life.
  • Beauty – I believe beauty lies in the unknown. It lies in the things you can’t explain. That is what atheism really means. Instead of resorting to weak explanations of a deity creating the world, you see all the beautiful aspects of nature you currently don’t understand. Why tarnish evidence that the universe is larger and more magnificent than we ever realized by placing an invisible man in front of it?

Pantheism and Rational Spirituality

So far my arguments have been against the traditional notion of a god. That is an invisible, all-powerful being that not only created the universe but also, through conscious force, interrupts the rules of nature, that he himself created, to perform miracles for the benefit of one planet amidst billions of billions of stars.

The alternative to that doesn’t need to be a cold, hyper-rational, if-I-don’t-see-it-it-doesn’t-exist mindset. Pantheism (or as Richard Dawkins refers to it as “sexed up atheism”) is another choice.

Pantheism literally means “God is all.” It is the belief that the universe itself is god. That nature, humanity, science and truth are the reflection of god. In the most basic sense, this isn’t any different from atheism or science. But while atheism emphasizes what the atheist doesn’t believe in, pantheism presents the alternative.

I’m a follower of rational spirituality. Although it may sound like an oxymoron, rational spirituality means that truth, and your understanding of the world, enhance your appreciation of it. Instead of supplementing an unemotional scientific perspective with superstition, you find the emotional beauty in science and reason.

Read a book on evolutionary biology or quantum physics and it you soon realize how mind-blowingly amazing the universe actually is. The wonders of the New Testament, in my opinion, pale in comparison to how evolution works, the possibilities of string theory or quantum entanglement.

Appealing to a Higher Motive

God can serve a purpose in causing us to aspire towards something greater. But I don’t believe a theistic god is the only (or even the best) possibility here either.

Even beyond just appreciating nature and the world for beauty, you need an ideal to strive towards. A motivation that gives your life purpose and your broader actions meaning. An answer to the question, “What does it all mean?”

Finding your higher ideal is an incredibly personal task. It is a task that can’t be delegated or avoided by reading a holy book. I can’t tell you what your higher ideal should be. All I can show you is what mine is.

My higher motive is based on three separate principles:

  • Truth – Complete understanding is the first part of my higher ideal. This means that there is intrinsic purpose in seeking the truth. And that faith or any suspension of the rational mind I possess is an inherent evil towards this goal. I don’t believe a lie at the most basic level can ever be superior to what reality actually is.
  • Service – The second aspect of my higher ideal is service and morality. This means that there is intrinsic purpose in serving the greatest good and respecting the rights of others. Any act that harms the greatest good or infringes on the personal rights of another conscious being is inherently evil.
  • Challenge – The final aspect of my higher ideal is that the pursuit of both truth and service is supposed to be challenging. Pain and struggle are not goals in themselves, but moving through challenges has intrinsic meaning if it moves you to greater truth and service. This means that no matter what happens to myself, there is a meaning in it if I choose to find it.

The two elements of rational spirituality and appealing to a higher motive do a far more elegant job of fulfilling me than adopting a specific religion and worshiping a god. Better yet, my beliefs are self-correcting. By placing the highest emphasis on truth, I am always willing to change my beliefs if evidence shows them to have errors.

Should You Become an Atheist?

I didn’t write this article to convert you. I fully expect not to have converted anyone who was already set in their beliefs. But just as I read religious and spiritual books to enhance my philosophy, hopefully this could do the same for you.

Further Reading for Atheism, Rational Spirituality and Higher Motives



Spirituality and Philosophy:

  • Ambulatory Whale


    Consider the following exercise: replace every occurrence of “God” in any given text with “Invisible Pink Agoraphobic Platypus”. A simple word substitution, nothing more involved than that. The text now seems utterly bizarre, doesn’t it? “Of course it does”, you might say, “because God is not an invisible, pink, agoraphobic platypus”. Alright, so you have some idea of what God is like – or at the very least, what God is not. But how do you know this? Your conception of God is primarily sourced from that of the Bible’s authors (assuming you’re Christian). Are you sure you would subscribe to the same ideas about God if you were hypothetically born in a (e.g.) Hindu family? With thousands of different religions all claiming a monopoly on Truth, how is the neutral observer to choose between them? Don’t you find it curious that the overwhelming majority of religious folk have religious beliefs almost identical with their parents’?

    Stephen Roberts once said, “I contend we’re both atheists; I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.” I think this succinctly encapsulates one of the greatest difficulties in simply believing without question.

  • Coenraad

    The problem with the human condition is that we tend to think in terms of people and we can at best only rely on assumptions. Assumptions that are quite often flawed.

    My concern here, is, that by tagging yourself with the “Atheist” label, you are sending a message to the impressionable assumptionists of the world (and they ARE in the majority) that you are a bad person. Those are people who are “good” people – and who may never be more enlightened.

    The mistaken assumption being: If you don’t choose “Love” as your God, what do you choose?

    Because another word for God is simply your own being and strive. What do you strive for – and if it’s the one-ness and acceptance of your “enemies” that the Bible calls Love, Yahweh / “I am”, or God – you might as well call yourself a Christian and get it over with. Or avoid ALL religious symbolism and conversation altogether.

    I’ve recently come to two insights that made “Christianity” easier to digest for me: 1) Most of what you see around you, that is man made, existed in the form of ideas before it was made. In light of that, what is more real, really – fantasy, or reality? Sure, we’re messing with the meanings of words here – but they are just sounds representative of meaning, and there are meanings and insights for which there are no commonly accepted grunts or words yet, so my point stands. 2) The Bible can be summarised in this: Love your neighbor as yourself and God above all. The Jews cruified Jesus for preaching this, because they saw it as a lame excuse to disregard their laws. But it’s in fact brilliant: you can’t follow it blindly! You first have to figure out what love is, who you are, who God is, and then who your enemies are… and come to the realisation that everything you do echos in eternity and that you can never really truly be in control. Something a lot of people rightfully fear.

    PS Thanks for existing! What I mean is – thanks for doing the course and proving this to the world and all… I’m totally in awe.

    My University story: Wanted to study AI to remove ‘admin’ from our lives. There was no “AI” course, so I decided to marry psychology and CS. But the Faculty of Sciences said – no, I have to do it as an Arts degree. And the Faculty of Arts said – sure, just check that there are no clashes with Admin. And all the subjects clashed. Which is so self-typical – in a way. Also telling: The fact that the admin department is double the size of any other faculty.

    Bring on the brave new world!

  • Coenraad

    PS Godel is super awesome. What he proved – the fact that “mathematics” and “science” will never be able to understand/prove everything: think about it’s greater implications as it pertains to religion.

    He took something he intuitively believed and expressed it in mathematical formulas to not only explain his true religion, but to prove it in a way that nobody has yet been able to refute. The “other” meaning of God – something that’s always bigger and more undefinable than anything you can ever define.

    The way I see it, is that Religion and Science are part of the same conversation. Science starts at the smallest possible concept, and Religion at the biggest. It’s inevitable that they’d meet – and ultimately compliment each other.

  • Holly

    I’m a person who always likes to know the worst and then put the best face I can on it. So I won’t deny any of what you said. But there’s one more thing to be said, even so. Suppose we ( Christians and people of other religions for centuries and centuries) have only dreamed, or made up, all those things-love incarnate and resurrection and a better, peaceful kingdom for all and eternal life and miracles and God himself. Suppose we have. Then all I can say is that, in that case, the made-up things seem a good deal more important than the real ones. Suppose the world with only materialism or just a bunch of atoms and energy is the only world. Well, it strikes me as a pretty poor one. Even though truth and service and challenge are nice, they are only means, not an end, and there’s still terrorism and oppression and bigotry. And that’s a funny thing, when you come to think of it. We’re just babies making up a game, if you’re right. But babies playing a game can make a play-world which, forgive me if this is offensive, beats your real world hollow. That’s why I’m going to stand by the play world. I’m on Christ’s side even if there isn’t any God to lead it. I’m going to live as like a true Christian as I can even if there isn’t any true Christianity. So, though we thank you kindly for your input, I and anyone else who whole-heartedly hopes in Christ are setting out in this dark world to spend our lives looking for the kingdom of God. Not that our lives will be very long, I should think, if we’re living exactly as this possibly made-up God calls us to ( living solely by trust in Him: turning the other cheek, inviting strangers to be our friends, and giving all we have to others); but that’s a small loss if the world’s as dull a place as you say.

  • MIKE



















  • David

    Without faith it is impossible to please him, for he that cometh to God must believe that he is and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.

    Your human religion of rationalism will fail, just like in France’s revolution. It will end in a reign of terror. I don’t want to sound harsh, but that is the truth. Your rational religion has no cure for the internal corruption in the heart of man because of his fallen state. Your “high” ideals of what is right and wrong will be powerless to keep yourself, or society.

    God issues a challenge to men like you if you really want to know the truth. It’s found in Isaiah 41.

    “Produce your cause, saith the Lord: bring forth your strong reasons, saith the King of Jacob. Let them bring them forth, and shew what shall happen: let them shew the former things, what they be, that we may consider them. and know the latter end of them; or declare us things to come. Shew the things that are to come hereafter, that we may know that ye are gods: yea do good , or do evil, that we may be dismayed, and behold it together.”

    God has predicted your future (and mine.) Declaring the end from the beginning. God issues the challenge that he knows the end from the beginning, and has declared it.

    If you up to the challenge here’s a book that tells us where we have been, where we are, and where we are going. http://www.y2hope.com/hope/gc…. or you can call 1-800-THE-TRUTH and request a hard copy.

  • Anonymous

    I am a born Buddhist and an Atheist. I agree on your view on god but I don’t understand your view on Buddhism so, if you please elaborate why Buddhism isn’t as bad as god? Thanks in advance.

  • Johnny

    You know what I think?

    Well, let me tell you about me first. I had been an atheist for not much longer than a year, cause I soon found atheism to be “practically the same” as religion. It is a belief that something is just the way you “think” it is, even though you cannot possibly know. In fact, by being an atheist you even disregard your own principal about being open to the opposite (see your blog homepage: “Being Able to Imagine the Opposite”).

    The ONLY known SOLUTION to this (for me) was agnosticism. Agnosticism is the ONLY view on this that can be scientifically retraced – as it is custom in science, you say that you don’t know and thus must think that it is at least generally/theoretically possible. We have not yet discovered instruments that could prove 100% that there’s no “god” or other higher being flowing around in the universe. As this is so, atheism for me is just as stupid as blind faith (you believe in god cause a priest told you “there is a god”.)

    YES: Atheism is the same coin as religion – just the opposite side. Agnosticism is the answer.

  • Vaughan

    No. Atheism is not the same coin as religion and while we are at it agnosticism is just philosophical laziness. Essentially agnostics have allowed the religious concept of omniscience to invade their belief system without questioning it.

    Certainty is not having 100% surety, it is simply confidence in human knowledge. 100% certainty is not possible, so why would you demand it of a human? In effect what you are asking the atheist to do is accept an omniscient standard of knowledge, without first defending that requirement. You probably do not even realise you have done it.

  • Johnny

    confidence in human knowledge? Sorry, i dont have that. if you digg into the philosophy of science you will see that nothing is as certain as you might think. it’s not just people believing THEY KNOW the world is a disk/slice for centuries – that was a long time ago – it is also modern science being build on theories that are essentially approximations of reality and therefore it is only a matter of time till they are overthrown. newton’s physics for example seem perfectly right for many things. however, at some point they won’t work anymore. Einstein (and others) realized this. and today we probably still not have the right theory. It’s 2012 – so what? In a 100 years people might say that those 21. century people were completely on the wrong track concerning physics (:

    So basically, I think as an open minded person i must assume that it is theoretically possible that there is something like a god – maybe is a small, selfish, human-like, child-eating god. I don’t know. Maybe it’s just a spaghetti monster. Maybe there is no god but earth is a mad scientists lab. I don’t know. But I think we shouldnt just assume that its not the case. Cause we dont know.

  • Josh

    Your “List of Common Arguments” contains none of the actual common arguments in the philosophical debates between atheism and theism all the way back to Plato. That’s a shame.

    You also don’t take on the actual philosophical implications of atheism like the negation of free will. Also a shame.

  • Ann

    What is TRUTH? Does your truth make you feel like you know
    what the truth is? It’s the knowing that confirms what the
    TRUTH is. GOD has the understanding and he is trying to get
    us to know that. We first have to have a relationship with GOD
    for he alone can give out meaning, knowledge (knowing). The
    equipment to have between you and him. The Holy Spirit is the go
    between GOD and mankind. GOD is the only one who can give
    out Salvation, and the gifts of the Spirit. We at best can be
    motivational speakers. The best one is the devil and he takes
    the TRUTH and twist, and turns to manipulate, bring strife by
    reason of religion, but being a christian is about relationship
    with GOD (ABBA) the first step. Seek, Ask, Knock. Love GOD

  • Kate

    Interesting and well thought out. Have you ever read The Biology of Belief by Dr. Bruce Lipton? I think you’d really like it- it’s about how we can influence and change our cells and our biology through environmental influences- including our thoughts.

    I really appreciate your willingness to use controversial words and promote debate on your site.

  • Divesh

    I applaud you for being brave enough to come out with your view Scott. Religion is a touchy subject at the best of times, and a downright dangerous one at the worst of it.

    I am sure you must have deliberated long and hard before posting this, as your blog is a business as well it took guts to possibly alienate some readers.

    Kudos to you sir.

  • Charles

    Dear Scott,

    Thank you for your interesting and Informative website. I came across it indirectly through Ramit Sethi’s 15 little life hacks which I found through Josh Kaufman’s Personal MBA. I know I will enjoy going through the rest of it. I especially enjoyed this section and I commend you on the pursuit of truth in this post-modernistic world.

    I do come from a Christian world view and it was great to see the comments from the other faiths and that link left by the first commenter. Thank you for allowing us to use this site to share our view points.

    I think one of the problems people have with religion is that they think they have to check their rational or scientific minds at the church door and go completely by faith. However, consider all the many men of science and other great minds who believed in God both today and in the past. People like Einstein, Beethoven, Tolstoy, And Pascal. The more scientifically advanced we get, I believe the more evidence there is for the “proof” of God.

    Please double check all the statements to follow as I am not the original source and as you know everyone makes mistakes. I do not mean to intentionally mislead anyone as these findings are not my own.

    Scientists who study the origins of life on earth have come down to basically only one explanation. That life was somehow carried here by a meteor striking the earth. Evolution is out as there is no evidence of any significant evolution in any organism that grows above 4 ft tall. They agree that the source of life could not have come from any nearby planet as the conditions were not right and think that it could not even have come from our galaxy. Thus the chances of that event occurring are infinitesimal. Even if it did occur, it still begs the question as to how that life started. The only other view point would be that life was made by a creator.

    2. The Bible is our source of truth and what we believe to be the word of God. “In the begining was the word. The word was with God, and the word was God.” John 1:1 How can we believe in the Bible? One is that the Bible is an historical document whose descriptions of past events have always been accurate. To date, there have been only archeological findings that support the history in the Bible. There has yet to be one finding that has shown otherwise. The other is that the Bible is the only book that has been able accurately tell us about the future. The Old Testament has about 18 or so prophesies about the coming of Jesus some 400 years before his actual arrival. All of them came true including the exact time Jesus would appear, to the city where he was born, and to his actions when he was charged and accused for his crucifixition. A mathematician calculated the odds that any man born at that time could fit the prophecies as Jesus did. The odds of anyone person able to hit about 7 would be like the chance that if you marked a 50 cent piece with an X and you covered the whole state of Texas with the coins three feet deep, that you would find that coin on your first grab. The odds of fufilling all 18 or so of them would be if the pile of coins covered all of Texas but then went up to the moon. In all, there are about 600 some prophecies in the Bible and a little over 300 of them have come to pass- there are more recent ones but the reformation of the country of Israel is a major one.

    Lastly, it’s too hard to deny the indescribable transformative power of faith in Jesus. I’ve seen former drug addicts, gang members be redeemed and become amazing pastors. Healings and miracles continue regularly even today.

    I hope that if you are really passionate about the search of truth that you would continue to look into these things further and go with open mind and open heart. There is a lot of good in everyone and your ideals of service and achievement for the higher good are commendable. But the truth is, we all fall short. The good news is that if we repent and turn from our own ways and follow Jesus, he promises forgiveness and a hope everlasting.

  • Scott Young


    “Evolution is out as there is no evidence of any significant evolution in any organism that grows above 4 ft tall.” – This is absurd.

    “People like Einstein, Beethoven, Tolstoy, And Pascal.” – Beyond the fallacious reasoning that smart people believe x therefore x must be true, it’s highly unlikely Einstein believed in God, or if he did he was a deist. The religious beliefs of past intellectuals must also be understood in a cultural context of their times were atheism was extremely unusual (and punishable).

    “Scientists who study the origins of life on earth have come down to basically only one explanation.” – No they haven’t. Read http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A… and see how many current theories are being debated.

    I think there are possible arguments for a deity, and perhaps even in believing in one on faith when the evidence is lacking. But if you want to have an intellectual debate about it, you can’t make claims that are disproven from a single web search.

  • Werner

    Thank you for the free ebooks, Holistic Learning and Get More From Life..I have to comment on the above issue for the general sake of reasoning…

    I’m sure that we all agree that there is a big difference between the word “Black” and what we
    commonly call “The ‘N’ word.”
    One describes an ethnic group, the other has extremely negative connotations.
    In the same way, there is a big difference between the word “Christian” and the word “religious.”
    History shows that religion has been accompanied by ignorance, intolerance, and superstition.
    Religion has fought the progress of science, and has been responsible to more wars than any
    thing else in history.
    I say that because I am not here representing Roman Catholicism, or the traditional Protestant
    They would no doubt distance themselves from me and my beliefs, as quickly as you would
    distance yourself from a skunk with severe halitosis.
    “Religious” Webster’s Dictionary: “Pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious
    I am neither a monk, nor am I part of any religious order.
    At the risk of causing you to roll your eyes in expectation of what you may consider
    “the usual nauseating arguments for God’s existence,” I am going to give you my three point
    outline, in which I will present my case:
    • The Evidence of Creation.
    • The Evidence of The Bible.
    • The Evidence of Conscience.
    Then I will speak briefly on the subject of evolution and make known to you details of the
    $250,000 offer for anyone who can offer any scientific evidence for evolution.
    1. The Evidence of Creation.
    Theory–Coke can, banana (ridges/groves, non-slip, outward indicators, tab, bio-degradable
    perforated, point at top, right shape, curved).
    Car–no maker?
    Order in creation.
    Sir Isaac Newton said, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only
    proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”
    But how do you scientifically prove God’s existence?
    The English word “scientific”–from the Latin words: “to make” and “knowledge.”
    Building builder.
    Painting painter.
    Exactly same applies to the existence of God: “For the invisible things of Him…” (Romans 1:20)
    Scientist Stephen Hawking is his book, A Brief History of Time said,
    “It would be very difficult to explain why the universe should have begun in just this way, except
    as the act of a God who intended to create beings like us.”
    Albert Einstein didn’t believe in the God of the Bible, but he wasn’t a fool. He knew that there
    was a Creator.
    He said, “God does not play dice [with the universe].”
    “Everyone who is seriously involved in the pursuit of science becomes convinced that a spirit is
    manifest in the laws of the Universe–a spirit vastly superior to that of man, and one in the face of
    which our modest powers must feel humble.” (The Quotable Einstein, p. 152).
    God’s existence is axiomatic.
    Arguing about the existence of a Creator is intellectually demeaning.
    It is like arguing with “The Sun is Not Hot Club,” about whether or not the sun is hot.
    That’s why the Bible says, “The fool has said in his heart, There is no God.”
    “The Atheist Test.”
    Two questions: Hawaii, Tibetan yak. Some things we don’t know.
    Thomas Edison “We do not know one-millionth of one percent about anything.”
    The statement, “There is no God” is an absolute statement.
    Absolute knowledge “No gold in China.”
    Don’t need absolute knowledge to know that there is gold in China.
    This circle represents all the knowledge in the universe.
    It is possible, in the 99% of the knowledge you haven’t yet come across, that there is ample
    evidence to prove that God exists?
    If you are reasonable, you will be forced to say, “Yes, it is possible…so I really don’t know.”
    Therefore must say, “With the limited knowledge I have at present I’ve come to the conclusion
    that there is no God, but I really don’t know.”
    2. The Evidence of the Bible.
    If we have problems with parts of the Bible, we should listen to Mark Twain, who wisely said,
    “Most people are bothered by those passages of Scriptures they don’t understand, but for me, I
    have always noticed that the passages that bother me are those I do understand.”
    He was right. It’s not things that men can’t understand that make them hate the Bible. It’s the
    things they can understand.
    The Bible is full scientific and medical facts, written thousands of years before man discovered
    the. See “Science Confirms the Bible” tract, and Scientific Facts in the Bible book.
    The facts, plus its many 100% accurate prophecies prove that the Bible is supernatural in origin.
    3. The Evidence of Conscience
    I am now going to move from addressing your intellect and speak directly to your conscience.
    This is because the word con-science means with knowledge.
    If your conscience is allowed to do its duty, it will speak to you of God’s existence.
    But if you deny that inner knowledge, according to the Bible your conscience is “seared.”
    So I am going to speak directly to it, in an effort to resurrect it.
    To do this, I will use a few of the Ten Commandments–what the Bible calls the Law of God.
    God’s Law is like a mirror.
    Not a pretty sight (this isn’t pleasant, but it won’t take long).
    This is most necessary for me to present my case for the existence of God, so please bear with
    Would you consider yourself to be a “good’ person?
    Here’s the test to see if you are morally clean: Have you kept the Ten Commandments?
    Have you ever told a lie?
    Have you ever stolen something?
    Jesus said, “Whoever…lust…”
    Then, by your own admission, you are a lying, thieving, adulterer at heart
    and you have to face God on Judgment day, whether you believe in Him or not.
    If He were to judge you…Heaven or Hell?
    I don’t believe in Hell!
    If I stand on a freeway and say, “I don’t believe in trucks.”
    The good news is that God doesn’t want any of us to go to Hell.
    He provided a way for us to be forgiven: The Cross.
    Finally, I would like to speak for a moment about EVOLUTION
    Let me make it clear that I do believe in variations within species. Some dogs appear to have
    evolved from large to small (or small to large), but no “evolution” has actually taken place.
    They are still dogs.
    So I do believe in something called “microevolution”–variation within a species.
    However, there is no evidence for man evolving from primates, commonly known as “the theory
    of evolution.”
    Professor Louis Bounoure, Director of Research, National Center of Scientific Research so
    rightly stated:
    “Evolution is a fairy tale for grown-ups. This theory has helped nothing in the progress of
    science. It is useless.”
    Sir Arthur Keith (Sir Arthur Keith wrote the foreword to the 100th edition of Origin of the
    Species) said, “Evolution is unproved and unprovable.”
    Malcolm Muggeridge, the famous British journalist and philosopher said,
    “I myself am convinced that the theory of evolution, especially the extent to which it’s been
    applied, will be one of the great jokes in history books of the future.” (The End of Christendom,
    Eerdmans, Grand Rapids, Mich., 1980, page 59).
    Dr. T. N. Tah-misian of the Atomic Energy Commission said,
    “Scientists who go about teaching that evolution is a fact of life are great con-men, and the story
    they are telling may be the greatest hoax ever.”
    USA Today March 21, 2001
    “Paleontologists have discovered a new skeleton in the closet of human ancestry that is likely to
    force science to revise, if not scrap, current theories of human origins.”
    Reuters reported that the discovery left “scientists of human evolution…confused,” saying,
    “Lucy may not even be a direct human ancestor after all.”
    The phrase “scientists of human evolution” is an oxymoron.
    Evolution isn’t “scientific.” It’s a theory.
    If you go to http://www.raycomfort.com to will see an offer of $250,000.
    Dr. Kent Hovind $250,000 “to anyone who can offer any scientific evidence that evolution is
    Take him to court. Become famous. Make this another Scopes trial.
    But you won’t, because you can’t. All you have is faith in a theory.
    Evolution is actually a religion.
    Dictionary: “Religion”: “A set of beliefs concerned with explaining the origins and purposes of
    the universe…”
    The belief of evolution even has its own religious language:
    “We believe, perhaps, maybe, probably, could’ve, possibly.”
    The founding father of the faith is Charles Darwin.
    The god of the religion of Darwinism is referred to by the faithful as “Mother Nature.”
    She is the one who is responsible for everything we can see in creation.
    What’s more, she’s very attractive to sinful men. They gravitate to her like a moth to a flame.
    Why? Because she’s deaf, blind, and mute.
    Mother Nature doesn’t hear anything, she doesn’t see anything, and what’s most important–she
    doesn’t say anything.
    Mother Nature doesn’t have any moral dictates.
    So, if you make her your creator, YOU CAN DO ANYTHING YOU WANT
    …every sinful pleasure can be enjoyed with no qualms of conscience.
    That’s why evolution is so appealing.
    Such a belief system is called “idolatry” (making up a non-existent god to suit yourself)
    It is a transgression of the First and Second of the Ten Commandments.
    To believe in the theory of evolution takes a great leap of bind faith.
    Like little children, they believe without the need of a thread of evidence.
    The theory doesn’t disprove the existence of God.
    It just reveals that those who believe it are truly capable of faith in the invisible…
    and confirms Napoleon’s great observation:
    “Man will believe anything, as long as it’s not in the Bible.”
    Thank you for listening. Please feel free to avail yourselves of the literature on the table.

  • Werner


    How do you know there was a builder?

    How do you know there was a painter?

    “The fool has said in his heart There is no God” (Psalm 14:1).

    $250,000 REWARD
    Offered by Dr. Kent Hovind to:
    “Anyone who can give any
    empirical evidence (scientific proof)
    for evolution.”

  • Charles


    Actually, Einstein was Jewish and had a strong belief in God. He also spoke of the New Testament as well per his close friends and colleagues.

    With regards to evolution, I did not say that there was no evolution, but no significant evolution–many of the postulates proposed by Darwin have been proven false and there is unfortunately a lot of misconception in the general public about the theory. That said, the fact of any form of evolution does not disprove the existence of God.

    Let me clarify my statement about the origins of life which you responded with the abiogenesis link. The statement was actually from a scientist who attended the last national scientific conference where the current theories were debated including those listed on your web link site. The consensus was that abiogenesis could not have occurred here due to the short time period available to produce life after the cooling period. Abiogenesis itself was discredited by the majority of the group. Of course you will always have some professor somewhere whose life depends on that research and will be a strong proponent but there also are professors who still espouse Marxism and want us to change our system. Even if we allow the possibility that abiogenesis can occur, it doesn’t explain how the formation got the information or genetic code to assemble and produce complex life.

    On your write up you ask the question “what does this all mean?” but you did not give an answer yourself?

  • Scott Young


    It’s a side point, but Albert Einstein was almost certainly agnostic and couldn’t be described as having a “strong belief in God”: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/A… – Regarding Judaism, he was Jewish, but that describes a culture, not just a religion. Regarding the faith itself he notes: “For me the Jewish religion like all other religions is an incarnation of the most childish superstitions.” But as I mentioned previously, Einstein’s belief in a god is irrelevant. Saul Kripke is brilliant and decidedly theistic, Dawkins likely equally so and atheistic.

    Your story regarding abiogenesis may have occurred, but to say there is a scientific consensus is misleading, and any modern biology textbook would point out that different theories currently compete.

    Evolution really has nothing to do with God, unless you take a fundamentalist interpretation of biblical events, you’re right. But the idea that large animals somehow don’t evolve significantly is not consistent with the science. Age to sexual maturity would be a factor in determining evolution’s rate, but the principle doesn’t depend on an organisms size.

    As for the misconceptions about evolution, I can’t say anything because you haven’t named any, but I would argue that the public has generally been misled into believing evolution is a weak or flawed theory, when it is one of the most robustly supported in all of biological science.

    But, you correctly point out, evolution doesn’t contradict a deity existing, so that is also a non sequitur.

    My article isn’t about justifying atheism from an epistemic standpoint, although I believe the case can be made easily. It’s explaining the philosophy from a personal perspective to help others understand why it isn’t nihilistic. As such, I don’t go into the many arguments for why a god is unlikely.

  • Scott Young


    The argument from design is flawed because, in positing a god to create the things you describe, what created the god? You might be tempted to respond that the god exists outside of time and therefore needed no creator. But if you allow yourself that exception, why invoke a god at all, if you’re already in the habit of explaining extremely complex things without designers?

    The idea of why there is something instead of nothing, or why there is this instead of something else is puzzling, and I certainly don’t have an answer.

    But the “I don’t understand it, therefore magic” chain of reasoning is something you can have as a private belief, but it’s hardly something you should expect other people to take on faith.


  • Charles


    Yes, the argument of who or who doesn’t believe is irrelevant, and Judaism is more a culture than a religion for those who live here.

    As for your textbooks, my source came from one of the latest research conferences, and not that it automatically rules out what text books say but shows the limitation of the truth that comes from man. It always changes with the latest research. If that is the case, can we really use atheism to define anything with conviction?

    You do point out that your more a rational spiritualist and you can see the wonder and beauty of nature and science. To follow the quasi-atheistic like viewpoint however, you would have to believe that all the detail and amazing nature of the universe was all started by chance, but does not that complexity point to at least intelligent design? Is not the spiritual side of a person a reflection of a creator who is spirit?

    The first line of the Bible is that in the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth. Some would say it is the greatest miracle in the Bible and its evidence is the world we live in. If you can believe that, than any of the miracles in the book are possible.

    But why is all this relevant to life today? We live in such a wealthy area of the world but did you know 90% of it lives only on two dollars a day, sleeps on the floor and has no running water? Even with our comfort, I think Thoreau got it right that we all live lives of quiet desperation, and it is because we have become separated from our source.

    You mentioned reading the New Testament in your statement so I will just write a short of summary as I can. The Bible is the story of man’s separation from him and his plan to redeem us. We were meant to live in close relationship to Him and could hear him speak to us. He gave us a purpose to fill the earth and take care of it. That changed when Adam and Eve disobeyed him and from that sin was born and the earth was cursed. We could no longer have direct contact and were banished from the garden. Sin and evil were allowed to rule over the earth. But even in punishment, God promised that Adam’s seed “would crush the serpents head” one day and redeem man, and thus is really the origin of Christianity. God let people live on but was so disgusted with man that he almost wiped out everyone with a great flood, but by grace saved one family. (Evidence of a great flood exists in Archeological findings today.) He chose a group of people to be his representative to the world and gave them laws, the Ten Commandments, to which we derive our morals. The people could not follow the laws, and thus he caused them to be dispersed, aka the Diaspora. He promised however a new way to be restored to him and that was Jesus. Jesus was not merely a good man, for a good man does not claim to be the son of God, but he was God’s gift to clothe our sinfulness in his perfection, for he was without sin and died on the cross as our sacrifice. “For as in Adam we all die, but in Christ we are all made alive.” The good news is that whoever will believe in him and follow his ways, would have not only eternal life, but a full life here on earth. The amazing thing is, despite what our past has been, he will never turn you away if you come to him.

    As I said in my very first post, there are some 600 or so prophecies in the Bible of which more than half have come true. Isn’t it likely that the remaining will come true? The other half talk about Jesus’ second coming, and the tribulation that will occur on earth–in which he will come as ruler and judge rather than Savior.

    God wants you back in his family, and he has given us a free gift if we only choose to accept it. I believe only He can help you believe, I just wanted to make sure you at least got the invitation.

  • Scott Young


    By chance? No. My knowledge is limited, so I can only speculate on the origins and underlying fabric of the universe (my atheism is simply that I’m unconvinced of theistic interpretations, not that I claim to have a correct theory).

    But, were I to speculate, I would argue that the further we probe nature the closer we get to fundamental rules which underlie it. If I had to put money on an ultimate answer to the universe, it would be that it exists out of logical necessity, a mathematical equation that must be fulfilled.

    Now this may certainly be incorrect. It could be that there is no fundamental, and we get ever more layers of the onion to peel. It could be that we are disconnected from those fundamentals, so they are unknowable. I can’t say.

    But, if I were forced to speculate, I’d guess this interpretation of the universe as being more plausible than a religious/theistic one. That math, not story or anthropomorphized agents, underlie creation.

    I note that this speculation is of a different sort than my atheistic feelings which are that theism is a bold claim without similarly bold evidence. Especially the more specific religions which have more precise claims, and would therefore require even more evidence to be plausible.


  • Chris

    I think much of the debate about the existence of [Some Higher consciousness] is very confused. I personally think atheism is a more advanced spiritual state than religious belief. However, my own personal experience is that almost certainly there is something beyond consciousness as we know it, and in no way is this outside the realm of proof, although for some reason my experience is that the proof most often must come as a personal (internal) rather than social (external) experience. Not sure why this is. I did have an external experience, but I think that is unusual.

    I believe it is because deep within consciousness there is a knowing, and a person on some level is [choosing] to ignore this knowing, as such it is not for anyone to prove that there is more to life than appearance suggests. A person must simply be open to whatever is true. I will say that the idea of a God as advocated by some religions is frankly laughable.

    “There are two ways to be fooled. One is to believe what isn’t true; the other is to refuse to believe what is true.”

    ― Søren Kierkegaard

    Doubt as a philosophy, if it is to be truly open, must extend to doubt of doubt. And I do not advocate blind belief as a valid alternative. I advocate honest questioning.

    However, I think the presumption of intellectual superiority of atheism is simply not valid, but is I admit [extremely] convincing. I am still awed by the clarity of thought arising from some avowed aethists, I just think…well.. they are wrong. Something is either true or it is not. And being concerned with what is true is not the same as taking a position of doubt [or atheism]. One of my favourite stories is the one below. I like it because it reminds me reality has no concern what I believe. Something is either true or it is not.

    An American scientist once visited the offices of the great Nobel Prize-winning physicist, Neils Bohr, in Copenhagen, and was amazed to find a horseshoe was nailed to the wall over his desk. see story below.

    The American said with a nervous laugh, “Surely you don’t believe that horseshoe will bring you good luck, do you, Professor Bohr?”

    Bohr chuckled. “I believe no such thing, my good friend. Not at all. I am scarcely likely to believe in such foolish nonsense. However, I am told that a horseshoe will bring you good luck whether you believe in it or not! How can one argue with such logic?”

    So, just to advocate that there is a third alternative to blind childish belief in God, and rational atheism. I do find it all very embarrassing that despite my ‘rationality’ I have had experiences that are pretty hard to refute as suggestive of the existence of some higher consciousness. Because I identify way more with the scientists. Such is life.



  • Werner

    Thank you for the reply Scott – we can argue till the cows come home. We ALL are sinners, we ALL fall short of the glory of God, we ALL need God’s mercy and grace..I’ll keep you in y prayers…
    ps. I’m talking about the God of the Bible, the Creator of the Universe, the King of Kings and Lord of Lords…may He have mercy on your soul

  • Derek

    Great article Scott. I just wanted to share that I came up with a similar set of life principals a while ago. I call them: Truth, Quest and Serenity. Truth and Quest are obviously similar to your Truth and Challenge. Serenity for me represents the goal for happiness and to be a part of the overall beauty of the universe around us. Thank you for the article. It helped both to make clear my own ideas as well as made me rethink them.

  • Sharon

    Hi Scott,
    On Jan 20th, 2011, my life took a complete turn-over. I experienced exactly what the Bible claims to happen to a born-again believer. And from that day to this moment, I live a life in complete peace and joy, and every verse in the Bible, is coming to pass in my life. I experience what Jesus calls ‘ABUNDANT LIFE’, which I have experienced much and is much more than, what your wonderful articles on life suggest. None can love YOU, like Jesus does.

    I humbly request you to go through these websites, many scientific intricate details were written in the Bible, long before scientists discovered them.



    My life is changed forever because of what Jesus did for me on the Cross, and my heart, myself and my life changed forever,ever since the Holy Spirit entered my spirit. This same thing is happening in so many people’s lives all through the world.

    I spoke to so many people round the world, who have a very similar testimony as mine, who experienced the SAME salvation, that the Bible speaks about.

    Please give a try seeking Jesus in the Bible. Try calling out to God, and ask Him to show you Himself, if He really exists.Thanks 🙂 The Holy Spirit transforms me day after day, by Jesus” Love and Grace. Jesus wants a Personal Intimate Relationship with YOU.

    Matthew 16:2626 What will you gain, if you own the whole world but destroy yourself? What would you give to get back your soul?

    Jesus died on the Cross for you, that if you give Him Lordship over your life, you will FIND COMPLETE JOY in the Abundance of LOVE AND GRACE.

    I apologize if I hurt you in anyways. I have prayed for Jesus to save you and reveal Himself to YOU. The God I serve, will SHOW YOU HIMSELF directly 🙂

    Thanks for reading the post, for the patience <3

  • Laura

    Thank you for writing this. I have been an Atheist (and vegetarian) since I was twelve years old and am now thirty. Too often I keep quiet when discussions of an afterlife, souls, spiritual energy, etc. come up for fear of offending people with my non-belief. I just have to remember to stay kind, rational and articulate—like you.

  • Luna

    I think people are still missing the point here. This is his blog and he can write whatever he likes. He’s not asking for opinions on why he shouldn’t be this way, and this is fair because he doesn’t ask you to do the same for him. If you don’t like what he writes, don’t read it. I personally don’t go on religious forums and bash those people. We can’t change others but we can be more tolerant of them.

  • Scott Young


    I post articles for discussion, so all comments are welcome (especially ones that disagree with me). That said, as you’ll note, I’m also happy to defend my viewpoint when I feel there is some apparent substance to the counterargument.

    I’m more amused that this article still receives comments!


  • Mlovgren

    I loved reading your post. It’s nice to see others who have similar outlooks as mine. I was raised Christian but do not see the Bible or any other religious texts as from God, but as literature. I am interested in what we all think about our origins but am more interested in what the world can show us, rather than human-written texts. I am also vegetarian, but am wary of telling people, only because they want to argue with me about it. Humans are so funny–we work very hard to prove we know the answers! (Although I am not immune to that, either.) Thank you for sharing your views.

  • Ryan

    Thank you, Scott, for an open-door policy. I am in awe of your tremendous feats and accomplishments. I enjoyed reading every word within this blog. As an eighth grade science teacher, your critical approach to belief is both inspiring and invigorating. I am also an athiest and believe in freedom. I have waisted years in church, only to come out empty minded and with empty pockets (tithe). I hold no hostility to no one, but only toward the idea that something else can make me a “better being.” I truly am the master of my own ship. Until we as humans can believe in ourselves, our culture, and our society, we have only our uncertainties to guide our stagnate habbits of mind–a deadly cycle without true realism.

    Thanks, again.

  • Brett Warner

    I’ve been reading your blog for a while but just stumbled on this post. I think your higher motive is absolutely fantastic and I haven’t read anything that sums up my feelings as accurately on the topic as you just have.

  • Christopher

    Dear Mr. Young
    This is a great blog. I haven’t got all the way through it yet, but I’m looking forward continue reading it tomorrow. Thank you.

  • Milan

    Seeing how every culture has some sense of religion one can speculate a natural sense of humans to look for something bigger than themselves.

    One cannot necessarily argue for or against God with logic and reason for one subject is of the mind while the other is of the spirit. It’s like trying to solve a math problem with yoga. When hearing the teaching of Jesus, his message is all about focusing on loving other people. While people can twist a religious message to do evil with it, it is in fact just that, twisting the message.

    While being an atheist is fine just remember we all have our ‘God’, anything we worship with all our time and thoughts.

  • bagus

    Isn’t it enough to see that a garden is beautiful without having to believe who create it? No. It isn’t.
    Isn’t it enough to believe that you are (Scotth Young) exist without your father and mother..?

  • Lee

    I appreciate your open and, what I sense to be inviting forum for thoughtful dialogue. Addressing the perceived conflict and hostility between science and religion, Henry Eyring in his book “Faith of A Scientist” observed that truth is self-consistent. If truths appear contradictory, we don’t yet have all the truth or the context in which to understand them. From this, I am comfortable that perceived conflicts between science (that attempts to explain the physically observable) and faith (that addresses the spiritually observable) exist because we don’t fully understand science or faith. When and if we ever get to that point, the two will be consistent and complimentary – we’ll have all the pieces of the puzzle. As a man of faith (I’m Mormon) and a man of science (I’m an electrical engineer) I see very few real contradictions between my faith and my science. The older I get (I’m 54), those contradictions somehow seem to be less contradictory, too.

  • Scott Young


    Not all things were born from mothers and fathers.


  • Firm Believer

    We’re walking on the beach and we find a shiny Telsa car,
    would you be believe me if I tell you that there’s no creator behing such a piece of engineering ?

    I don’t think any sane person would tell this is just the result of mother nature and evolution.

    If you don’t swallow the pill that a Telsa car can’t be the result of mother nature, how can you believe that the human which is the most complex piece of engineering don’t have a creator.

    René Descartes (the father of cartesian thinking!), after looking on how complex is the entire universe the human body, admits how this could all tick together without a creator.

    Since you seems a sharp an curious person, I invite you to ponder how a book called the Quran explained the embryology process 14th century ago while science know how embryology work only a few decades ago


    But don’t take my word for granted and I invite you to continue your quest for the thruth. : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v

  • Nalley Adam

    peace be upon you scott!

    I swear that you are the smartest atheist I’ve ever seen in my life !

    however, I don’t agree that you need to be an atheist so you can have mental freedom! not all religions are the same , I believe that the ONLY religion in this world that tells people to reflect upon this universe and use their intellects to discover it is ISLAM as God gives great rewards for the scientists and the people who seek knowledge and the Quran(Muslims’ noble book) says that they are in higher levels than ordinary worshipers ! I think that’s why Muslims during the Islamic Golden Age implemented Islam law ,rosem founded&developed many sciences in all aspects of life, and formed the Islamic Spain libraries ,it’s like Islam unbridle their minds after they were living in darkness worshiping idols and killing their own daughters before Islam !
    the grandfather of the computer I’m using now to write this comment is Alkhwarizimi he is the one who founded and developed Algebra(it’s an Arabian word) and Algorithms(derived from his name) and he was a MUSLIM!

    “For all present-day mathematicians and scientists are children of Islam.”
    Keith Devlin on the debt of influence that science, culture and technology owe to Islam

    thanks to Islamic Spain manuscripts Europe rose, we&history can’t deny this fact 🙂 .I became a muslim when I read the Quran as I didn’t find any contradiction with science ,in fact, I found scientific accurate signs in it !I studied this book and found it an amazing book of “art of life” it just teaches you how to live as a human and how to do good and seek knowledge so you get rewards in the hereafter . I also read the bible before the quran and I was shocked by the amount of scientific errors in it and how it contradicts itself ..

    I’m 18, I passed high school with a high score and thanks God I had a scholarship ,my goal is to be a molecular biologist and contribute in developing a cure for cancer,I will start studying in Feb 2013 and my goal right now is to achieve what Scott achieved and finish my 4 year courses in the shortest possible time 😉 ! so wish me luck

    I just wanted to share my journey to Islam with you and tell you that being religious does not necessarily mean that you are a closed minded person! because the works of religious people influenced the European Renaissance and the scientific revolution
    I know Today, mention of the word Islam can, to some, conjure up images of terrorists flying planes full of people into buildings, all in the name, they say, of God.
    In an equally sad vein, the word Baghdad brings to mind Saddam Hussein. Both images are as unrepresentative as they are understandable, a sad reflection on the ease with which a handful of fanatics can hijack not just a plane but an entire cultural heritage and its associated religion.

    It is really sad! However, history can’t lie I read what European historians wrote about this great empire and those great people who founded a treasure for the west called Al Andalus ( the Islamic Spain) ask yourself who founded Oxford and by whom he was influenced?

    Too bad Alkhwarizmi,Ibn Al hytham , Ibn sina ,…etc don’t exist anymore and Muslims easily let go of their glory and civilization so we in the west inherited it …

  • Jean-Victor Côté

    One could also say that nothing exists but God. This is another version of pantheism, perhaps, but it would explain why the world we experience is seen by Hinduism as an illusion.

  • Joshua Bond

    Hello Scott,
    Thank you for your interesting article on atheism.
    Ultimately science, religion, atheism and spirituality will all meet at the same point: Truth. (False is false, and what is true has never changed). This meeting point is possible if “God” is defined as “the sum of all the incorruptible laws that run the universe”.
    If you’ve not yet read any books by Alan Watts, I can recommend: “The Book: On The Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are”.
    With best wishes,

  • Ann

    GOD LOVES you always! Follow the TRUTH.

  • Rohan

    I liked your post, it really gives a different view to the media popularised militant atheist. I agree that is possible to be a moral and good person with and without religion, just as it is possible to be corrupt and vile with or without it.

    You gave us some recommended reading at the end, I would like to offer you another area of research in your spiritual/philosophical journey when you next delve into it. I think with today’s media portrayal of Islam, it gets a pretty bad rep. I would hope that you would read around Islam from Islamic sources to expand the base of spiritual reading you have already covered. If I were to only recommend one thing from Islam to read it would be the Quran, I would recommend http://quran.com/. And there is no need to read it in order (but I would recommend reading chapters 1 and the first 30 or so ‘verses’ of chapter 2 first). The chapters are pretty independent in that respect. If you want to look further, I would also recommend a biography of the Prophet of Islam, Muhammad (peace be upon him). He has been said to be the most influential man in history by Micheal H. Hart, in his 1978 book ” The 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History.” Personally some of my favourite chapters are “Yusuf” (Joseph) and “al-Kahf” (The cave). I hope it gives you something extra to improve your philosophy (lol that sounds so condescending right, but I mean it genuinely).

  • Guillermo


    Love your books. QUICK comment.

    Philosophically I find a weak position to be Atheist. This is because, if I have the definition of “atheist” correct, it means to deny the existence of God (whatever that means to you). So, are you infallible? Could there be a possibility of something outside pure chaos causing the evolution, expansion of universe of the laws of nature? I am not sure, are you? 100%? If so, stay atheist, if you are not 100% then I think being an agnostic might be a better position.

    Thanks again for the blog!
    ps: excuse my English as I am not native.

  • Kenn

    Being new to this blog I can only look forward to more enlightened engagement. Thank you.

  • Jeff

    I dislike how even after you have presented a completely logical explanation for why atheism makes perfect sense, people find the need to try to tell you that you are wrong, with no proof or justification whatsoever. I wish I could understand how people can push their views on others when they have zero actual proof themselves. I used to love having debates with believers, but lately I have realized that all it does is make me frustrated that no amount of logic or reasoning gets through to them. And after such a well presented argument that you have made, half of these comments are further proof.

  • Victoria

    Hello Scott, came upon your site and found it interesting, especially the emotional notion of this article. I didn’t walk away satisfied from reading it though. The primary reason is because you live at instance of time where you benefit a great lot from religious teachings. The principles you mention– truth, service and challenge are all religious precepts. in fact the only difference that I have been able to find between this and Judaic notions is absence of all knowing, loving and powerful creator. As I read this, It made me think of a sort of a copyright dilemma. Imagine reading a great and inspirational novel where every line has been a key for getting joy in your life. Imagine using it to lead a wonderful life. Imagine that somehow you have ended up being the only person that owns a copy of this book in existence. Then in your old age imagine a little kid coming to you and asking you for the secret of your success and instead of making him a copy, you selectively tell him 1/10th of the book that you thought was essential. You also ensure that you never mention the name of the original author as a recommendation to pursue his own learning. This is what this article made me think . Our world is built on on the original religious principles and guidelines. Yes, religion has been used to twist the truth, forward agenda of personal power and worse. It has also been guilty of becoming a replacement theology where the true beauty gets reduced and lost in multiple translations. However, it is not religion itself that was at fault it is the perpetrators. I have a problem not with ideology but with implementation. I agree with you that humans are believing machines but I so want to disagree with you that one can be rational and believe in god. I don’t know, I am still learning. for example the notion to suspend disbelief. It was and remains necessary in science, in order to make forward progress. The point is to not skip logic all together but be patient as you proceed down your path. Anyways, great article. I don’t usually feel compelled to comment.

  • Scott Young


    That a book contains some truths does not imply it is truthful.

    I will give religion credit for some things, perhaps for some contributions to moral philosophy. But that doesn’t mean I owe it anything (or should accept any of its other assertions).


  • Victoria

    Agree with the first statement. However, religion is not just one book, a book is a mere artifact,a byproduct, of which there many. And selective storytelling is not lying, it is simply not is disclosing the whole story. Right? I dont think you understood my point. Like it or not, you have already accepted most of religious assertions as evident by this piece of writing. I assert that almost all moral codes today are derived from religious teachings. Simple historical study will offer sound argument for my assertion. I also assert that atheism is another form of replacement theology. I grew up in a completely atheist culture so I speak from experience. I will also hypothesize that belief in god or religion will make one happier, if one choose one’s beliefs accurately. For this I have no proof, too often causation and correlation are easily confused.