The twenty-first century is characterized by an active militancy of atheism. This new ideology is called Neo-atheism. Your fans are characterized by a total active manifestation against any religion, faith, or notion of any god. Today, it is easy to see phrases atheist billboards, buses, books that become best seller and blogs that ridicule religion. They claim that the religious abandon science or eliminate their worldview.
However, the great debate is not between science and religion and theology or science, but between atheism and theism, because there are scientists on both sides. The big question is the worldview that both follow. Atheism has as main assumption materialism, believing that the ultimate reality is matter and the universe explains itself. Have theism has the main assumption that ultimate reality is God and the universe does not explain himself. Nevertheless, the big question is which one is more reasonable in the face of scientific advances.
Thus, comes the question: why more educated people, educated and most scientists adhere to theism or Christianity as in the case of Francis Collins is a researcher and director of the human genome project, responsible for DNA mapping. He declared his rejection of atheism in his book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. Why are there a large number of scientists who say they are theists, including teachers from the same university in one of the main leaders of atheism, Richard Dawlkins? Some of them are: John Lennox, PhD in mathematics and Alister McGrath, a postdoctoral fellow in molecular biophysics.
The answer is that theism answers to great questions of humanity and atheism has failed to refute or bringing coherent and scientific responses, since they advocate science as the only epistemological. Bertrand Russell said: "whatever knowledge is attainable must be attained by scientific methods, and what science can not discover, the man can not know."
However, the reason for this is a reaction against militancy evidence in biology with microscopic structures that are real machines, the source of the information in DNA, the mathematical formulas in the universe that scientists are calling for "Fine Tuning". Those studies that have intrigued scientists, coupled with the inefficiency of science to answer basic questions have been factors that scientists have seen with other eyes atheism. As stated by Oxford biologist Sir Peter Medawar, "The existence of a limit to science is made clear by his inability to answer basic questions concerning children and the first and last things - questions such" how it all began? "," Why we are here "" What is the reason to live? "
2. THE HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION AND ATHEISM
Since Democritus, the originator of the atomic theory, and Lucretius, Latin poet and philosopher, the tension between the existence of God as first cause and matter as early existed. This went on for Socrates and Plato.
However, from the Enlightenment, philosophers and scientists have abandoned the assumption of a personal God, majestic, eternal creator. Rene Descastes began with the Cartesian method, which affirmed the existence of something only by evidence. Your question was extended to the very existence. So your phrase cogito, ergo sum shows that only realize when we think of our existence.
With the Enlightenment in the eighteenth century, experience, reason and the scientific method became the only ways to acquire knowledge, because they say it is the only way to take the man out of the darkness of ignorance. Among the thinkers who advocated this idea are: Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Hegel, Montesquieu, Diderot, D'Alembert and Rousseau.
In the nineteenth century the influence of positivism of Auguste Comte asserted that the ideal society was to "order and progress". He stated that the historical fact should speak for itself and the scientific method, controlled and measured. So this is the only way to attain knowledge.
Karl Marx's historical materialism uses to develop its Marxist theory. The famous phrase of Marx who said: "Religion is the opium of the people" brings a basis for the communist and socialist ideology, it led many to death as happened in the regime of Josef Stalin in the Soviet Union called.
However, it was with Friedrich Nietzsche that the worldview of a God or a creator was remote, since he declared the "death of God." For him, Christianity or religious moral values had no more sense since been exceeded by the values of this world. Therefore, one can see that these ideologies eliminate altogether the idea of a Creator to another who claimed that science and what we can know enough to explain the existence in the world and all human ontological questions.
As if all this were not enough, the lack of intelligible answers from atheists with respect to the main questions that theists put God as the solution became the basis of atheism are increasingly in danger of crumbling under pressure by the research and scientific discoveries that point to a Designer or a Creator.
3. THE ATHEIST PILLARS IN RUINS
The neo-atheists insist on bringing some arguments for its ideology, although they say you can not prove something that does not exist. However, this does not happen in practice. There are several books written by various authors who try to bring arguments that God does not exist. These arguments are continuously repeated in lectures and books, thereby demonstrating that they are the pillars of neo-atheist.
3.1. God is not necessary
The first pillar is the futility of atheists God because science answers everything, they say. However, this argument is very weak. When we say that God is unnecessary, one needs to have answers to many questions that only the idea of a sovereign God, mighty and wise answer. For example, atheism would have to have convincing answers to the origin of all things. This includes everything from the universe, which has mathematical forms and aesthetic and biological machines to high-level information in DNA. We need to remember to atheists that the universe is not disorganized, but completely organized and governed by laws so accurate that would impress a sincere and intelligent. The very word κόσμος Greek means "ordered". Κοσμέω She comes from the verb meaning "put in order", "take into harmony." Therefore, the Greeks understood that the cosmos was something that was in order and completely systematic.
Microscopic biological structures like the bacterial flagellum is a real machine and has an entire structure of a water-cooled rotary engine, rotor bearing, clutch and brake, high level information encrypted in the DNA and moves like Mobile DNA are examples organization, planning and intelligence. Not to mention the complex organic structures that demonstrate high-level planning as the ocular system, blood and nerve.
So all this leads to be wise, powerful and transcendent. To deny this is to go against rationality and through a sea of doubt totally unnecessary.
The neo-atheists argue that this is to put God into something that science can not explain and call it "gaps." However, the "gaps" exist only when a response does not fit or has no logical conclusion. When we conclude that an intelligent being could be behind the universe and the complexity of life, we are doing what we would naturally realize the structures of this nature. Therefore, there is no "gap", but very precise and logical conclusion, and the conclusion that the Egyptian pyramids were built by intelligent people, even if we do not know exactly who made them and how they did.
Therefore, science has increasingly confirmed the existence of God because it demonstrates scientific structures with microscopic irreducible complexities, as well as fine tuning in the universe.
Also, science will never answer for ethical, aesthetic and ontological. Atheism comes with a cover of scholarship claiming that the true scientist has to be an atheist. However, currently there are scientists on both sides. The great scientists, before the Enlightenment, admitted the assumption of a personal Creator. For example, Galileo, Kepler, Newton, Copernicus, Linnaeus, Ampere. All these scientists had assumed that as all things came from a wise and powerful Creator. Then God was replaced by the belief that only matter can cause physical and biological laws. However, everyone admits that only intelligence can create laws, planning and complexity.
3.2. The religion is evil and the cause of many conflicts and deaths
The second pillar is an atheistic attack on religion. This argument is the most obtuse and not intelligent. In fact, this argument will never fit in the matter of showing that God does not exist, because even though religion were not bad at all deny the existence of God. It's like someone who wanted to prove that Christopher Columbus did not exist saying that America is bad or that American presidents are criminals or something. Therefore, this argument is completely mediocre.
However, the accusation that religions have led to deaths, further confirms the religion, because the Bible speaks of the total failure of humanity. Even atheism has its representatives criminals, like Stalin and others. Therefore, the problem is not religion, but the man who turned away from God - this further confirms the Bible texts.
Atheism, therefore, does not answer the main human questions: what is the purpose of man? How it all began? Why should I be good or protecting the environment to think about my neighbor?
Only religion can deepen these answers and show purpose, beginning and morality, as they are in the dimension of faith. Therefore, atheism should be called "no answers" Also, because atheism deprives people of having the main responses of its existence, purpose, basis for morality and altruism.
We can only say that the militant atheist requires more than faith. It requires total abandonment of rationality in favor of an ideology to cover scientific, but completely dogmatic and irrational.