The Making of an Atheist: How Immorality Leads to Unbelief

[kılıç_mehmet]

By James S. Spiegel.

http://www.amazon.com/Making-Atheist-Imm...an+Atheist

Book description:

The new atheists are on the warpath. They come armed with arguments to show that belief in God is absurd and dangerous. In the name of societal progress, they promote purging the world of all religious practice. And they claim that people of faith are mentally ill. Some of the new atheists openly declare their hatred for the Judeo-Christian God.

Christian apologists have been quick to respond to the new atheists' arguments. But there is another dimension to the issue which begs to be addressed--the root causes of atheism. Where do atheists come from? How did such folks as Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, and Christopher Hitchens become such ardent atheists? If we are to believe them, their flight from faith resulted from a dispassionate review of the evidence. Not enough rational grounds for belief in God, they tell us. But is this the whole story?

Could it be that their opposition to religious faith has more to do with passion than reason? What if, in the end, evidence has little to do with how atheists arrive at their anti-faith? That is precisely the claim in this book. Atheism is not at all a consequence of intellectual doubts. These are mere symptoms of the root cause--moral rebellion. For the atheist, the missing ingredient is not evidence but obedience.

The psalmist declares, "The fool says in his heart there is no God" (Ps. 14:1), and in the book of Romans, Paul makes it clear that lack of evidence is not the atheist's problem. The Making of an Atheist confirms these biblical truths and describes the moral and psychological dynamics involved in the abandonment of faith.

Them fighting words.

It could very well be what he says. To be honest, I have yet to meet an atheist in this forum which conforms with whatever moral standards the majority of the public in their country has. Not to say this for all atheists, but those who maintain this identity as their primary form of self-identification, beyond, say, family line, tribe, nation, or whatever, are generally internationalist, humanist, anti-culture and somewhat "avant-garde".
I guess this is due to the reason of their belief that they only get one life and might as well enjoy it as much as they can, so they cannot spare thought to things like public morals, or anything that goes beyond their lifetime.
But since they are always a minority wherever they are, their actions do not really have much of an importance really. The real trouble are as a matter of fact, theists who act as though they were the above mentioned people, even though their beliefs go against it.
Together, they form a portion of society who lives for the sake of living, something which I disapprove. Obviously, its not due to the personal convictions of any of the two, but atheists are more prone to fall victim to todays consumerist, cosmopolitan lifestyles, so they stand out more than those who profess a belief in a religion, or God.