Mailbag: Common Atheist Beliefs
Subject: Why Do Atheist Tend to Generalize?
Common Beliefs of Agnostic/Atheist:
All Christians who believe the Bible are ignorant.
The Bible is myth and superstition.
All true scientists are agnostic/atheists.
The [whole] Theory of Organic Evolution is no longer a theory, but proven fact.
Scientific evidence of "creation" [Big Bang] is not really scientific evidence of Creation.
Something eternal is possible [change, time, energy, etc.] but Someone eternal is impossible.
It's unfortunately not all that uncommon for religious believers to make sweeping generalizations about atheists - who they are, what they think, and why the are atheists in the first place. This particular post was unusual in that it managed to include so many popular generalizations in such a handy list - making it very easy to address and refute.
The first generalization is almost too vague to say anything about - "believe" the Bible how, believe that it is inerrant? Ignorant how? At any rate, not all atheists think that all Christians are completely ignorant. It's a common belief, and in fact it is also common for Christians not to be as well educated about the Bible and Christian history as they should be.
Not all atheists say that the Bible is all myth and superstition. Quite a lot of it is, sure - and on that there are plenty of Christians who agree. It also isn't true that atheists will say that a person must be an atheist in order to be a "true" scientist. There are plenty of scientists who are theists. What atheists will commonly argue, though, is that these scientist often don't apply their scientific methodology to their theism.
Most atheists one meets in the West will have some understanding of science and, therefore, will agree that evolution is a fact as well as a theory. Some may not - whether because of ignorance of evolution or some other reason - and there's nothing about atheism that requires any particular scientific beliefs.
It would also be unusual to find an atheist in the West who knew enough about the Big Bang to think that it might qualify as evidence of "Creation" - and, even if you did, they wouldn't consider it strong enough evidence to accept the conclusion that any creator-gods exist. These last two claims, however, at least comes close to being a fairly true generalization.
The last generalization doesn't really make much sense. There isn't anything about atheism that leads to any particular conclusions about infinity, eternity, etc. Insofar as most atheists in the West will believe that anything can be "eternal," it is likely only in the context of the universe - i.e., something existing for all of time. What that has to do with "Someone eternal" is uncertain. Should someone wish to propose that there exists a god or gods who are "eternal" in the sense of having existed for as long as time has existed, they can do so - but that won't be the Christian god.
Note: This message originally appeared in the Agnosticism / Atheism forum. Read the whole thread. More selections from the Agnosticism / Atheism Mailbag...
Comments
“Common Beliefs of Agnostic/Atheist:
All Christians who believe the Bible are ignorant.”
As opposed to certain Christians who think that those who do not believe the Bible are ignorant and wicked?
“The Bible is myth and superstition.”
And what about certain Christians who say that the Holy Books and beliefs are nothing more than myth and superstition? Double standard, much?
“All true scientists are agnostic/atheists.”
Odd, since Christian Fundamentalists will constantly argue about every minute doctrine and try to prove who is in fact a ‘true’ Christian and who isn’t.
“The [whole] Theory of Organic Evolution is no longer a theory, but proven fact.”
In other words, evolution can’t be right because despite all of the moutains of evidence supporting it, it won’t allow certain Christians to hold to a extremely strict interpretation of Genesis? What has this got to do with atheism? Many Christians also accept evolution, such as Roman Catholics, but wait, I forgot. They aren’t true ’scientists’, ahem — I mean ‘Christians’.
“Scientific evidence of “creation” [Big Bang] is not really scientific evidence of Creation.”
So ‘creation’ = Big Bang? This individual hasn’t even established any firm evidence for this, he’s just asserted it. Furthermore, he is indicating that only Genesis must be the true creation story and on top of that re-writing the definition of science to incorporate only his religious dogma. I wonder how he would react to other creation stories from other religions? Well, that would be different, wouldn’t it?
“Something eternal is possible [change, time, energy, etc.] but Someone eternal is impossible.”
As if certain Christians do not say, ‘Only true Christians will believe that Jesus is God and will follow a precise regimen of doctrine (Arminian, or Calvinist; Premillenialism, amillenialism; etc.) are truly saved’? I highly doubt that every last atheist/agnostic would say that God is an absolute possibility. Some would, but why every single one? Christians have historically salivated at the possibility of having their flock uniformly in agreement on very strict doctrine? Do they expect that everybody else acts the same way and just like them, cannot have any dissenting opinions?
From what I can tell, the person who made this ridiculous list is just projecting the same doctrinal straightjacketing on to atheists/agnostics that is usually prevalent with Conservative Christians. If he should be playing any smug, superior games with anyone, he should point the finger at himself and his comrades.