Saturday, March 6, 2010


Apparently Atheism is hard to define. The gamut runs from Evolutionist to Buddhist.

From a Christian perspective all non-Christians are Atheist. However, this would be too simple a definition since there are people who call themselves Christian that don’t believe in God. The so-called Jehovah’s Witnesses fit this bill. The Watchtower Bible & Tract Society of New York Inc. put out a publication in which God was referred to as a three-headed dog. This definition of God is right up there with “tooth fairy” and “flying spaghetti monster” alluded to by the common garden variety Evolutionary Atheist.

We won’t get sidetracked into trying to define what a Christian is. But surely at its narrowest a Christian is a follower of Christ. Who do Atheists follow? Darwin and Buddha are two names that obviously spring to mind.

Peter Singer, a philosopher, is to be a speaker at “The Rise of Atheism” global convention in Melbourne. Singer was asked the following: “Studies now show that the so called ‘human’ qualities of compassion and altruism are present in dolphins, chimps, and gorillas. What does this tell us?"

Here’s how Singer responds to this from a Darwinist presupposition: "It tells us what Darwin already noticed – that it is not only in our anatomy, but also in our emotional and mental lives, that we are on a continuum with other animals. It also tells us that our ethics need to change. Not only human beings can have basic rights, or the moral status of a person. All animals are just ‘things’ – at law, items of property. That needs to change. We should not disregard or discount the interests of another sentient being just because it is not a member of our species.” (March 6-7 2010 – Weekend Australian Magazine).

Singer also says, “We also have to move beyond faith in order to discuss whether a belief is right or wrong.” (ibid.) Singer doesn’t define what he means by “faith.” The Oxford English Reference Dictionary says that faith first of all is: “complete trust or confidence.” Singer completely trusts or has confidence in his Darwinian Atheism.

Based on his Darwinian Atheist presuppositions Singer believes that we must afford animals equal rights with people. Thus the death of a dolphin, chimp, gorilla, dog, cat, budgie is on the same level as the death of your mum, dad, sister, brother or loved one. I’ll try to remember what Springer says when I try to comfort the grieving! Mind you, I'll also keep in mind that Jesus says, "You are of more value than many sparrows."

Singer also says, "If we are to solve the problems that face us, we need to take an open-minded evidence-based attitude to the world." (ibid.) He is closed-minded and has no evidence yet he believes or has faith "that the universe was not created by a divine being, and that there is no survival after death." (ibid.)

Also, no one has witnessed "molecules to man" Evolution. Yet Singer has “complete trust and confidence” in the truthfulness of this Darwinian hypothesis. Needless to say, I don’t! But then again, I’m a follower of Jesus Christ not Darwin. And, being God and a man in one divine Person forever, Christ the Creator is definitely a "sentient being" before whom we must all give account of our lives after death!

My religion is Christian. Peter Singer’s is Darwinian Atheism. Atheism is just another false religion.

1 comment:

  1. Those presuppositions are slippery suckers Neil. Not many an Atheist wants to acknowledge their existence. Let's just pretend we have total objectivity and rationality in our system! I think presuppositions reveal too much for the Atheist. They declare the Emperor's nakedness by illustrating that all philosophical systems rest upon faith in something or other. I think, well I know the Atheist understands that he has been placed on the horns of the argument when his presuppositions are consistently targeted. It is difficult to defend the absurd!