Adherents of non-religious belief

850-900 million

Year founded

Earliest date of origin is possibly pre-historic post-diluvian; at least pre-520 BC when the earliest Chinese non-religious traditions (Taoism, Confucianism) appeared; Thereafter Humanism, Atheism, Agnosticism in their most recent iteration would appear with the so-called “enlightenment” 1770-1800 A.D.

Founder(s) of non-religious belief

No distinct “founder” but the earliest record of a non-religious system of belief and worldview would be Chiu King (Confucius) 550-479 B.C. and for the modern form of secular non-religious belief, other more recent key influencers were:

David Hume (1711-1776)
Immanuel Kant (1724- 1804)
George W. F. Hegel (1770-1831)
Ludwig Feurbach (1804-1872)
Charles Darwin (1809-1882)
Karl Marx – (1818-1883)
Friedrich Engles (1820-1895)
T.H. Huxley (1825-1895)
Friedrich Nietzsche (1844-1900)
Jean-Paul Sartre (1905-1981)

A (without) Theism (God). Atheism means simply “without God”. Atheism has been around in its various iterations for millenia. One of the earliest codified forms of atheism would be Confucianism in the mid 6th century B.C. whereby Confucius believed in a series of principles to live by and actively spoke against the belief in deity of any kind. However, the concept of atheism goes back even further to at least the 10th century B.C. when King David, wrote the following Psalm:

A fool says in his heart 'there is no God'.

Psalm 14:1

The modern form of atheism has been passed down over the last few centuries via teachings and writings mostly from the enlightenment period of the late 18th century:

Who or what is God to the atheist

Historically, there was a constant struggle within atheism. While its adherents would cling to the belief that there was no God in existence whatsoever, they were at a complete loss to explain how the universe and humans came into being in the first place. Atheists make the impossible-to-prove claim that no god exists nor ever would nor could. The atheist posits that God is just the figment of a primitive imagination.

Many Neo-atheists today take on the tactic of ridiculing theists by equating belief in God to that of believing in Santa Claus. This is due largely in part to what can be called the “Great Retreat of Richard Dawkins” who, after being repeatedly defeated by theists in debate, directed his followers to no longer engage the Christian but rather they should mock them openly:

Dawkins called on atheists and agnostics to "ridicule and show contempt" for the religious and their doctrines. The example he used was the Roman Catholic belief that the bread and wine of communion turns into the actual body and blood of Christ. He encouraged atheists to mock and ridicule the religious in public.

World News Group, March 28, 2012

Richard Dawkins is considered one of the “Four Horsemen of New Atheism” due to his committment to lecturing on theology instead of his chosen field, biology. c.f. Darwin lecturing on naturalism instead of his chosen field of theology.

Strangely, today as the “nothing created and resulted in everything” argument crumbles, many atheists (Richard Dawkins included) are now either flirting with or outright adopting a bizarre new “theory” that highly intelligent aliens dropped off “life samples” here on earth to develop. A claim which cannot be “proven scientifically” nor can be “verified empirically” (both flawed methods of determining truth but are used by the atheist to reject belief in God). This theory (someday to be propagated as fact) is somehow more credible to the atheist than the truth of an intelligent being that is Spirit who creates and sustains everything seen and unseen. A being who has spoken and verified Himself in Scripture and Who has eyewitnesses to His miraculous interaction with His creation.

This theory doesn’t answer the questions:

“How did we get here”
“Why am I here”
“Where am I going”

It just kicks the following questions further out into space:

Why is there something rather than nothing?
How did the aliens get to their planet?
Why are they on their planet?
Where are the aliens going in the future?

There is a willingness to believe in a vastly superior intelligent being, so long as its an alien that doesn’t require accountability for one’s life choices. Nevertheless, the Bible is always proven correct regarding those who prefer stories of alien life-planting to the truth of the God who created all things:

"The coming of the lawless one is according to the working of Satan, with all power, signs, and lying wonders, 10 and with all unrighteous deception among those who perish, because they did not receive the love of the truth, that they might be saved. 11 And for this reason God will send them strong delusion, that they should believe the lie, 12 that they all may be condemned who did not believe the truth but had pleasure in unrighteousness."

2 Thessalonians 2:9-12 (NKJV)

The sad thing is that these people who love the lie more than the truth (most likely because the lie doesn’t require them to turn from their sin) will stand before Jesus, the God of all creation to give an account for the life He’s given them. The problem is that they suppress the truth in this unrighteousness despite everything shown to them. My hope is that the person reading this is not one of them nor allows themselves to become one of them:

"For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who suppress the truth in unrighteousness, 19 because what may be known of God is manifest in them, for God has shown it to them. 20 For since the creation of the world His invisible attributes are clearly seen, being understood by the things that are made, even His eternal power and Godhead, so that they are without excuse, 21 because, although they knew God, they did not glorify Him as God, nor were thankful, but became futile in their thoughts, and their foolish hearts were darkened."

Romans 1:8-21 (NKJV)

The religious worldview of the atheist

Atheism has in the past been classified as “non-theist” but today it has moved drastically to more of an anti-theist position. There are a couple of written works which specifically underpin the modern atheist:

Humanist Manifesto
“The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life” by Charles Darwin.
“The Age of Reason” by Thomas Paine
“The Anti-Christ” by Friedrich Wilhelm Nietzsche
“Why I am not a Christian” by Bertrand Russell, Paul Edwards
“Das Kapital” by Karl Marx which is a political/societal blueprint whereby religion is depicted as evil and the state itself revered as the most high provider and authority. Confucianism)
1. This work contains the famous quote “Religion is the opiate of the masses”. Oddly enough, the Covid lockdowns of 2020-2021 revealed that blind belief in government and state-ordained spokesmen posing as scientists would prove to opiate the masses. (c.f. Bolshevik and Chinese revolutions)

Of the 6 works mentioned above, I will go into a bit more detail on the Humanist Manifesto and the faith-based evolution which was introduced by Charles Darwin in “The Origin of the Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life”.

Honourable Mention:

There are/were four authors and speakers who were given the name “The Four Horsemen of New Atheism“. These are Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris and was Christopher Hitchens who passed away in 2011 and instantly became a believer as we all do after death but unfortunately too late to avail himself of the saving grace of God provided through Jesus.

These four have contributed several works which influence what is now known as “new atheism”. I give them an honourable mention but the works I’ve mentioned above were more foundational in the formation of modern atheism.

Photo attribution: Author: unknown., CC BY-SA 4.0, https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?curid=35010565

Humanist Manifesto

The Humanist Manifesto was written in 1933 and was signed by all prominent secular humanists of the day. The crux of this manifesto can be summarised with the following quote:

“Humanism is the faith in the supreme value and self-perfectability of human personality.”

Based on 15 concepts:

The Universe is self-existing and not created.
Man is a result of a continuous natural process.
Mind is a projection of the body and nothing more.
Man is moulded mostly by his culture.
There is no supernatural.
Man has outgrown religion and any idea of God.
Man’s goal is the development of his own personality, which ceases to exist at death
Man will continue to develop to the point where he will look within himself and o the natural world for the solution to all of his problems
All institutions and/or religions that in some wa impede this “human development” must be changed
Socialism is the ideal form of economics
All mankind deserves to share in the fruits from following the above tenets.
Religious forms and ideas of our fathers are inadequate.
The quest for the good life is still the central task for mankind.
Man is alone responsible for the realisation of his dreams.
Intelligence and will, bring the good life (fulfilled dreams) about.

Evolution

From the Latin evolutio and evolvere – (an unfolding)

Despite the holes in the primary arguments used by atheists and agnostics in the 18th century, their cause would receive a shot in the arm in the early 19th century when a theology major named Charles Darwin wrote a book called called “The Origin of Species by means of Natural Selection or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle for Life” a title that so embarrasses the politically correct atheist that they have shortened all references to name of the work as “Origin of the Species”.

This work comprises Charles Darwin’s theoretical account of how he supposed all life came about on earth. Through the ages, it has been attributed to him as an “original scientific work” when history reveals that it was neither original (it was primarily based on the writing “Zoinomia” written by his grandfather) nor scientific (Darwin had no background in naturalism but rather, his training was in theology).

Many quickly embraced the new “Darwinist” theory in haste in order to justify how such complex life came to be. Unfortunately, in their haste to embrace Darwin’s ‘Zoinomia’ re-write, there was a failure to investigate yet even more holes in this new theory of Evolution:

On The Origin Of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the Preservation of Favoured Races in the Struggle For Life:

Darwin admitted his “theory” had holes, the following graphic contains a few quotes from the book:

“Why, if species have descended from other species by insensibly fine gradations, do we not everywhere see innumerable transitional forms.”

If numerous species, belonging to the same genera or families, have really started into life all at once, the fact would be fatal to the theory to descent with slow modification though natural selection.

“I concluded that this great group had been suddenly developed at the commencement of the tertiary series This was a sore trouble to me, adding as I thought one more instance of the abrupt appearance of a great group of species. ”

“The case most frequently insisted on by palaeontologists of the apparently sudden appearance of a whole group of species, is that of the teleostean fishes, low down in the Chalk period.”

“On the sudden appearance of groups of Allied Species in the lowest known fossiliferous strata: There is another and allied difficulty, which is much graver. I allude to the manner in which numbers of species of the same group suddenly appear in the lowest known fossiliferous rocks.”

“Consequently, if my theory be true, it is indisputable that before the lowest Silurian stratum was deposited, long periods elapsed, as long as, or probably far longer than, the whole interval from the Silurian age to the present day; and that during these vast, yet quite unknown, periods of time, the world swarmed with living creatures. To the question why we do not find records of these vast primordial periods, I can give no satisfactory answer.”

“The case at present must remain inexplicable; and may be truly urged as a valid argument against the views here entertained.”

“The several difficulties here discussed, namely our not finding in the successive formations infinitely numerous transitional links between the many species which now exist or have existed; the sudden manner in which whole groups of species appear in our European formations; the almost entire absence, as at present known, of fossiliferous formations beneath the Silurian strata, are all undoubtedly of the gravest nature.”

First law of thermodynamics: Matter or energy cannot be created or destroyed (conservation principle)

"It is absolutely safe to say that if you meet someone who claims not to believe in evolution, that person is ignorant, stupid or insane (or wicked)"

Richard Dawkins, Put Your Money on Evolution, New York Times April 9, 1999 p. 35 Tweet

Serious flaws with the theory of evolution

Charles Darwin, theologian, wrote Origin of The Species. He assumed the role of ‘naturalist’ with no education in the field. He also claimed that if transitional forms were not found in the next 100 years, this ‘theory’ should be abandoned.” The following are a few more significant points to consider which should raise some serious questions regarding the validity of this theory of evolution:

1. Bad Cosmology

First law of thermodynamics: Matter or energy cannot be created or destroyed (conservation principle). Yet, contrary to science, the Humanist Manifesto (see above) claims that the Universe is self-existing and not created and emerged from nothing via the Big Bang.

Big Bang theory is the entire basis of evolution and was started by George Edward Lemaitre who guessed that the universe was only a few light years in diameter. (12 trillion miles). In 1965 the guess was reduced to 275 million miles. Then in 1972 the absolute scientific fact was again changed and reduced to 71 million miles. In 1974 the guess was yet again changed and reduced to 54,000 miles.

In 1983 the "scientific" guess on the size of the universe was reduced to a trillionth the diameter of a proton. Now “science” guys say it was nothing at all but a “singularity” according to David Bolton Davidhauser which they brainwash children to believe was a tiny as a dot on the page. The problem with the universe starting from nothing at all a singularity. No bigger than a period on this page they say.

The problem with this dot on page is that we are supposed to religiously believe that it expands to a full universe with no impetus when actual science (and mathematics) say that from nothing comes nothing and that everything that begins requires a cause.

Nothing like this is observed anywhere nor can it be reproduced in a controlled environment; This claim essentially says that from nothing comes nothing even though observable science tells us that everything that begins requires a cause. This is a great religious fairy tale but it isn't science.

Biblical Cosmology:

Hebrews 1:10-12 “You, Lord, in the beginning laid the foundation of the earth, and the heavens are the work of Your hands. They will perish, but You remain; and they will all grow old like a garment; like a cloak You will fold them up, and they will be changed. But You are the same, and Your years will not fail.”

2. Bad Metaphysics

Evolution scientists have guesstimated that earthly matter formed by deposition from the newly formed universe which sprung into existence from the Big Bang. Living cells somehow magically, mysteriously formed by a complex chemical reaction.

Science has NOT been able to recreate this guesstimated eruption of life from non-life. Lifeless brainless “matter” would have to organise itself “accidentally” into the absolutely perfect set of systems (not individual parts) to give rise to life and sustain it.

The untenable position that organic life can somehow spring spontaneously from inorganic matter I.e. life can spring from a rock is known as spontaneous abiogenesis and is fully refuted by science. It has never been observed, recreated in a controlled environment, proven or disproven by repetition. This is another great religious fairy tale but definitely not science.

Evolutionist scientists claim that the fossil record shows an abrupt appearance of life forms then a sudden "stasis” (which, ironically, is the very definition of creation - D. Johnson Darwin on Trial)

Atheism & Non-religious