Religions, Cults & Worldviews: Valuable Answers for Valid Questions.

Atheism, Agnosticism, Humanism

If one is atheistic/humanistic in their beliefs, then there is no afterlife,

atheism, after death nothing, humanism, secularism, humanist

just an end. The atheist believes that after death, there is nothing. This is based on the presupposition that men and women are nothing more than animal in composition, possessing neither a soul nor a spirit. All thoughts are as a result of a chemical transfer between synapses in the brain. This Darwinian outlook on life offers absolutely no explanation for the vast difference between the most intelligent animal on the planet and the least intelligent man on the planet. Ultimately, this view of the afterlife appears to quell a nagging uneasiness within the atheist. They no longer have to feel that they will be held accountable for the life they chose to lead. Creating a view on afterlife whereby a human being simply dies with the absence of any activity whatsoever whether good or bad, happy or sad, most likely brings a sort of temporary peace of mind that allows the atheist to live as he or she would desire without any consideration for long-term consequence. We can see evidence of this mindset in the final interview with Jeffrey Dahmer, a notorious serial killer and, prior to his final days in prison, a devout atheist. Unfortunately for the atheist, agnostic, Humanist, Darwinist, etc this view of the afterlife was/is arrived at in a very “unscientific” manner where there is zero data to evaluate and analyze, no way of recreating the event in a controlled laboratory for observation, no eyewitnesses, and no logical rationale, hypothesis, or theory for arriving at the conclusion that there is “Nothing after Death”. Because of the absence of scientific evidence, one can conclude that this belief actually requires more faith than even the most far fetched of religious afterlife scenarios. According to the atheist, they have this life and this life only to accomplish their hearts desire since, for them, no afterlife exists.

See a final analysis of the Atheist, Agnostic, and Humanist view(s) on the afterlife below…

A (without) Theism (God)

.Atheism means simply “without God”. Atheism has been passed down over the last few centuries via teachings and writings mostly from the enlightenment period of the late 18th century. This belief struggled within itself: while its adherents would cling to the belief that there was no God in existence whatsover, they were at a complete loss to explain how humans came into being in the first place. They would struggle with the frustration of wanting to believe in something so bad while there was no evidence to support or even to speculate how we all got here.

Some significant milestones in the relatively recent development of the atheist belief system:

  • I. George Hegel – God needed the world as much as the world needed God, therefore rendering Him as unnecessary and ultimately imaginary. (embraced by Feurbach, Sartre, Frederick ‘god is dead’ Nietzsche)
  • II. Hegel w/ Feurbach influenced Karl Marx, an avowed atheist, responsible for much of the humanism and atheism found in Eastern Europe and Asia today.
  • III. Charles Darwin, the Theology major, writes, The Origin of The Species, a sort of “borrowed” manuscript from his grandfather’s, Zoinomia. This is addressed further down in the reading.
  • IV. Humanist Manifesto created in 1933 and signed by all prominent secular humanists of the day.
  • Atheist/Agnostic Writings

  • Darwin, Marx – Prophets of Atheism

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

    Charles Darwin wrote a 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).

    Darwin’s work gave atheists a long missing response to a question that plagued them, namely, “How did we get here and why are we here if there isn’t a God?”. This writing provided a faith-based answer for them to the first part of the question, or so they thought. It did not, however, provide any answer whatsoever to the latter half of the question, “why”. Darwin’s theory was quickly propped up by the pseudo-scientific community as “fact” even though it has never and can never be scientifically proven. The dating of fossils which are touted as “transitional” forms are nothing more than circular reasoning – The archaeologist dates his fossil from the geologist, who then dates his layers based on the archaeological fossil record, and bad carbon-14 dating.

    Darwin admitted his “theory” had holes, here are 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.”

    “To suppose that the eye, with all its inimitable contrivances for adjusting the focus to different distances, for admitting different amounts of light, and for the correction of spherical and chromatic aberration, could have been formed by natural selection, seems, I freely confess, absurd in the highest possible degree.”

    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 paleontologists 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 fossilferous 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.”

    Humanist Manifesto (1933) – “Humanism is the faith in the supreme value and self-perfectability of human personality.  Based on 15 concepts:
    1. The Universe is self-existing and not created.
    2. Man is a result of a continuous natural process.
    3. Mind is a projection of the body and nothing more.
    4. Man is molded mostly by his culture.
    5. There is no supernatural.
    6. Man has outgrown religion and any idea of God.
    7. Man’s goal is the development of his own personality, which ceases to exist at death
    8. 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
    9. All institutions and/or religions that in some wa impede this “human development” must be changed
    10. Socialism is the ideal form of economics
    11. All mankind deserves to share in the fruits from following the above tenets.
    12. Religious forms and ideas of our fathers are inadequate.
    13. The quest for the good life is still the central task for mankind.
    14. Man is alone responsible for the realization of his dreams.
    15. Intelligence and will, bring the good life (fulfilled dreams) about.
    Also see: “Das Kapital” – Karl Marx
    “Religion is the opiate of the masses”,
    and “Origin of the Species” – Charles Darwin

  • Humanist Manifesto

    (1933) – Based on 15 concepts:

________1. The Universe is self-existing and not created.
________2. Man is a result of a continuous natural process.
________3. Mind is a projection of the body and nothing more.
________4. Man is molded mostly by his culture.
________5. There is no supernatural.
________6. Man has outgrown religion and any idea of God.
________7. Man’s goal is the development of his own personality,
____________which ceases to exist at death
________8. Man will continue to develop to the point where he will
____________look within himself and of the natural world for the
____________solution to all of his problems
________9. All institutions and/or religions that in some way impede
____________this “human development” must be changed
________10. Socialism is the ideal form of economics
________11. All mankind deserves to share in the fruits from following the above tenets.
________12. Religious forms and ideas of our fathers are inadequate.
________13. The quest for the good life is still the central task for mankind.
________14. Man is alone responsible for the realization of his dreams.
________15. Intelligence and will bring the good life (fulfilled dreams) about.

Nothing After Death

Atheists often times will say, “Where extraordinary claims are made, extraordinary evidence is required” which sounds quite logical at first but upon further thought, a theist could actually make an identical argument claiming the atheist’s belief in the ‘non-existence of a god of any kind, any where, on any planet, and in any galaxy’ is itself an “extraordinary” claim that requires “extraordinary evidence”.

In the end both “extraordinary” arguments negate each other and the theist and atheist alike must then move on from a “show me the money” position to a more intelligent discussion whereby they directly discuss their reasons for either belief or disbelief . So an atheist might intelligently defend his position utilizing the following types of arguments:

1. Moral Concepts argument against God – The Christian God being all-powerful and the God of love could not (some argue ‘would’ not – completely different argument) allow evil.
               a. If God was all-powerful, he could destroy evil.
               b. If God were all-good, he would destroy evil
               c. Evil exists, Therefore, God doesn’t
               d. Theist Refutation: 1st premise is good, 2nd one fails to take into consideration                the possibility that the good God may have some use for the evil to bring about a                greater good.
               – Also fails to consider the aspect of time. God might use/allow evil for a time                then ultimately destroy it.
               – Often times there is a confusion between good/evil and personal happiness
               – The events we condemn and the moral law by which we condemn them are both                traceable to the same source.

2. Scientific Methods argument against God – used by atheists and skeptics
               a. FIRST – God is man’s wish: man is inadequate and requires someone/thing                greater than himself to rescue him from his dilemmas.
               b. God arises from this desire and is therefore without objective reality.
               c. Refutation: Whether or not a man ‘wishes’ is no evidence for whether a thing                exists or doesn’t exist!
               – Could we assume that since atheists wish for God to NOT exist, that He                therefore does exist!?
               d. SECOND – God is a result of superstitious belief: Natural laws explain                everything, we no longer need a God to explain things.
               Therefore, God does not exist.
               e. refutation: genetic fallacy – assumes a point proven merely by virtue of tracing                it to its source.
               – Could we assume that since a particular science arose out of magic or alchemy                that it implies that science is invalid today?

3. Logic argument against God
               a. FIRST – God’s all powerfulness is contradictory. If God is all powerful,
               He should be able to do all things but in doing all things
               he may thwart his own omnipotence. Therefore, God does not exist.
               b. Refutation: This comes from a misunderstanding of the omnipotent
               attribute of God. God’s power can do all the things that power CAN do.
               – Power cannot do the intrinsically or logically impossible
               – such things cannot be done at all”
               – How much power is required to make 2+2=6? 4 atom bombs?
               Power has nothing to do with mathmatical equations
               c. SECOND – God’s attributes contradict each other: love and wrath,
               all loving yet all knowing; absolutely good yet absolutely free.
               These contradict each other logically.
               d. Refutation of ‘c’ – assumes that above attributes are mutually exclusive.
               A loving father disciplines his child in loving punishment.
               All knowing shows love of the person to make choices to learn

Agnosticism – ‘a’ without ‘gnosis’ (knowledge)

Agnosticism believes there is insufficient evidence to prove or disprove the existence or nonexistence of God. Criticizes theist for their dogmatism based on assumption.

____I. Two types of agnostic
________a. agnostic I – leaves the possibility open for incoming facts but defers their
____________conclusion until that time. Their statement would be,
____________“we do not know all the facts…”
________b. agnostic II – (like a hard skeptic) is much more dogmatic in that the facts do not
____________exist for them simply because this agnostic says,
____________“we cannot know the facts, not now nor in the future” (Immanuel Kant)

____II. David Hume – skeptic who said “Belief is not to be confused with ultimate truth,
________which is unknowable.”
________a. Hume suspends accepting anything as truth until sufficient ‘facts’ are in

Agnostics might utilize the following arguments to support their particular belief system:

____1. Language argument Against God, from Agnostics, skeptics
________a. two types of statements: purely definitional (all triangles have 3 sides)
____________and empirical (this is a triangle)
________b. One cannot make definitional statements about God without showing He exists
________c. because God is not empirically verifiable, we cannot make empirical
____________statements about Him.
________d. Therefore, talk of God is nonsense.

____Theist Response: This language argument is self-refuting, the statement itself is
________________neither ‘definitional’ nor ‘empirical’ (factual), which, in effect,
________________condemns this line of reasoning as nonsensical.

____2. Knowledge argument against God, from agnostics, skeptics
________a. We can know a thing as it is ‘to us’ due to imperfect senses,
________b.but we cannot know a thing as it ‘truly’ is.

____Theist Response: like the Language argument, the Knowledge argument is self refuting
____________– “we cannot know the real” means that we cannot know this statement itself!

Warren Young, “Man not only can be deceived by his senses but often times he KNOWS he’s
________being deceived and then applies reason to compensate for the possible deception
________and learns”.

William Lane Craig writes in his book, Reasonable Faith, “The trouble with the Language and
________Knowledge arguments is that the agnostic assumes some knowledge about reality
________in order to deny ANY knowledge of reality.

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 “Origin of the Species”. This book was actually based primarily on the work of his grandfather’s Zoinomia, and was not as “original” as some would (and still do) claim. Many quickly embraced the new “Darwinist” theory in haste in order to justify how such complex life came to be. A long-standing and troublesome bit of “evidence” presented by theists as empirical evidence of a Creator. 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:


– From the Latin evolutio and evolvere – (an unfolding)

Some significant points to consider regarding the relatively recent development of the theory of evolution:

____I. 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.”

____II. Fossil record: Scientists say “show abrupt appearance + stasis” (which, ironically,
________is the very definition of creation – Darwin on Trial)

____III. Transitional Forms – There are none. No cogs or dats just dogs and cats
________a. Evolutionists say, “there are transitional forms but they have been ‘eroded”
____________and “rapidity/short bursts don’t leave transitional forms
________b. Museums use ‘artistic license’ to make these forms up to substitute for scientific
____________evidence. i.e. the bone fragment that is sculpted into a gorilla with the eyes
____________of a philosopher.

____IV. Archaeological “Missing Link” Frauds
________a.Ramipithicus – Jaw + several teeth – more was later found to reveal that it more
____________resembles an orangutan than a human
________b. Homo Erectus ‘Java Man’ – supposedly showed ‘expansion of th brain’.
____________Java man is composed of a skull fragment plus a pelvic bone that was found
____________yards away from it without any indication that these belonged to the same
________c. Australopithecine – ‘Lucy’ – said to walk upright due to a hip bone and knee
____________supposedly found with the skull. The hip bone and knee were found a mile
____________away and 2 feet deeper in rock (difference of several years); Even pygmy
____________chimps walk upright all the time.
________d. Piltdown Man – Human skull – with the jaw of an orangutan – teeth were filed
____________and presented as the “missing link” due to tooth shape. Needless to say, this
____________“find” was then embarrassingly deemed a hoax and brushed under the rug by
____________those of the science community with a disposition toward humanism.
________e. Neanderthal Man – Bones were stooped – turned out to have rickets/arthritis
____________and was quickly reclassified to ‘homo sapien’.
________f. Nebraska Man – a single tooth found on a farm in Nebraska and was quickly
____________turned into an entire skull, person, etc. this took place at about the same time
____________as the “monkey scopes” trial was taking place. Interestingly enough, this tooth
____________turned out to be the tooth of a rare pig. “Nebraska man is a case of a pig
____________making a monkey out of an evolutionist”- Norman Geisler

Theism – Belief in Deity (theos)

The theist, many times, utilizes the following arguments to support a belief in a God:

Teleological Argument For The Existence of God

– ‘telos’ design; ‘logos’ rational thought/word

  • A. Infers an intelligent designer of the universe just as we infer an intelligent designer for any product in which we discern evidence of purposeful adaptation of means to some end
  • B. Thomas Aquinas (13th cent) – Stated that all things operate in order toward some end, even though they lack consciousness (c.f. acorn example). Nothing that lacks consciousness tends toward a goal unless it is under the direction of someone with consciousness and direction. (c.f. syllogism of this)
  • C. William Paley (18-19th cent.) – Argued from the position of Intelligent Design If one were to trip over a rock in a field, one could say it has lain there forever. If one were to trip over a watch, no one would say it has “lain there forever” because its parts are framed and assembled for ONE integral purpose: to tell time! We need not ‘see’ the construction process to recognize a designer. Like ancient works of art, we acknowledge a designer. We cannot infer that this watch is merely one in an infinite series of watches because we still have no account for the (original) design itself! In nature, even greater design exists (human eye) which is even greater evidence for a designer.

Cosmological Argument For The Existence of God

– ‘cosmos’ universe; ‘logos’ rational thought/word; first Cause as sufficient reason of the cosmos.

  • A. Al Ghazali – Muslim (11-12th cent.) – Kalam argument

               I. Premise 1 – every being which begins, has a cause for its beginning.
               – Anything that begins to exist, does so at a certain point in time. But since prior                to things existence, all moments ar alike, there must be some cause that                determines that the thing comes to exist at that moment.
               II. Premise 2 – The world is a being with a beginning – It is impossible that there                should be an infinite regress of events in time, for if this were so we could never                have arrived at today and that is absurd.
               III. Conclusion – Therefore, it possesses a cause for its beginning

  • B. Thomas Aquinas (13 cent.)

               I. Unmoved Mover – Anything that has the potential to move cannot actualize its                own potential. Some other thing must cause it to move and something causes this                other thing to move and so on its repeated. However, it cannot regress to infinity.                It must have a first cause of motion.
               II. First Cause – Nothing can be self-caused because then it would have to bestow                existence on itself. Therefore, there must be a first cause which is simply                uncaused. This, everyone calls “God”.
               III. Absolute Necessary Being – In the world there are both possible beings
               (those that come into and pass out of, existence) and necessary beings
               (those that always exist). – presupposing the past eternity of the earth,
               all possibilities would be realized and that all possible beings would come to be
               and pass away, making it possible that the process would arrive at the
               ‘nothing exists’ possibility (since its had an eternity to realize all possibilities)
               then there would be nothing in existence today,
____________(since from nothing comes nothing),
               this is absurd because, things still exist today! Therefore, necessary beings must
               exist in that at least ONE being has to continue to exist throughout all the coming
               into and passing out of existence of the many possible being.

Moral Argument For The Existence of God

The position that there is the existence of a being which is the embodiment of the ultimate good, which is the source of the objective moral values we experience in the world. 8

____• A. Thomas Aquinas – There exists, a gradation of values: some things are more good,
_______true, and noble than others, the varying degrees of which increase to approach a
_______superlative standard.
________I. whatever possesses a property more fully than anything else is the cause
____________of that property.
________II. Hence, something is the cause of superlative standard of good, true,noble
____________things: which we call, God
____• B. William Sorley (19-20th cent.) – God, as the grounds of natural and/or moral
_______orders, best provides for a rational unified view of reality.
________I. Reality is characterized by an objective moral order, which is as real and
____________independent of our recognition as the natural order of things is.
________II. On the same grounds that we assume the reality of the world of objects, we
____________assume the reality of the moral order of objective value.
________III. Only persons have intrinsic value, because meaningful moral behavior
____________requires purpose and will.
________IV. But no person has ever realized all moral behavior. The moral ideal is
____________nowhere fully actualized in the finite world, even though it is presently
____________binding and obligatory for the finite world!
________V. If the moral ideal is to be valid for reality, it must be fully realized in an
____________existent that is both personal and eternal, that is, God.
________VI. The problem of evil for both atheists and theists is that the natural order
____________and moral order seem to be working at cross-purposes: the natural
____________order often fails to realize the good that ought to be realized.
____________• This is a result of confusing moral purpose with personal happiness


Add notes from phone – bad cosmology, teleology, geology etc.

  • We all arrive at conclusions that tend toward our bias whether it is teaching, books, or evening newscasters, all human beings will gravitate toward information that favors our bias. One such bias suggests that the universe is eternal, and asserts that Earth arrived at an exact state of life-sustaining temperature and composition by way of pure chance, and that mankind began as a type of cell which became a type of molecular goo, and then a fish, and then an amphibian, and then an ape, and then a human.
  • This idea would otherwise be disregarded as ridiculous, unfounded babble, if it weren’t for the supposition that perhaps these millions of miraculous mutations and transitions took place over millions and millions and millions of years. With the addition of millions of years, somehow even the most ridiculous notion seems plausible, sometimes even probable! Proponents of the “eternal universe” bias have no capacity to fathom what millions of years would actually look like and therefore concede, erroneously, that practically anything is possible given enough time.
  • The idea that millions and millions of spectacular creatures existing in an environment perfectly suited to sustain life for EXACTLY those creatures, came about by freak mutations over millions and millions of years starting from a single cell is a faith-based belief system: no evidence, no eyewitness reports (past, present, or future), and no logical consistency with nature. Darwin the theology major, without any training, teaching, or experimentation in naturalist studies, actually wrote down/codified much of what his grandfather, Erasmus Darwin, suggested in his writings called Zonomia and also, according to Darwin, Lamarckian evolution by Dr. Douglas Grant, as he heard him teach in Edinburgh, Scotland.
  • Through his grandfathers writings and Dr. Grant’s teachings, Darwin came to the conclusion that man started as a cell. Darwin also wisely stated that ‘his’ theory (not a fact) required transitional forms of species, and if none were found in the next 100 years after his writing, ‘his’ theory should be discarded. Nearly 200 years have passed and no transitional forms have been found nor exist today. As Phillip E. Johnson writes in his book, Darwin on Trial, “We simply have dogs, or cats, but there are no cogs, dats.
  • Now keep in mind, the theory of evolution speaks of species evolving into a completely different species: a fish evolving into an amphibian, evolving into a 4 legged goat-like creature, this goat like creature becoming an ape and an ape becoming a human. If this transitioning process has been continuing for millions of years, it would make sense that we would see these “middle” development forms walking around today (or over the last 4-5000 years), but we do not.
  • Some desperate atheist scientists have have depended heavily on sparse, unidentifiable, bone fragments and artist renderings to create some kind of random, sporadic transitional form in an effort to prop up a bankrupt theory whose plagiaristic founder said should be debunked upon no discovery of transitional forms! No transitional forms exist today because none existed in the past. This is more about clinging to pseudo-science to further justify a position that isn’t so much about discovering the beginning of man as it is about desperately trying to quiet the innate sense within every human being that there must be someone who put this all together, a God!
  • If evolution has ALWAYS been in process, it would STILL be in process today. But what we find is, one species giving birth to its own species and “after its own kind” just as it was always designed to do. Therefore, as Darwin himself recommended we must throw this theory out and begin to look at some other possibilities for the ‘origin of the species’.
  • Evolution is NOT scientific due to bad archaeology, bad biology, bad anthropology, bad cosmology, bad geology, bad chemistry