Is atheism a form of contradiction?

A contradiction for what?I cannot see the meaning of the question, only to suspect what it might mean.

In fact, I became an atheist because the contradictions in religion began to accumulate and disturbed me massively.This led to growing doubts until one day, after a long time, I lost faith.

Some contradictions can easily be resolved: if God loves all men, why is there hell?That makes no sense at all. If God is the Creator of everything, He is also responsible for everything, including the existence of hell and the devil. Infinite punishments for finite crimes is an act of vicious cruelty beyond which nothing worse can be imagined. So you just assume that there is no hell, or that it is empty – opposition is lifted.

Other contradictions are indissoluble, but this is only noticed after a while.God is supposed to be good, but there is so much cruelty in his creation. This is then explained, for example, by the ‘free will’. After a while, one realizes that the contradiction is not resolved: firstly, because there are natural disasters for which people cannot be responsible – but God very well.Secondly,because the whole history of evolution has been written with blood and suffering – of animals that have no free will but can suffer just as much as we do.3.5 billion years of cruel suffering before there were human beings. Therefore, “free will” is nothing more than a stupid excuse that calms you down until you think through it – which many people don’t.

Even that God is not omnipotent may be acceptable as a solution for a while.But the crucial question then is: Is God powerful enough to create a better world thanthis?

If one answers YES, then God cannot be good, because He has created a world of suffering, but which is obviously not (in full) necessary.He may have created the world with less suffering, but he did not. He is fully responsible for any suffering that is superfluous. God is guilty of any kind of suffering that goes beyond what one expects in paradise: the addition of superfluous suffering is the definition of malice.

If one answers NO, then the hope of a paradise, the core of the “good news”, is obviously a false hope.Then there will continue to be suffering in paradise, but it will last forever, so it is infinite.

Any argument that a certain amount of suffering is necessary means infinite suffering in infinite time after death.Christians never think through this to the end, because God must not be questioned. Here God begins, there is no desire to think further.

Over time, the more you think about it – if you take the liberty of thinking beyond what you have been taught, the more contradictions arise.One gains a certain allergy to these contradictions, all of which can easily be resolved: there is noGod.Schwupps, they’re gone.

Atheism is not at odds with a nature that is neutral to any form of suffering.Atheism is in no contradiction to the facts and observations.

So those who do not like contradictions will have to become an atheist if they dare to use their minds without trusting in hasty answers.

Contradiction can also be interpreted as: I disagree with the assumptions of the theists.In this sense, the answer is: yes, atheism is a contradiction to theism – we do not accept the logical contradictions in religion.We do not rattlead what the theists teach us, we allow ourselves the luxury of our own opinion. Atheists, especially the former believers, have thought more about the whole thing than most theists. Above all, we have thought more deeply, and we have continued to think about the consequences.

The faithful, on the other hand, make permanent ad hoc assumptions about God, but they have usually not thought them through sufficiently.The contradictions are only postponed, not lifted.

Leave a Reply