Home

REMOVING STRAW MAN ARGUMENTS

Chapter 3

Atheism proposes that there is no God or that there is insufficient evidence upon which to base a belief in the existence of God. Yet the majority of the arguments asserted against the existence of God that a believer would most likely encounter reveal a different agenda.

Most arguments for atheism attack the reasonableness of religious beliefs, the value of religious practices, and the accuracy of religious writings.

Accordingly, what seems to offend atheists the most is not the existence of God but rather the existence of religion,

especially as it is practiced by the three major monotheistic religions—Judaism, Christianity, and Islam. When atheism attacks religious ideology instead of the real issue of whether there is a God, it is using what is called a straw man argument.

According to Wikipedia, a straw man argument is one that creates the illusion of having completely refuted or defeated an opponent's proposition by covertly replacing it with a different proposition (standing up a straw man) and then refuting or defeating that false argument (knocking down the straw man) instead of the original proposition. It is used particularly in arguments about highly charged emotional issues where staging an entertaining battle and defeating an enemy may be more valued than critical thinking or understanding both sides of the issue.

This aptly describes the most common arguments of atheism. Instead of providing evidence to negate the existence of God,

Many atheists attack the straw man of either religion, religious doctrines, or religious writings.

They conclude that if they can prove such things to be wrong or in error, they will have proven that God does not exist. Here are examples of straw man arguments:

  • If a religious practice harms people or stifles progress, then there is no God.

  • If a statement in a religious book is inconsistent with known facts, then there is no God.

  • If the behavior of historical religious characters is unreasonable, crude, or hateful, then there is no God.

  • If a statement or action in a religious book attributed to God is unloving, then there is no God.

These arguments may, at best, provide a reason for believers to re-examine their religion, its doctrines, or its writings, but in no way do such arguments negate the existence of God.

God is much more than a religion or a doctrine or a religious writing. Even believers, especially Bible readers, must recognize that a God who is "the builder of everything" (Hebrews 3:4), the One in whom "we live and move and have our being" (Acts 17:28), whose thoughts and ways are higher than our thoughts and ways (Isaiah 55:8--9), a God whose mind we cannot comprehend (1 Corinthians 2:16), the self-existent, undefinable "I am" (Exodus 3:14), cannot be fully represented by a religion, a doctrine, or a writing.

This identifies the fundamental problem with atheism.

Atheists either cannot or will not distinguish between God and religion.

They somehow believe God and religion are the same thing! This failure is why they continue to assert these straw man arguments.

To clarify the distinction, consider this: The difference between God and religion is similar to the difference between the stars and astronomy. One is the subject, and the other is a study of the subject. If astronomers get their facts wrong, which they have often done and will continue to do, no one asserts that the stars are unreal or somehow non-existent. It merely reveals that the astronomer needs to re-examine his facts and conclusions. Likewise, if religionists get their facts wrong, that provides no grounds to assert that God is not real. It only provides reasons for further self-examination and research.

Just as the stars existed long before any astronomer, God, as the First Source and Center of all creation, existed long before any religion dared to describe Him.

And He will continue to exist even if all religions, sacred writings, and doctrines fail. As the apostle Paul wrote, "Let God be true, and every human being a liar" (Romans 3:4).

Therefore, if an atheist wants to have a real conversation about the existence of God, straw man arguments aimed at religions and doctrines should be set aside for a different discussion such as "Is religion beneficial?" or "Is religion necessary?" or "Does religion have an important place in modern society?" The answer to each of these questions is in the affirmative, but they are nevertheless valid questions.

Of course, there are other arguments against the existence of God that are not founded on religious ideology. Those arguments are mostly built around scientific and archeological facts but are followed by erroneous conclusions. I address some of those arguments in later chapters.

For now, I hope you can see that to use arguments attacking religions and doctrines in an attempt to negate the existence of God is dishonest, disingenuous, and deceptive.

At the end of the day, even if all the arguments against religion prevail, God will continue to exist, to uphold and sustain all creation, and to give humanity the one thing that only God can give—survival after death and an eternal career in the heavenly country.

Of course, we know that many atheists will continue to use straw man arguments against primitive religious ideas. There is simply too much meat to chew on. But at least mature believers will be able to recognize the difference between an argument against the existence of God and an argument against the value of religion. More important, they will not lose their faith in God because of straw man arguments that do not address the fundamental issue.