How Does Atheism Answer Our Most Important Questions?

ChjqrMhXIAE8YqlOld-school atheists like Friedrich Nietzsche
recognized that atheism utterly failed
to answer the most profound of human questions,
and thus atheism, he believed, led inexorably
to nihilism.

Nowadays, most atheists are very uncomfortable with nihilism and want to distance themselves from their intellectual forefathers. Just because God doesn’t exist doesn’t mean that life can’t be vibrant and meaningful, right?

Well, it seems that not every atheist has abandoned Nietzsche’s insights. Atheist professor Alex Rosenberg provides the following summary of atheism’s answers to life’s most profound questions:

Is there a God? No.

What is the nature of reality? What physics says it is.

What is the purpose of the universe? There is none.

What is the meaning of life? Ditto.

Why am I here? Just dumb luck.

Is there a soul? Are you kidding?

Is there free will? Not a chance!

What is the difference between right/wrong, good/bad? There is no moral difference between them.

He concludes, “So much for the meaning of history, and everything else we care about.”

Rosenberg left out other depressing atheist answers like the following:

Will there be justice for all those who have been wronged? No way.

Is there life after death? Are you joking?

Where did mankind come from? A prebiotic slime.

Wow! What a positive outlook on life! No wonder more people don’t become atheists. It casts such a stunning vision for mankind, doesn’t it?

–Bill Pratt
http://www.toughquestionsanswered.org/2013/12/20/how-does-atheism-answer-our-most-important-questions/

Grand Theft Worldview

Frank-Turek

•  Richard Dawkins calls God “evil,” but tells us evil doesn’t exist. (He’s half right: “Evil” is meaningless without God.)
•  Sam Harris wants to hold people accountable for their actions, but tells us we have no free will. (He’s half right: if the world is strictly natural and material, free will is impossible.)
•  Lawrence Krauss pursues as the causal explanation for what we see in nature, but tells us the cause of the universe was “nothing.” • He thinks his loose definition of “nothing” resolves that obvious tension.” (He’s stuck there: without God as creator, the explaining where the universe came from requires some creative thinking.)
•  Atheists claim to be the true representatives of reason, but have no good explanation for where reason came from, and (trust me, I was there at the “Reason Rally,” and I have a chapter about it in True Reason) resort to ridicule and emotion to make their “reasoned” case. (Are they stuck, too? Is that why they do that?)
•  They claim their reason is about reality, but as atheists Thomas Nagel and Alex Rosenberg have cogently argued, they can’t explain how a strictly material brain can be about anything at all. (That requires something else. God, for example.)

–Frank Turek
Stealing from God:
Why Atheists Need God To Make Their Case