The Strangely Simple World of Internet Atheism

There is a strangely simple world of Internet Atheism.

Let me clarify what I’m referring to. The brand of “Internet Atheism” I’m thinking of when I say that does not include all atheists, nor does it refer all atheists on the Internet, but it is an atheistic world that could only exist because of the Internet. It couldn’t thrive in any numbers if not for the unique features of its environment: blogs, social media, and Reddit, mostly. I’m not referring to all atheist blogs and social media, though I am certainly thinking of some of the big ones.

So then what am I talking about?

This strange world I’m talking about is the realm where science is smart and religion is stupid, science is good and religion is bad, and it’s exactly that simple and easy.

I’ve written about it, with a definite example or two, in this month’s Worldview and You column at BreakPoint.

Tom Gilson

Vice President for Strategic Services, Ratio Christi Lead Blogger at Thinking Christian Editor, True Reason BreakPoint Columnist

You may also like...

3 Responses

  1. Keith says:

    Tom, do you/Christians think of other religions as “good”? Would you prefer a random person be, say, Muslim or Hindu than an atheist, and if so, why?

    Since you reject the truth claims of Islam and Hinduism, reasons you have to encourage and support those religions should be applicable to me as well.

    I guess I’m trying to tease apart where and why you’re saying “Religion is Just Good”, vs. “Christianity is True”.

  2. Tom Gilson says:

    I’m not saying religion is just good. If I did it was an extreme error on the keyboard! That would be as strangely simple as Internet Atheism.

    Other religions have their good and bad points. Their bad points are where they contradict and/or make irrelevant Christianity’s understanding of the nature of God, humans, the human problem, the solution to the human problem, the purpose of creation, time, and history, the nature of Jesus Christ, the truth and purpose of his death and resurrection, the authority of Scripture vs. other modes of spiritual knowledge, the uniqueness of truth, the most godly ways of relating to God, other humans, and creation, and probably many other things I’ve left out.

    At those points of disagreement, esp. the nature of God, Christ, the human problem, and the solution to the human problem, other religions are lifeless and unable to give life as the way of Christ can give.

    Which non-Christian belief do I “prefer”? All of them have their good and bad points as far as their place in this world. Only Christ gives life. Otherwise it’s too complicated and too dependent on local circumstances for me to care to say which.

  3. Considering some of the great founders of science were Christians, and saw no conflict between science and faith, it doesn’t make sense that we have set up a mutually exclusive definition of each. Science should be about discovering reality, wherever it leads. Faith should not be a leap in the dark, but rather, in the direction reason points to. And of course our a priori worldviews and assumptions influence us so much more than we admit.

%d bloggers like this: