Counterarguments Regarding Atheism
Religion is a construct that guide a person’s belief in the existence of divine spirits and
God. However, concerns have been raised by several scholars as to whether atheism should be
regarded as a religion or a social movement that only denounces the presence of spiritual world.
As some philosophers once argued, for a movement to qualify as a religion, there has to be
something binding them together, that is, their belief and action must be in line with certain
universal culture which is the spiritual world (Draper 2). Such arguments determine the stake of
atheism as a mere protestant group that lacks a common denominator to attest their belief. On the
contrary, others also claim that within a religion, there are protesting groups but are still treated
as believers in their religion. Therefore, the rise of atheism which is based on the critique and
denial of metaphysical belief in God and other divine spirits raises concerns as to whether god
exists or not.
Atheism is a rejection of religious beliefs. A central dogma common to major religions
such as Christianity, Judaism and Islam is the existence of one supernatural being, God, who
created the universe together with everything found in it. Their doctrines confirm that God
enjoys sovereignty over his creations including human beings. For these believers, they are sinful
but have to intercede for God’s ordinance. Their belief goes undisputed and is not questionable.
On the contrary, atheism casts a wider rejection not to Christianity, Judaism and Islam alone, but
a total a disregard to the existence of any spiritual beings (Nielsen 1). They do not recognize the
presence of God and other traditional gods. In other words, they do not consider any of such.
Their action might raise questions whether their stance is adequate enough to warrant rejection of
God and other divine spirits. Nonetheless, there is need for a tolerable understanding of atheism
to help in characterization of their belief and practice to a central viewpoint.
Saying that atheism is the opposite of theism is very inadequate in the context of
characterizing atheism. Theism refers to a system of beliefs where the reality of God can be
affirmed by seeking to demonstrate his existence. In fact, not all theologians who consider
themselves as defenders of faith whether of Christianity, Judaism or Islam regard themselves as
theists. Other Protestants regarded theists’ God as idol and resisted construing God as the
Supreme Being, the Most Powerful and infinite (Draper 2). If God really exists, it possible that
people would not easily accept him and consider him with eternity that he is the Supreme Being
per se, but rather align themselves for competition. Even though this argument seems to support
the atheism analogy, it is not refuting the existence of religion. It is a confirmatory ideology that
although religion exists and believers have maximum alignment to their faith, others still protest
the wholeness with which their belief is based. However, by considering the protest within
different denominations affirms the inadequacies that both theism and atheism have though not
in an antagonistic manner.
Importantly, not all denials of God are denials of his existence. In most cases, some
believers who know God really exists refute his will by rejecting his authority over them. At
some point, they may just opt out and begin living their own life as though God does not exist. In
such cases, such category of individuals denies God but cannot be considered as atheists either.
They simply do not question the existence of God, contrary to atheism who in totality, disregard
God as a whole anything in the form of religion. Actually such characterization is evidently
narrow. Although atheists disregard God and religion as a whole, there are sections of them who
believe the concept of God is not true and is not false at the same time (Keenan n.p). They are
only concerned about the claims by the religious alignments and other anthropomorphic forms
that consider God in wholeness as the supernatural power. As such, it would mean that were it
not for the claims that atheists refute about God, they would possibly accord his existence. Or
maybe they believe he does exist but not in the majestic powers professed by believers about
him. In any way, people understand what they deny about God but not his existence.
In essence, the existence of God needs to be regarded as a mere hypothesis. So far, there
are no ontological evidences supporting or disapproving that God exists. Thus, it is insensible to
prejudge any claim regarding the existence of God. As a result, an atheist is justifiable to claim
that there is no evidence and so God does not exist. Nonetheless, it is a mere dogma to contend
to such claim built on grounds of lack of evidence. Instead, the atheists themselves should find
ways of defending their stance about religion and the existence of God other than relying on the
absence of evidence. The believers in his existence have concentrated their faith on a
postmortem experience. They focus ahead and believe that upon their death, they will come to
the presence of God. And so, if such claims are true, then the atheists, after the death of their
physical body, will establish the evidence they ever claimed to be missing. At that time, they will
seek solace by claiming, ‘God, you did not give me enough evidence to believe you ever
Draper, Paul. "Atheism and Agnosticism (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)."
Plato.Stanford.Edu, 2017, https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/
Keenan, John. "Where is the World's Most 'Godless' City?." The Guardian, 2016,
Nielsen, Kai. "Atheism | Definition, Philosophy, & Comparison to Agnosticism." Encyclopedia
Britannica, 2012, https://www.britannica.com/topic/atheism