1. The denial of a deity

Atheism is the state either of being without theistic beliefs, or of actively disbelieving in the existence of deities. In antiquity, Epicureanism incorporated aspects of atheism, but it disappeared from the philosophy of the Greek and Roman traditions as Christianity gained influence

One thing common among Atheists educated and not is that they maintain the understanding in the absence of a deity or God. The error presented in atheistic denial of a deity is the argument that other religions cannot “prove” the existence of their God through a means of humanistic observance (sight, smell, touch, taste, hear). Atheists cannot disprove the existence of any given religional God under humanistic observance, therefore their original contextural argument against the existence only meets on a level of debate against their argument in itself.

C.S Lewis Says:

My argument against God was that the universe seemed so cruel and unjust. But how had I got this idea of just and unjust? A man does not call a line crooked unless he has some idea of a straight line. … Of course, I could have given up my idea of justice by saying that it was nothing but a private idea of my own. But if I did that, then my argument against God collapsed too–for the argument depended on saying that the world was really unjust, not simply that it did not happen to please my private fancies. Thus in the very act of trying to prove that God did not exist–in other words, that the whole of reality was senseless–I found I was forced to assume that one part of reality–namely my idea of justice–was full of sense. Consequently atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning: just as, if there were no light in the universe and therefore no creatures with eyes, we should never know it was dark. Dark would be without meaning.

2. Reliance on Science

Atheists often refer to scientific theories they claim “proven” throughout History. The “Big Bang Theory” is one often referred to by those that maintain the atheistic perspective. The “Big Bang Theory” is only a theory, It is a relatively new theory that dates back only to around the 1950’s and took the place of astronomers previous perspective titled the “steady state theory”.

In physical cosmology, the Big Bang is the scientific theory that the universe emerged from a tremendously dense and hot state about 13.7 billion years ago.

The error in atheists using this representation of how the universe came into existence, is the absence of their explanation of how the “from” in the “emerged from” came into existence to begin with.

In physics, heat, symbolized by Q, is defined as energy in transit. Generally, heat is a form of energy transfer associated with the different motions of atoms, molecules and other particles that comprise matter when it is hot and when it is cold.

Another error in this representation is the idea that the universe as we know it came into existence from large amounts of “heat”. If heat is described by scientists as being a “form of energy transfer associated with the different motions of atoms, molecules and other particles that comprise matter” one would simply ask how the “atoms, molecules and other particles that comprise matter” came into existence to begin with. The beginning of creation doesn’t start after the creation of the elements that identify any given creation, does it?

3. The Faith in non-existing Faith

Atheists commonly presume that the belief in God is only dependent on a level of psychosomatics. That those whom believe and have Faith in a deity do so on their own accord, “If you tell yourself you believe in God, You will believe”. This is actually probably true in many cases, however, not in true established cases of Faith. For faith is defined as “Aceptance of ideals, beliefs, etc., which are not necessarily demonstrable through experimentation or reason”. In order for an Atheist to examine the topic of faith as being psychosomatic they would have to possess a level of true faith in themselves in order to truly believe what they are saying is true, and to support their argument with logic they would have to possess actual faith in what they are believing and presenting as being psychosomatic. In conclusion, atheists presume true faith to be completely unobtainable by humans which would only claim they don’t believe what they themselves speak. Or, they would maintain that faith in something that isn’t able to be examined empirically (seen or touched) like God, cannot exist, which that statement also cannot be faithfully believed upon by an Atheist themselves, being that the statement in itself cannot be empirically examined.