Hard Questions--Is Christianity a less intelligent worldview than atheism?

Is Christianity a less intelligent worldview than atheism? Why or why not?



A1 Problem (according to the atheist)

• B1 Atheism is based on reason and logic.


• B2 Christianity is based on blind faith in imaginary beings.


• B3 Many modern day scholars have questioned the reliability of the Gospels and the real intentions of Jesus and what He wanted to do. Many have stated that Jesus did not intend to establish a new religion and himself as Messiah. These scholars offer suggestions of reforming Judaism to over throwing the Romans. (For a discussion of this from a Roman Catholic view see here).

A2 Answers

• B1 Christianity is a reasonable faith, not blind faith.


• B2 Jesus is a real, historical being.
  
  
  
  • C1 First century Christians (the Bible and early church fathers) and non-Christians write about a historical Jesus. See here and here
  
  
  • C2 The Gospels in particular and the whole of the New Testament was written when witnesses pro and con were still alive and could refute these writings.
  
  
  
  


• B3 The scholars mentioned above accept some sayings and teachings of Jesus and reject others. They accept those sayings and teachings that lend credence to their views. It is best to take it all as real history or simply reject it as fiction.


• B4 J. Warner Wallace offers the view of the chain of evidence from his book (Cold Case Christianity) and regarding the reliability of the New Testament here.

A3 Sources

• B1 Can Reason Lead Us To A Relationship With God


• B2 Why Science Is Not the Only Path to Knowledge


• B3 Historical Jesus

 

Atheism advances

Atheism advances

I had a discussion with an atheist once, and he concluded that the only purpose for life is to pass on our genes and try to make the world a better place.

I told him you have no hope but to be a pile of compost.

He finished by saying goodbye "from one pile of compost to another."

He was a nice guy, not like some who are snarly and condescending.

Al Serrato over at please convince me has an article concerning purpose from the atheist's viewpoint.

He starts the article:

“There are asedno atheists in foxholes.” Or so the saying goes. Today, that probably has more to do with the scarcity of foxholes than it does with the scarcity of atheists. Indeed, the growing ranks of atheists include some who would like the military to allow them to designate “humanist” on their dog tags and official records. Just as a Catholic would wish to be specifically labeled and not bunched with other “Christians,” they argue, so too the “humanist” wants his “positive philosophy” to properly reflect what he believes."

Later he adds:

"Atheism posits that we are accidents of evolution, with no transcendent or lasting purpose. The universe just happens to exist and we just happen to be the unintended byproduct of a string of events which were set in motion randomly untold billions of years ago. We pass our brief moments in the sun, and in the end, we simply return to dust. The quality of the lives we lived, and our desire to continue thinking and growing and… being…count for nothing. There is no ultimate arbiter of right and wrong, neither punishment for evil deeds nor rewards for the good that was done."

Truly life's purpose is pretty bleak by their view.

You can read the whole article here.