Flowchart atheism


This image is a little more obtuse than I was hoping for.

In many of the enlightening discussions I have had and witnessed, there are a lot of self professing atheists out there who seem to subscribe to some sort of flow chart methodology for discussing (despatching) religion. One of the common components on many of these flowcharts appears to be a decision point which holds religion and science to be mutually exclusive. To partake in religion, it seems, is to deny science.

Science is a methodological approach created by people in order to understand and verify factual knowledge. There are other branches of knowledge that a scientific approach does not deal with very well such as knowledge of hate, deceit and discontent … yet it can measure the entropic effect that results from such knowledge. Furthermore science does not help us to have knowledge of love, forgiveness and grace. All this unscientific knowledge is what makes us human. I believe that love, forgiveness and grace are the most desirable forms of knowledge and they are fully embodied in the person of Jesus Christ.

Science can tell us if something is alive or dead, but it is ambivalent on the topic as to which option is more preferable. Science can establish a can be done but is silent on whether it ought to be done. Finally science might inform us of facts, yet it can never make a request or any demand of us. We should neither deny nor affirm science. To do so would be strange. Science is not meant to be affirmed, or believed in. It is meant to be applied.

To take science further than that is to almost be saying that science has some sort of sentient attributes. This is precisely what atheists refuse to attribute to God. While science cannot be affirmed or denied, God can, because he makes a claim over you, as he is your creator. He requires a response to the love he has shown to you, the forgiveness he offers you through his immeasurable grace in Jesus Christ.

Leave a comment


  1. People probably ought not to treat science as a pre-emptive argument against religion. Whether or not any given religious claim will hold up to the methodology is anotehr question, but if one rejects a belief on that basis, it doesn’t necessarily entail personification of science.

    • Not all religious claims are open to scientific inquiry. This is because not all knowledge is scientific. Some knowledge can be acquired, but some knowledge is a gift.

  2. …so you say, but people who fail to adopt your view on the subject are NOT endowing science with sentience thereby, which is the claim to which I objected.

    • There is a slight tendency among many to say things like – “science tells us” – “science knows” – when it would be more correct to use the “scientists tell us” – “scientists know” – it is very subtle, but it is personification none the less and when the scientifically less literate hear “science tells us xyz” then there is a tendency to take this as absolute truth and not apply as much critical thought to the matter. When they here “scientists tell us xyz” then they are more likely to be critical and tend to pay less attention to this, because you see scientist are people and they make mistakes, they are biased, they are funded by petrochemical companies etc etc. But science …. it knows things, it tells us things, it explains things to us, it helps us to know what is good and what is not, it gave us the iPhone, it is going to cure cancer one day …

  3. Okay, I like your last point and it helps me understand the original post. It’s much better than I originally thought.

  4. You make a good point about the scope of science, but I would like to add that for some atheists, not believing in the judeo-christian God does not mean not believing in anything; it just means not believing in that. It means saying “I don’t know and I might never know and that’s ok”. Like not knowing where the Universe came from or why we love or hate or are even here. Religion answers those questions and science does not (yet), so being an atheist is also about being all right with Big Questions with No Answers. Answers can be very reassuring, though…


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: