In his bold and bigoted quest to ridicule the very idea of "God" and "religion", rendering the whole thing as nothing but a big ancient "delusion", Richard Dawkins delivers what I view to be - in fact - some of the greatest services an atheist has ever done to the cause of truth and the message of tawheed. Even an amateur philosopher like himself should realize that it takes much more to argue against the reliability of innate rationality and natural language, not to mention the mental consistency of all humans ever since the dawn of time (except for atheists in general and Darwinians in particular). Yet, he does not, thinking perhaps that this is all he needs to do to deliver his message to an audience of commoners and laypeople; and this serves me pretty well indeed.In his book "The God Delusion", Dawkins seeks to convince the lay reader that ever since time immemorial, humans have been "fooled" or "deluded" to see "design" where in fact there is not, and to see order and purpose where in fact there is none. He calls his ideological mission an attempt to "raise" people's consciousness to the level where they are finally prepared to embrace such outrageous claims, both intellectually and spiritually. Thus I only find it convenient and justifiable that a book written to serve - among other pertinent ends - as a response to The God Delusion would come out under the title: Blasting the foundations of Atheism. But how does blowing Dawkins' book serve as a means to blast all atheism? Well, I think that if one was to take some time and carefully examine every quasi argument that Dawkins puts forth in his boldly titled book, they would at least offer the reader fair insight into the "psyche" and "rationale" of an atheist, a militant one no less, who claims to have come to a near certainty that God is only a delusion! So if written with care, such an insight would suffice, in my view, to effectively destroy the foundations of all atheism. After all, atheism should be viewed as a psychological condition, and the core thesis of atheism is indeed every bit as ridiculous as what the very title of Dawkins' book demonstrates. Thus I chose to exploit The God Delusion as a perfect instrument for my ends, and for that I am very grateful to Richard Dawkins.Originally, I set out to refute every false or inconsistent claim that Dawkins bothered to advance in his book, and further expand on my arguments against atheistic thought along every quotation that I choose to pick. Naturally, I ended up with a volume little over a thousand pages large. Thus I was advised to split it in two volumes, the first of which would be printed separately, and would suffice to blow at least the two core chapters of Dawkins' book out of the water: chapters three and four.It is my pleasure to present the first of the two volumes of the book Blasting the Foundations of Atheism: its Pseudoscience and Pseudo-reason; a book which is not only addressed to sincere truth seekers worldwide but also to those who are on the verge of atheism

If you don't understand the reason for unbelief, you don't understand the reason for belief. This book is NOT a how-to guide for winning debates with non-believers, or trying to convince atheists there is a God. I spent a decade as an apologist arguing and debating with thousands of unbelievers. I've witnessed hundreds of formal debates between Christians vs atheists, and the one thing that remained unchanged at the end of the day is atheists were still atheists. Nothing changed. Why? There's a reason atheists aren't convinced. It's not because of a lack of evidence for God as they claim. Trying to convince atheists with evidence only presents them with more of what they reject. When a Christian tries to prove God, or rationalize one out of atheism, they do not understand the underlying reason why atheists don't believe. Are atheists asking questions and confronting Christians because they are seeking God? No! Atheists are seeking justification for unbelief. Christians unknowingly give them justification for unbelief by entering The Courtroom of Atheism and answering atheists on their terms. Trying to prove God to one that doesn't believe in God will ultimately give the non-believer justification for unbelief. In this book you'll discover why Christians should never try to prove God to an unbeliever. Doing so demonstrates the Christian disagrees with scripture. You'll also learn the hidden agenda behind the purpose for interrogating Christians. Most importantly, Christians will learn why debating non-believers, and trying to reason with atheists will not bring them to Christ. Far too often people of faith attempt to argue with atheists in hopes to bring them out of atheism only to end up doubting their faith. Why does this happen? If you are curious, this book is for you.

In recent years a number of bestselling books have forcefully argued that belief in God can no longer be defended on rational or empirical grounds, and that the scientific worldview has rendered obsolete the traditional beliefs held by Christianity, Judaism, and Islam. The authors of these books—Richard Dawkins, Daniel Dennett, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens, and Victor J. Stenger—have come to be known as the "New Atheists." Predictably, their works have been controversial and attracted a good deal of critical reaction. In this new book, Victor J. Stenger, whose God: The Failed Hypothesis was on the New York Times bestseller list in 2007, reviews and expands upon the principles of New Atheism and answers many of its critics. He demonstrates in detail that naturalism—the view that all of reality is reducible to matter and nothing else—is sufficient to explain everything we observe in the universe, from the most distant galaxies to the inner workings of the brain that result in the phenomenon of mind. Stenger disputes the claim of many critics that the question of whether God exists is beyond the ken of science. On the contrary, he argues that absence of evidence for God is, indeed, evidence of absence when the evidence should be there and is not. Turning from scientific to historical evidence, Stenger then points out the many examples of evil perpetrated in the name of religion. He also notes that the Bible, which is still taken to be divine revelation by millions, fails as a basis for morality and is unable to account for the problem of unnecessary suffering throughout the world. Finally, he discusses the teachings of ancient nontheist sages such as Buddha, Lao Tzu, and Confucius, whose guidelines for coping with the problems of life and death did not depend upon a supernatural metaphysics. Stenger argues that this "way of nature" is far superior to the traditional supernatural monotheisms, which history shows can lead to a host of evils. The New Atheism is a well-argued defense of the atheist position and a strong rebuttal of its critics.

The easy way to understand atheism and secular philosophy For people seeking a non-religious philosophy of life, as well as believers with atheist friends, Atheism For Dummies offers an intelligent exploration of the historical and moral case for atheism. Often wildly misunderstood, atheism is a secular approach to life based on the understanding that reality is an arrangement of physical matter, with no consideration of unverifiable spiritual forces. Atheism For Dummies offers a brief history of atheist philosophy and its evolution, explores it as a historical and cultural movement, covers important historical writings on the subject, and discusses the nature of ethics and morality in the absence of religion. A simple, yet intelligent exploration of an often misunderstood philosophy Explores the differences between explicit and implicit atheism A comprehensive, readable, and thoroughly unbiased resource As the number of atheists worldwide continues to grow, this book offers a broad understanding of the subject for those exploring atheism as an approach to living.

The term "new atheism" has been given to the recent barrage of bestselling books written by Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Christopher Hitchens, and others. These books and their authors have had a significant media presence and have only grown in popularity over the years. This book brings together scholars from religious studies, science, sociology of science, philosophy, and theology to engage the new atheism and place it in the context of broader scholarly discourses. This volume will serve to contextualize and critically examine the claims, arguments and goals of the new atheism so that readers can become more informed of some of the debates with which the new atheists inevitably and, at times unknowingly, engage. "This collection will prove to be most valuable to readers who wish to understand the implications and phenomenal success of the new atheism from a multidisciplinary perspective. The editor is to be congratulted for assembling such an impressive list of contributions.---John F. Haught, Senior Fellow, Science & Religion, Woodstock Theological Center, George-town University "The new atheism, a species of secular fundamentalism, has excited a great deal of comment and controversy in recent years. Religion and the New Atheism raises the discourse to a new level."---Randall Balmer, Episcopal Priest and author of The Making of Evangelicalism "Amarasingam's collection of original essays dealing with various aspects of the recent work of new atheists is a most engaging read. The chapters included offer a wide array of perspectives, touching on numerous aspects and angles of New Atheism and its relationship to contemporary religion. While I most definitely did not agree with all of the contributions in the volume, and while I am generally more supportive of the new atheists than I am of their detractors, I found this volume over-all to be a compelling, engrossing, and provocative contribution."---Phil Zuckerman, Associate Professor of Sociology, Pitzer College, Author of Society Without God

Geoffrey Berg, a graduate of Cambridge University, England, believes the case for atheism has never been put in as forceful and logically cogent a way as it merits, least of all by the great philosophers. In this book he sets out to remedy that by strengthening some traditional atheistic arguments and by initiating some new logical arguments for atheism. Geoffrey Berg develops six simple completely logical arguments in clear language that practically everybody can understand in a way that has never been done before to prove that belief in God is not merely unsupported by Logic but is actually contrary to Logic. This is a groundbreaking book because it is probably the first attempt by a single author that devotes an entire book to absolutely disproving the existence of God, all the time matching verbal arguments with strictly logical formulations of the argument. It aims to crystallize the case for atheism in a way that has not been done before. It is likely in retrospect to be seen as a landmark book because some of the novel arguments in this book are likely to be used hereafter by people around the world.

"Does a god exist? This question has undoubtedly been asked, in one form or another, since man has had the ability to communicate. . . Thousands of volumes have been written on the subject of a god, and the vast majority have answered the questions with a resounding 'Yes!' " "You are about to read a minority viewpoint." With this intriguing introduction, George H. Smith sets out to demolish what he considers the most widespread and destructive of all the myths devised by man - the concept of a supreme being. With painstaking scholarship and rigorous arguments, Mr. Smith examines, dissects, and refutes the myriad "proofs" offered by theists - the defenses of sophisticated, professional theologians, as well as the average religious layman. He explores the historical and psychological havoc wrought by religion in general - and concludes that religious belief cannot have any place in the life of modern, rational man. "It is not my purpose to convert people to atheism . . . (but to) demonstrate that the belief in God is irrational to the point of absurdity. If a person wishes to continue believing in a god, that is his prerogative, but he can no longer excuse his belief in the name of reason and moral necessity."