Atheism is by definition illogical for the simple reason you can’t say no god exists unless you possess all knowledge. If you don’t know everything in the cosmos (and outside it), God can exist outside your knowledge. Atheism doesn’t follow logic while holding an illogical (and unprovable) position; its followers accept it on faith, without proof, logic or reason.
The following represents a common statement with faulty logic (though often repeated):
Just a reminder people: There is no god.
The only way to make the statement “there is no God” is if you have all knowledge. Why does it form a logical absurdity? Consider the following diagram:
################## # # # B # # ##### # # # A # # # ##### # # # ##################
“A” represents your knowledge — it’s a subset of all the knowledge in the cosmos noted by “B”. So if you say by your knowledge there is no God, God can easily exist anywhere in “B”. Thus your statement is illogical — no proof is required because the statement itself makes no sense — it’s a logical absurdity. Naturally, when some atheists find out the logical absurdity of their position they’ll go to any lengths to argue against it.
Using your psuedo-logic, nobody can know anything. Including the fact that we can’t know that we can’t know everything.
Obviously that’s wrong. We can know anything in the subset “A”, and the more we explore, the larger that subset becomes (although it will never be as large as “B”). Others try the old switch-the-argument fallacy (red herring); in other words, ignore the problem by trying to change the discussion to another topic.
Atheism is illogical but theism isnt? #fail
Those statements arise from a lack of understanding in logic. Just look at the diagram above and it’s obvious the statement “There is no God” assumes you have all knowledge in the cosmos, while “There is a God” does not make that assumption.
Nobody’s saying you can’t believe there is no God, only if you choose to make that statement you’re taking it on faith, not reason, critical thinking, or logic; don’t confuse the logic of the statement with proof. None of this proves God does or does not exist, only the atheist claim “There is no God” equates to gibberish — you’re free to believe nonsense if you wish, but don’t call it reasoned and logical.
Some atheists argue definitions — some have even rejected the dictionary, substituting their own non-dictionary definition. That’s their right of course, but doesn’t it make communication difficult if you don’t agree with the rest of the world the meaning of words? But no matter — whatever you call it (atheism, dirt, or apple pie), stating “there is no God” as a (hoped for) fact displays a lack of critical thinking skills. You can believe nonsense if you wish, but it’s rather bizarre to call it logical and reasoned.
Other atheists state it’s not an absolute statement (“there is no God”), only that they’re 99.999% confident no God exists — they’ll leave the 0.001% chance. But how much knowledge do they posses verses exists in the cosmos? If they’re 99% sure, but only posses 0.00001% (generously) of all possible knowledge, that doesn’t give their statement much credibility, does it? Their 99% certainty becomes only 0.0001% (or much less) when compared to total knowledge; saying they’re 0.0001% sure no God exists just doesn’t have the same ring to it though, does it?
In other words, they take their atheist dogma on faith — not logic, reason, and critical thinking. So much for having an open mind.
Yet some might say you can’t say god does exist for the same reason. But that’s not true; you can say a god exists and be logical because that statement does not require the person making it to hold all knowledge for it to be logically sound. But that leads to the following question.
Stating does exist requires evidence. If I tell you that snoring is caused by a gnome in your nose, I have to support my claim
That statement is logical, but lacks proof.