According to atheists, the concept of a god is an invention of mankind. When you look at the many gods that have existed in this world that have been paid homage, revered and devoted, you would have to agree. There have been gods that are angry and gods that are benevolent. Not only have there been gods, there have been goddesses. Many of the gods of the ancient world have become relics of the past. While in India, there are gods that are still being born as humans and then exalted to Godhood status to be adored and worshipped. These are manmade gods that not only atheists reject, but so does the majority of the world’s population.
The problem with “atheism” is the very word suggests that the idea of God exists. If there were no such thing as an entity that is designated “God” existing, then atheists would not call themselves such. It is one thing to reject manmade gods and call yourself an atheist because you do not believe that manmade gods are truly Divine, but another matter to oppose the existence of the DIVINE ONE, God Almighty.
When we talk about origins of the Universe, we all know that the Universe was not made by man. Man can create many things, but the creations of man are not in the same league as those crafted by the Creator of the Universe. When you consider what man has created, the one missing major factor is life itself. No man has created a living entity. Man has created buildings and other architectural structures, equipment and vehicles, airplanes and ships, electrical goods and power generators, but nothing that has life in itself and has the power to procreate. The closest man will come to being able to copy the idea of procreation is to create robots that build robots; only this is not the act of procreation.
The problem with atheism is that the rejection of God Almighty being the creator of the Universe means another view has to be concocted as to how the Universe came into existence and life of Earth materialized. Instead of creating manmade gods to substitute the divine, atheists like to subscribe to a theory of nothingness bringing forth something. The very concept of nothing producing something is an oxymoron; a contradiction in itself. Nothing brings forth nothing; something brings forth something. There is no such thing as nothing bringing forth something. But this is the only defense an atheist has in rejecting the Infinite One, the Creator of the Universe.
The problem with atheism is its adherents rely on the illogical to dispute the logical. To explain the world as we know it today, atheists like to subscribe to the theory of evolution as a scientific fact that somehow has been proven. Somehow, out of chaos order was created. (Not sure how the theory of evolution proves this in a laboratory.) Then there is the question of evidence of design being created without a designer. Ask any believer who believes the theory of evolution to be a scientific fact to prove this to you and you will be ridiculed for being unscientific. On the other hand, if you suggest there is no evidence that life evolved over millions of years, these atheists declare they have evidence (interpreted to demonstrate this) in the fossil record and you cannot deny their interpretation of the facts.
The problem with atheism is adherents need to resort to trickery to justify their claims. The first law of thermodynamics states you cannot create something out nothing. This is classified as not only a scientific principle, but an undeniable fundamental truth. However, the Theory of Evolution states that order came out of chaos and this is a scientific fact. If you do the research, you find that a scientific law holds precedence over a scientific theory any day.
The problem for atheism is scientists reject the truth because they want to create their own lie, like George Wald, who shared in winning the Nobel Peace Prize for medicine (1997). In Scientific American (August 1954) George Wald wrote:
“When it comes to the origin of life, we have only two possibilities as to how life arose. One is spontaneous generation arising to evolution; the other is a supernatural creative act of God. There is no third possibility...Spontaneous generation was scientifically disproved one hundred years ago by Louis Pasteur, Spellanzani, Reddy and others. That leads us scientifically to only one possible conclusion—that life arose as a supernatural creative act of God... I will not accept that philosophically because I do not want to believe in God. Therefore, I choose to believe in that which I know is scientifically impossible, spontaneous generation arising to evolution.”
The problem with atheism is it offers nothing but a bleak, cold, empty, future, yet people prefer this than to having a future with a hope. The only reason can be, like George Wald, they do not want to admit that whilst humans have been created in the image of God, and maybe are little gods with the ability to discover the wonders of the Universe and create and design new technologies, they are not God.