Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person's Answer to Christian Fundamentalism

Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person's Answer to Christian Fundamentalism | David Mills | From Christian To Skeptic

books:

Atheist Universe: ...

	Atheist Universe: The Thinking Person's Answer to Christian Fundamentalism David Mills Ulysses Press, 2006 - 272 pages average customer review:based on 206 reviews view larger image
	for more information click here

highly recommended

Clear, concise, and persuasive, Atheist Universe details exactly why God is unnecessary to explain the universe and life's diversity, organization, and beauty. The author thoroughly rebuts every argument that claims to "prove" God's existence ? arguments based on logic, common sense, philosophy, ethics, history and science.

Atheist Universe avoids the esoteric language and logic used by philosophers and presents its scientific evidence in simple lay terms, making it a richly entertaining and easy-to-read introduction to atheism. A comprehensive primer, it addresses all the historical and scientific questions, including: Is there proof that God does not exist? What evidence is there of Jesus's resurrection? Can creation science reconcile scripture with the latest scientific discoveries?

Atheist Universe also answers ethical issues such as: What is the meaning of life without God? It's a spellbinding inquiry that ultimately arrives at a controversial and well-documented conclusion.

for more information click here

Exceeded all of my expectations...

I've been questioning relgion for quite some time, but never really labeled myself as an atheist. This book is intended as a specific rebuttal to the creative design 'science' promoted by religiously influenced schools. Not only does it wonderfully refute creative design with solid scientific arguements, it also points out many contradictions within the bible on various topics.

From Christian To Skeptic

My experiences were not at all that dissimilar to the author's.

As I tried to defend Christianity from critics I started studying apologetics. At first I did this to defend my cherished faith, however, the more I studied, the more I became dissatisfied with the answers Christians gave to defend their faith.

Slowly and almost a little bit reluctantly, I started seeing clearly the errors of Theism and starting embracing atheism.

This book is the most sensible, well laid out book I have read on this subject, and I have read quite a bit. Succinct and without all the fluff of some of the other books I have read. You don't have to be a scientist to clearly understand it.

Kudos to the author for his courage and his ability to lay it out for others so clearly.

for more information click here

A Basic Primer For Non-Believers

I found the the first 6 chapters slightly disappointing. Not because they aren't well-written or thoughtful, but because they are pretty basic stuff for non-theists who have a lot of exposure to these arguments.

However, chapters 7-10 are some of the most outstanding arguments and writings I've heard to date on their subjects. I'm not going to go into detail, but chapter 8, "The Myth of Hell" is an astoundingly perceptive and pursuasive discussion on the subject of the Christian belief in Hell and why the concept itself completely obliterates all Christian perceptions of God. Of all the similar works I've read, chapter 8 is among the best. Since it's written from paragraph one by making the assumption that God DOES exist, it makes how he frames his points even better.

With all the works of what some are terming "The New Atheists," I think Mills should be proud to produce a work that I believe is worthy of sitting on anyone's shelf next to Dawkins, Hitchens...etc.
Thoughtful work. Easy Read. Highly recommended, especially to those that are just entering into freethought reading whether you're an atheist, unsure and searching or just plain curious.

for more information click here

Good but dry in places

The author knows his subject. He also knows how to reply to the silly statements and beliefs of creationists and those who believe in fairy tales. But I found his writing in some places a bit dry and tiresome compared to other writers on this subject. Of course, he takes a different route and his book is not meant to compete with the other books. He takes a very educated and scientific view of all things and generally disproves creationism among other things. He takes no prisoners in his view of his opposition --- or those who believe in god and specifically fundamentalists. If you want to know how to answer the beliefs of those folks, you need this book. Although the burden of proof is with them, not the atheist.

Whether your are an atheist or not, this is a very intriguing book. The subject of evolution is gone into in some detail and the discussion quite interesting and eye-opening.

The author did have a time line problem. He said he surfed the Web in the 1980s. In early 1991 Berners-Lee wrote the first web browser. Tim Berners-Lee and Robert Cailliau's official proposal for the World Wide Web is dated November 12th, 1990. This is the first document that actually uses the term.

That makes you wonder how deeply documented the work really is. It's not that the Internet didn't exist in the 1980's. But it didn't exist in the form we know today and there were no Web sites such as he describes in the book.

Fortunately, these mistakes in documentation were not related directly to the topic.

- Susanna K. Hutcheson

for more information click here

Thought the book OK except for what I outlined below.

I ordered David Mill's 'Atheist Universe' with expectations that it would be written with scientific knowledge that I haven't already been exposed to. Knowledge that furthers my already strong conviction that, indeed, religion has proved itself to be one of the strongest 'memes' pervading all societies. I had an interest in seeing how this former born-again individual who had been raised in a Christian home, but now a professing atheist for the past 30 years, would address these different scientific questions and he didn't dissappoint me. There were some well written relevant chapters.

My negatives concerning this book and I'll state them are.

His introduction began with a 'ranting and railing' diatribe against all conservatives as though people who are currently talk show hosts and Fox News are out there doing nothing but crusading to crush anyone desiring to be a free thinker. Although I don't agree with many 'ultra right' conservative issues neither do I adhere to many 'ultra left' ideologies either. I'm able to sort this all out for myself without being subjected to David Mills strong political beliefs which did nothing for the book IMO. I found this to be a turn off and almost put the book down. However, he redeemed himself in the chapters that followed and reafirmed many of my own findings as to why I've become an atheist.

Then I reached Chapter 9 where he seemed to crusade for the right of pornography purveyers on the Internet to remain uncensored (except for those who use children in pornography). I would think everyone would agree with the latter.

But he went on to pretty much assert that it's every man's right to view pornography and even moreso the right of every boy having reached puberty to do so as well. His contention in Chapter 9 was that pornography on the Internet is really nobody's business, expecially those rascally conservatives who have the gall to introduce ways and means to block it from being seen by children. His contention was and I quote him here that there is "no problem and we should not strive to 'child proof' the Internet". He asserted as though it's a scientifically proven idea "that it's fact that children have no libido" and further stated that, "unless spoon-fed these fantasies by an incompetent psychotherapist or social worker, sexual imagery and desire are totally absent within children until puberty begins.

I would like to differ greatly with David Mills expertise in this area. I am a female and I was sexually abused as a child from the age of 5. I can state as fact that my libido was awakened by these experiences and remained awakened through my childhood where I did act out many fantasies. So as far as I am concerned, David Mills,
in Chapter 9, demonstrates that doesn't know what he is talking about and should have left this out of his book completely as it has no relevency whatsoever to the rest of his book.

Furthermore, because he believes that viewing pornography is the inherit right of every boy reaching puberty as well as every man as if it is an innocent 'victimless' activity which doesn't hurt anyone. Atheists should be about the consideration of others because it's the right thing to do and not because some God said so. It is in many ways totally inconsiderate and in some cases harmful.

I contend that many wives are deeply hurt when their husbands sit in front of the Internet mastubating and fantasizing instead of working on their real life relationships and I also wonder how David Mills would feel about his own daughter growing up to be one of these 'porn actresses' being ogled by teen boys and men alike while they masturbate themselves?

Could the contents of Chapter 9 lend themselves to why people might perceive atheists as 'amoral'?

for more information click here