Recently, as I viewed an episode on the YouTube channel Rationality Rules, I observed an episode critiquing some of the work done by eminent Christian apologist William Lane Craig. This video was another attack on the Kalaam cosmological argument which, in recent days, seems to have become a whipping post for atheists of all kinds. While the channel tries to pretend that atheism is extremely rational and that science wins because it uses logic and observation, the individual who runs it is not particularly rational at all, nor are his assertions about science. What he is actually doing is smuggling a religious view in while denying that it is a religious view.
Speaking rationally, the laws of logic cannot be proved with science yet science uses these laws to prove everything else. Since the atheistic materialistic view does not provide a mechanism for logic, it must steal the very basis of logic from the theistic worldview. This is also true with morality. If atheism posits that it is wrong to believe in God, then it must have a moral reason for stating that it is wrong. Why should a difference of opinion, whether educated or not, indicate that one side is wrong, and the other side is right? Again, since atheistic materialism cannot provide a basis for morality it must steal a basis of morality from theism. In other words, it is not rational to believe in rationality apart from God.
How does atheism try to justify this metaphysical theft from theism? It does so by using a philosophical or religious ideology called scientism. Scientism can be defined as: “an ideology that promotes science as the only objective means by which society should determine normative and epistemological values. The term scientism is generally used critically, pointing to the cosmetic application of science in unwarranted situations not amenable to application of the scientific method or similar scientific standards (en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientism).” Please note that while this definition was taken from Wikipedia, there are other philosophical sites that would provide a similar definition for scientism. It is not scientifically provable nor rational to believe that science is the only way to know something. In fact, it is not even logical to believe that science is the only way to know something. This is clearly a philosophical and religious prejudice on the part of atheists.
The next time you listen to a cleverly worded argument from an atheist or an atheistic website remember that he/she is borrowing metaphysical goods from theism, without which their system cannot explain or have a basis for its attacks on theism. This is intellectually dishonest and not terribly rational. It is always important to remember that it is not rational or morally good to believe in rationality or moral goodness apart from God. The atheist is on shaky ground as a beggar having to borrow from a worldview that it denies.