The Incoherence and Irrationality of Atheism

Atheism is a belief whereby one believes in the absence of a god, and rejects the possibility of there being one entirely. Modern scientists and philosophers present this as a rational and scientific worldview. However, upon deeper examination, it becomes evident that atheism is fundamentally incoherent and self-defeating. It cannot provide a sufficient basis for the existence of the universe, the foundation of reason, objective morality, or meaning. In attempting to deny God, atheism undermines its own intellectual foundations, making it not only irrational but also self-contradictory.

This irrationality was famously demonstrated by the great sheikh-ul-Islam, Imam Abu Hanifa in a debate with an atheist. The story goes that an atheist approached Abu Hanifa, demanding proof of God’s existence. Instead of immediately engaging in complex arguments, Abu Hanifa gave an analogy.

He asked, “What would you say if you heard of a fully-loaded ship, sailing across the sea without a captain, steering itself through storms and waves, reaching its destination safely?”

The atheist laughed and said, “That’s impossible! A ship cannot move without a sailor; it would crash into rocks and sink.”

Abu Hanifa then replied, “If a simple ship cannot exist or function without a captain, how can this vast and complex universe exist without a Creator?”

The atheist was left speechless, realizing the absurdity of denying God. This simple but profound example highlights the fundamental incoherence of atheism—it denies the necessity of an intelligent Creator while accepting order and complexity in the world.

My First Argument Is The Evidence of Ultimate Origins

The most basic question that atheism fails to answer is: Why does anything exist at all? The principle of causality states that everything that begins to exist must have a cause. Since both philosophical reasoning and scientific evidence confirm that the universe had a beginning, it must have had a cause.

Scientific Evidence for a Beginning: The Big Bang Theory and the Second Law of Thermodynamics confirm that the universe is not eternal. If the universe had existed forever, it would have already reached a state of maximum entropy (heat death), where no usable energy remains. The fact that the universe is still active proves that it had a starting point.

Can Something Come from Nothing? Some atheists argue that the universe came from “nothing.” However, true “nothing” means the absence of everything—no space, time, matter, or energy. To say that the universe emerged from nothing is absurd. If nothing truly existed, then nothing could produce anything. The only reasonable explanation is that a necessary, self-existent being brought the universe into existence. This being is God, or Allah

Atheism, by contrast, has no coherent explanation for why there is something rather than nothing. Like the ship in Abu Hanifa’s analogy, the universe cannot steer itself into existence.

Next, I Would Like To Highlight The Failure to Justify Rationality and Knowledge

Atheists claim to rely on reason and logic, yet their worldview undermines the very foundation of rational thought. If human minds are merely the product of blind evolutionary processes, then thoughts are just chemical reactions in the brain—unguided by truth.

Materialism Undermines Rationality: If atheism is true, then human thoughts are determined by physical laws, just like a rock falling to the ground. But if our thoughts are mere physical processes, how can we trust them to lead to truth? Under atheism, reason is an illusion—nothing more than neurons firing due to random genetic mutations.

The Evolutionary Argument Against Naturalism: Philosopher Alvin Plantinga argues that if our cognitive faculties evolved purely for survival rather than truth, then we have no reason to trust our own reasoning. Evolution favors survival, not logical accuracy. If false beliefs aid survival, they would persist. Thus, atheism is self-defeating—it relies on reason while simultaneously denying any rational basis for it.

In contrast, theism provides a foundation for rationality. If humans are created by a rational God, then it makes sense that we are capable of reasoning and discovering truth.

The Collapse of Objective Morality

Another major failure of atheism is its inability to justify objective morality. If God does not exist, then moral values are nothing more than human opinions or societal constructs. This leads to dangerous consequences:

No Real Right and Wrong: In a purely materialistic universe, what one person calls “evil” is just their subjective preference. Murder, theft, and oppression are not objectively wrong; they are only considered wrong based on human conventions.

The Is-Ought Problem: The philosopher David Hume pointed out that atheism faces an “is-ought” problem. Just because something exists in nature (e.g., animals kill each other) does not mean it is morally right. Without an external moral standard, no objective “ought” can be derived.

Atheists Borrow from Theism: Atheists often condemn religious believers for acts of violence, oppression, or injustice. However, if morality is subjective, how can they claim that anything is truly wrong? Their moral outrage is borrowed from a theistic framework where good and evil objectively exist.

Theism provides a coherent foundation for morality: moral laws exist because they are grounded in the nature of a perfect moral lawgiver—Allah.

My Next Point is the Meaninglessness of Life Without God

Atheism inevitably leads to nihilism—the belief that life has no ultimate meaning or purpose.

The Illusion of Meaning: Some atheists claim they can create their own meaning in life. However, this is a psychological trick. If everything we do ultimately vanishes with time, then any meaning we create is artificial. A universe without God is indifferent to our existence.

Atheist Philosophers Acknowledge the Problem:

Friedrich Nietzsche declared that without God, traditional morality and purpose collapse.

Jean-Paul Sartre admitted that life has no objective meaning, and we must simply impose our own purpose.

But this is intellectual dishonesty—if there is no real meaning, then pretending otherwise is mere self-delusion. Theism, by contrast, provides genuine meaning: life is valuable because it was intentionally created by God for a purpose.

And finally, number 5: The Hypocrisy of Demanding Evidence While Holding Unjustified Assumptions

Atheists frequently demand scientific evidence for God’s existence while simultaneously holding to unjustified assumptions that their own worldview cannot explain.

The Laws of Logic: Logic is immaterial, universal, and necessary. But if atheism is true, why should these laws exist in a purely materialistic universe? Theism provides an answer—logical consistency is grounded in God’s rational nature.

Fine-Tuning of the Universe: The precise physical constants that allow life to exist are astronomically improbable. Atheists dismiss this as coincidence, yet their own science confirms that even slight variations in these constants would make life impossible. The best explanation is intelligent design, not random chance.

Conclusion

Atheism is intellectually bankrupt. It fails to provide a foundation for existence, rationality, morality, or meaning. Like the ship in Abu Hanifa’s analogy, the universe cannot guide itself into existence without an intelligent Creator. The atheist worldview is ultimately incoherent, borrowing from theistic principles while denying the very foundation that makes them possible.