Discussing Atheism with Patrick Madrid


Last week Patrick Madrid and I discussed the topic of Atheism, and how to respond to it.

You can read more of what I’ve written regarding atheism here.

Our conversation is about an hour long, so grab a beverage and enjoy!

Some things we mentioned in our chat were:

Atheism in Ireland increases 400%

Answering Atheism

Strange Notions

ps I’ve written a small book that responds to 20 atheist objections. It’ll be put out by Catholic Answers Press around April.

Here’s what Peter Kreeft, professor of Philosophy at Boston College, had to say about the book:

A short and simple book deserves a short and simple blurb.  I am happy to supply it for Matt Fradd’s useful little book, 20 Answers to Atheism.  It is practical, to the point, and on target.  Above all, it’s TRUE.

Stay tuned!

Here’s the audio:

Download here 

10 thoughts on “Discussing Atheism with Patrick Madrid

    1. Very true, but this is made difficult for two reasons:
      1) most atheists I have encountered accept evidence of only the material realm
      2) when material evidence is provided, it is dismissed if a materialistic explanation (regardless of its unlikeliness) can be provided

      Adapting one of Matt’s analogies regarding pornography, it is like being invited to box someone, but are allowed to use only your left hand which must be covered in foam and bubble wrap.

      1. I understand the analogy, however as a non-theist I use material evidence for everything else in my life. I won’t change my standard of evidence for this one question.

        I would like to discuss both your non-material and material evidence for god. It is the only way for those of faith and non-faith to get a better understanding each other.

  1. I -hate- that image. Absolutely hate it. I’ve seen it before and it makes me angry every time, it’s practically a flag for the new atheism and their ad hominem style of refuting arguments.

  2. I totally agree with the comment from bluesync.
    The atheists (usually the “I’m athiest so I’m really smart and different”) will usually hit a spot where they refuse to go any further.

    Their questions (more often complaints) are often more theological/philosophical than scientific. Ones like “If there is a God, why are there so many wrongs”.
    But when we begin to engage them on Thomistic Theology (or really anything else), they pull up their wall and refuse to listen.

    Who are the ignorant ones, now?

    1. I would discuss the scientific problems I see with a god, but can you define what you mean by God?

      If God affects the world, then it falls into the realm of science. If God doesn’t affect the world, then science can’t comment on God.

      I think one of the reasons atheists and other non-theists question gods on a theological or philosophical basis is because some people define god in a way that can’t be tested by science so it’s the only way to have a discussion.

      I would engage you in Thomistic Theology I’m sure it would be an interesting discussion!

      1. Blue, you seem to be proposing that only statements that can be tested scientifically can be proven true or false. Is this so?

    2. Theological/philosophical rocks that God can not lift are proof of an ability to think but a lack of ambition in applying logic. An argument for the proposition, “I was born to be the sex that is not evident in my genetic make-up,” is a difficult quandary for the materialists. They walk out over religious skiffs to apply support by just such an Atlassian rock.

      Start with a materialist premise and then address the ensoulment of persons at conception. Once you begin from such a backwards approach you can only play first fiddle for the New Detroit (“Robocop?”) orchestra. Then how could God know that fraternal twins would be two separate persons and when was the soul “twinned?” After a few two many drinks it might make sense.

      From this the strong evidence of DNA is shown to be non-assertive in the fullness of the motherly broth in which materialists stew. Any idea on how to blow out mother Sam’s bucanneer match when stewing in this ‘the rabbit died’ stew? Ooga, ooga, booga, booga …. booga!

      It is true that we are resurrected body and soul — you mean that our DNA and mDNA can be changed by His precious blood? How preposterous.

      1. I am confused by these comments. All I know is that Atheism is illogical, if Atheism were true, they would not be offended by Theists being Theists.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *