While being an atheist hardly implies that one is a critical thinker, many of us try to wear that hat and fail miserably by falling into logical fallacies and attempting to answer questions from the standpoint of ignorance. Many will try to come up with ridiculous arguments that shine a spotlight on their ignorance and open themselves up for illogical claims to fill in the gaps. The silliest of these arguments that I’ve heard is, “If Jesus died for our sin, why is there still sin?” This question is the equivalent on the ignorance scale to the question about evolution that asks why there are still be apes if we evolved from apes. The Jesus question can be uttered in response to the ape question, but only if one doesn’t plan on breaking their stride. One thing evangelists lack is the one thing that all non-believers should have, which is the ability to feel comfortable saying, “I don’t know.”
It has been stated ad nauseum that atheism is not a belief system, it’s simply a lack of belief. A few famous heathens feel that “atheism” shouldn’t even be a word since it’s a neutral state of being. But, since we’re the minority and the majority think belief is the default, we just have to deal with it for now. What we don’t have to deal with is providing proof for our negative assertion. Theists claim a positive and if they really want it to be accepted, they should probably come up with a good reason; extraordinary claims and all that. It’s strange that so many theists still demand that we explain how “atheism” is true, without ever stopping to consider how painfully stupid it sounds. However, the demands of evangelicals tend to reach absurd levels when it comes to explaining why one might not believe.
It starts with simple questions about watches and watchmakers and escalates quickly into questions about the origin of the universe itself. Someone who has read and understood Lawrence Krauss, can go with it to some extent, but eventually, every single one of us must fall back on “I don’t know.” And that’s perfectly acceptable. Very often, no explanation is preferable to a silly explanation.