One of the fundamental social changes in the modern world is the decline of religiosity and believing in God. Numerous factors contribute to this retreat of the sea of ​​faith. An important factor in this event is the family; which has usually attracted little attention. Statistical and sociological evidences prove the idea that the atheism is tied to this important factor. This article examines this question in a descriptive-analytical manner that if the family is so important and its decline leads to the decline of believing in God, why is that? By examining different probabilities and speculations through statistical and sociological data, it has reached this result that nonmarriage, life without children, freedom from family bondage, theoretical or practical atheism of parents, absence of father at home and contradiction of religious treatment of parents have a great role in turning away all members of the family, especially children from God and religion.

Among the religions and philosophical schools of India - most of which are pragmatists - the Sankhya school has a special philosophical position in terms of its theoretical discussions and complex system of categories. The two categories of "Purusha" (soul) and "Prakriti" (matter), the basic principles of metaphysics, seem to be Sankhya's duality. For this reason, some sages and commentators of this system of thought have discussed the issue of God's existence. Most of the advanced commentators, based on the belief in multiple eternal souls and also the special concept of causality among the Sankhya philosophers, are of the opinion that God has no place in the Sankhya school, as it is proposed in monotheistic religions; But the later commentators of this system of thought, who have more followers, believe that the existence of God as a perfect spirit overseeing the creative function of Prakriti is necessary; But they have not always explained their idea correctly according to the metaphysics of the Sankhya school. Using the descriptive-analytical method, this study investigates the "problem of belief in God" in this intellectual system; To what extent is the belief in the existence of a single God compatible with other main structures of Sankhya's metaphysics? Examining the presuppositions and reasons of the parties to the conflict, it seems that Purusha in Sankhya's intellectual system is the same as God; But the incredulous commentators have confused Purusha with the term "énaniat" (the second imperfection of Prakrit).

Understanding the New atheism and its challenges with religious believers in these years are the issues that involved Christian theologians in response. New atheism is a new version of atheism that hostile has attacked against any kind of religious belief especially Christianity. In the years leading up to the first decade of the twenty-first century, religious apologetic has increased in the face of these new attacks. Some of these arguments are mentioned in this article by Christian theologians in two general categories, Arguments based on scientific propositions and philosophical- theological arguments in defense of religion and provide a brief evaluation of them.

از مهم ترین موضوعات الاهیات و بلکه فلسفه، سخن در باب وجود، اوصاف و عمل کرد خداوند یا امر متعال است. یکی از مباحث مهم مرتبط با این موضوع، که سابقه اش به قدمت تاریخ انسان است، خداناباوری است. در بحث خداناباوری، مهم ترین موضوع این است که، با توجه به دلایل گوناگون و پیامدهای ناگوار بی خدایی، آیا امکان حذف خداوند از عالم وجود دارد یا خیر؟ این نوشتار با بررسی ناسازگاری های درونی و پیامدهای گسترده و غیرقابل انکار حذف خداوند از عالم و نیز شواهد بیرونی، با روش تحلیل عقلی به بررسی چرایی ناممکن بودن الحاد پرداخته است و دیدگاه مقابل، یعنی امکان الحاد آسان و بی دغدغه را با رویکرد تحلیلی _ انتقادی به چالش کشیده است. دستاوردهای مهم این نوشتار عبارت اند از: الف) با توجه به ناسازگاری ها و پیامدهای گسترده کنار نهادن خداوند از عالم، امکان الحاد حقیقی وجود ندارد. ب) اندکی از ملحدان به لوازم الحاد حقیقی آگاه هستند. ج) بسیاری از بی خدایان به ادعای الحاد خویش پای بند نیستند و از نیمة راه الحاد مسیر خود را تغییر می دهند. د) بی خدایان به زبان و بیانی دیگر، باورها و آموزه های دین داران را تکرار می کنند.در صورت پذیرش، چکیده انگلیسی تقدیم می شود

از موضوعات مهم در الاهیات و فلسفه، سخن در باب خداباوری و نقطة مقابل آن، یعنی الحاد است. خداناباوران با رد جهان بینی یکتاپرستی، ایمان و سرسپردگی به فرد یا چیزی، باور به خدای متشخص و نقش آفرین در هستی و زندگی انسان، باورها و قوانین قطعی و دگم، مناسک و شعائر توحیدی، جاودانگی طلبی و آرمان شهرگرایی ادیان توحیدی و ...، در صدد ارائة دیدگاهی مستقل و به دور از و بلکه در مقابل داشته های خداباوران هستند. در اینجا مسأله مهم این است که، آیا ملحدان و خداناباوران در ادعای استقلال خویش و دوری از خداباوری در جهان نگری، باورها و کارکردها حقیقتاً صادق هستند یا خیر. این نوشتار، با روش توصیفی تحلیلی و با شواهد متعدد و البته تنها توسط بخشی از آنها، این ادعا که الحاد ایده ای کاملاً مستقل و متضاد و در مقابل خداباوری است، را به چالش کشیده، آن را ناراست دانسته است. شواهد و دلایل ما را به این نتیجه می رساند که الحاد ایده ای خام و ناپخته و غیرقابل دفاع و در بهترین حالت، یک کپی بردای ناشیانه و از سر استیصال از خداباوری است و بنابراین، دیدگاهی قابل دفاع و عمل نیست.با سلامدر صورت پذیرش، چکیده انگلیسی تقدیم می شود.

This article deals with the New atheism as one of the most important antireligious currents in the present day. It came to the surface of public opinion during the first decade of this century. Its spokesmen, in the first place by popularizing the natural sciences, and then by leaning on a naturalistic world view, and finally under the pretext of terrorist attacks and the behavior of some religious fundamentalists and religious extremist currents, launched a strong attack against religion and religious beliefs. With the same approach, they are emphasizing on the conflict between science and religion, and see the theory of evolution and its most important component, natural selection, enough to explain everything. In contrast, according to the theologies of Abrahamic religions, we can insist on the compatibility of science and religion. So we can find that these religions not only insist on the importance of the reason and intellectual thinking, but also use the achievements of the reason in natural sciences and scientific theories.

In the new age the conflict between science and religion has turned into one of the most important apprehensions of believers in God. Employing scientific hypotheses, some of the believers in God have challenged religious beliefs and some others, on the basis of the findings and hypotheses of modern science, have tried to weaken the apologias and theodicies which the believers in God have presented to solve the problem of evil (as one of the most principal philosophical reasons for atheism). By examining modern science in terms of structure, denotation, and method, we will show in this article that the modern science cannot be considered as an argument for atheism. Similarly, by examining the problem of evil in two fields of ethical evil and physical evil – without wishing to judge the believers’ success in presenting apologias and theodicies – we will state that science cannot weaken the apologias and theodicies of the believers in God either in the field of ethical or physical evil and indirectly be considered as a supporter of atheism.

In this article, the doubt of God as a historical matter has been criticized in an analytical-descriptive way based on library sources. Kent's doubt about God is based on the theory of three-stage thinking; Based on that, man first thinks about God, then he relies on philosophy and finally on science. On the basis of evidence such as induction, intuition and logical necessity, Auguste Comte comes to the conclusion that this law governs human thought, and now human societies have reached the scientific stage, i.e. the last stage of the development of human thought, and thus God, who was a centeric principle in the divine era, was central, now it has been pushed aside as a historical matter. Since this doubt is based on the law of three stages, we tried to criticize this law from different perspectives. In the process of criticizing the cited evidence, such as induction, intuition and logical necessity were criticized. By criticizing the Law of three Stages, the weakness of God's doubt was revealed as a historical matter.

Questions like: "Is There a God?" and "Does God give meaning to life?" are two of the most vivid philosophical questions and Nietzsche reflected on both of them. Nietzsche denies the objective existence of God on the basis of a version of the divine hiddenness argument. He maintains that if one accepts the theistic conception of God then he won’t be able to explain the silence of God throughout the history. He then thinks about the dying role of believing in God in giving meaning to human life. By using allegorical characters such as the madman with lantern, the old saint, the retired pope and the ugliest human being, Nietzsche tries to show how the death of God will result in spiritual crisis. The doctrine of Übermensch fills the emptiness that emerges after the death of God but Nietzsche’s argument against the existence of God is not successful and cannot establish an atheistic ontology. In addition to that, despite of some examples in different religions, there isn’t any necessary relation between believing in God with the Resentment and the denial of life. Finally, it will be shown that the doctrine of Übermensch is such an unachievable goal that will lead to human's psychological dissatisfaction.

From the Age of Enlightenment to the present day, modern man has sought to analyze religious beliefs in new epistemological ways. Accordingly, the study of belief in God as the most important religious belief has emerged by examining the evidence of theism and has had a special occurrence among Western thinkers. Antony Flew, a contemporary philosopher based on evidence, is one of the thinkers who paid special attention to the analysis of theism and its rejection based on evidence. So much so that he was called the father of neo-atheism. The subject of this article is the study and analysis of his views in the first period of his scientific life, which he emerged as an atheist. In his atheistic works, Antony Flew states some basic points in rejecting theism, the more basic of which are discussed in this article. To this end, Antony Flew's prominent views on atheism, namely the meaninglessness of the language of religion, the incompatibility of the concept of God, and the principle of atheism, are examined, and then the strengths and weaknesses of each are examined. Thus, it will be revealed that although Flew has presented serious and thought-provoking problems in the field of theism, But many of these cases in the past have been suggested in other ways and of course can be criticized and have drawbacks and weaknesses that are considered.