“No Religion”: America’s Fastest-Growing Religion – Part 3
Recap
This week, another Christian, whose opinion I hold with the utmost respect, raised a question regarding my line of logic concerning the emergence of life on Earth. He pointed out that a lot of the Christian argument against the spontaneous, undirected, rise of life mistakenly follows this line of thought:
1: X is a complex process
2. Science has no natural explanation of X
3. Therefore, a transcendent being must account for X
As any atheist is happy to point out, this is textbook “God of the Gaps” logic, and it doesn’t work. For starters, if science does discover a natural cause, does this disprove God? Of course not.
In response, I raised a question about what this looks like if you were to state it from the scientific perspective,
- All observable phenomenon can be explained via a natural, materialistic cause.
- X is an observable phenomenon
- Therefore, X can be explained via a natural, materialistic cause
I pointed out (correctly in my opinion ) that I could reject the first premise as it would require an infinite regress into the past.
Therefore, I can conclude that while “almost all” observable phenomenon has a natural, materialistic cause, there must certainly be some – namely the creation of time and space itself – that required the intervention of God.
What do you guys think? I’d love to hear your thoughts.
Back to the Post
For those of you that missed the first blog post of this series. Click here.
Last week we covered items 2-5. We’re on the home stretch this week as I plan to finish up with items 6-9.
As a reminder, the goal of this post is to show that atheism is not a mere rejection of a worldview but a substitution. If we say there is no God, then we must fill in the gaps left by His absence.
9 Characteristics of Religion[1]
- Notion of a deity or absolute that which is of ultimate concern or import
- Idea of Human Nature
- Ideas of Divine Providence
- Idea of the Meaning to Human History
- Problem of Evil
- Description of the Central Problem with Human Life and Suffering
- Idea of Afterlife
- Idea of Human Community and Ethics
- A Concept of the World
Description of the Central Problem with Human Life and Suffering
One thing I’ll say for him. You can always count on Richard Dawkins to get to the core of the atheist doctrine. According to Dawkins…
“The total amount of suffering per year in the natural world is beyond all decent contemplation. During the minute that it takes me to compose this sentence, thousands of animals are being eaten alive, many others are running for their lives, whimpering with fear, others are slowly being devoured from within by rasping parasites, thousands of all kinds are dying of starvation, thirst, and disease.
It must be so. If there ever is a time of plenty, this very fact will automatically lead to an increase in the population until the natural state of starvation and misery is restored. In a universe of electrons and selfish genes, blind physical forces and genetic replication, some people are going to get hurt, other people are going to get lucky, and you won’t find any rhyme or reason in it, nor any justice. The universe that we observe has precisely the properties we should expect if there is, at bottom, no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pitiless indifference.”[2]
Richard Dawkins – River Out of Eden
On this point, I agree with Professor John Lennox. This is a valid, hard-hitting objection to the Christian notion of an all-good, all-powerful God.
And let’s say we accept Dawkins’ assessment. What then? Has all suffering ceased?
No.
Instead, we are left with our pain and brokenness but with no hope for future reconciliation.
And what does Christ’s crucifixion say about God and His take on human suffering?
A lot, actually.
If Christ was who he said he was – i.e. God reincarnate – then at the very least, we can say that God assumed the burden of human suffering on Himself. He came to earth in mortal flesh to suffer and die that we might all have hope.
The hope that we all might be reconciled to Him and spend eternity in Glory reunited with those that we have been separated from in this life.
Idea of Afterlife
I have a good friend and co-worker that is an atheist. One day while we were walking back from the lunchroom to our office, he asked, “Have you seen that they are doing research to plug our brains into a computer so that even when we die, we live? Doesn’t that sound awesome?”
I was a little taken aback by this question. Honestly, I had never thought about it. As a Christian, if I could live forever, should I?
A day later, I went back to him. I told him that, no, I didn’t think it was a good idea that we try to live forever like that. I didn’t think that is what God intended for us. I also told him that it all sounded a bit like an atheist’s idea of Heaven.
Traditionally, atheists do not have a concept of an afterlife. You live. You die. Once you’re dead, you no longer remember living… Pretty bleak.
But don’t get the wrong idea. That doesn’t mean they’re taking death lying down. On the contrary, they are very interested in creating their own “eternity” or at least delaying death for as long as possible.[3]
This all leads back to a point I made in the first post of this series. If Christians put their faith in God, atheists put theirs in science. If Christians find hope in the crucifixion and resurrection of Christ, Atheists find hope in the belief that science can fill the gap left by their lack of faith.
To me, it seems like a pretty shallow worldview. One that offers very little depth, meaning, and purpose.
Not to mention that I’ve met some of these scientific researchers they are so quick to trust. Let me tell you something… they ain’t God.
Idea of Human Community and Ethics
As any atheist is quick to point out, “You don’t have to believe in God to be moral.” And this is certainly true.
However, if they believe there is no “supreme law-giver” then where do they get this idea of “being moral” in the first place? Without God, morality is nothing more than the subjective opinions of the fickle masses.
But atheists don’t really believe this. They’ll often say that it’s “obvious” what is right by doing a simple value assessment. They never seem to get around to explaining “Why?” it is obvious or “To whom?”.
On the topic of morality, it appears that it is just another incidence of atheists wanting to stand on God’s shoulders without giving Him any of the credit.
As Paul states in his letter to the Romans, “God’s laws are written on our hearts.” We are endowed with an innate sense of right and wrong at birth. It must be cultivated, and we must be taught to obey its directives by our parents. But it is nonetheless there from the beginning.
A Concept of the World
Atheists see the world through the prism of religious indoctrination. They believe that because of this indoctrination, there have been constant wars and conflict as world religions seek power and control of the people. They view the idea of religion as dangerous. And, admittedly, in some cases they are correct. You don’t need to be that old to remember 9/11 and almost 3000 lives lost due to religious zeal.
However, when it comes to atheist’s reading of Christianity’s history, eisegesis is the only process on the menu. They read the history of the world and see Christians as the oppressors at every turn of the page. They pretend that Christians had no positive influence on the sciences or the medical field. Of course, they never mention that the first hospitals and universities were started by the Catholic Church.
Sir Isaac Newton in his famous work, The Mathematical Principles of Natural Philosophy, remarked, “This most beautiful system of the sun, planets, and comets, could only proceed from the counsel and dominion of an intelligent and powerful Being.”[4] The idea that the universe has a created order and that it can be understood by man originates from Christianity’s teachings on God and His nature. To pretend that Christianity played no positive role in the evolution of modern western civilization is to view history through your own desires instead of reality.
Conclusion
The goal of this series was to show that Christianity is a much deeper and well-rationalized worldview than atheism. It is reasonable in its explanation of the emergence of a created order. It offers hope in times of suffering and an anchor to keep us grounded. It is a faith that provides us with purpose and prevents us from waffling on the winds of popular opinion.
There is a reason why western societies have been the most successful over the course of human history. They owe it all to their guiding Christian principles and faith that Divine Providence is active in the lives of men and seeks to continue our improvement so long as we continue to seek His ways.
If you enjoyed this post, check out our other blog posts on the ontological, cosmological, and moral arguments for God. Learn more about how A Millennials Divine Defense came to be by clicking here.
Don’t forget to SUBSCRIBE to our blog and join the campaign to bring Millennials back to the Faith!
[1] Pecorino, P. A. (2001). What is Religion? Retrieved March 4, 2020, from https://www.qcc.cuny.edu/socialsciences/ppecorino/phil_of_religion_text/CHAPTER_1_OVERVIEW/What_is_religion.htm
[2] Dawkins, R. (2015). River out of Eden: a Darwinian view of life. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.
[3] Friend, T. (2019, July 9). Silicon Valley’s Quest to Live Forever. Retrieved March 16, 2020, from https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2017/04/03/silicon-valleys-quest-to-live-forever
[4] Newton, I. (1777). Mathematical principles of natural philosophy. London.
Recent Comments