Atheism vs. Christianity
Someone recently posted a video of a debate between Atheism and Christianity. I didn’t bother to watch because that kind of debate infers that one or the other is right. What if they’re both wrong?
Take Atheism. It’s actually as much a religion as… say religion is. In one respect, it’s the belief that you can solve all the mysteries of life simply by employing logic (and one’s intelligence). Atheists have built their whole world around the achievement of their vision of nirvana through the elevation of the mind to what approximates a form of godhood. Of course, one has to stop and realize that our physical senses are so flawed as to severely limit our brains’ perception of reality. We can’t even properly discern what’s occurring in our own dimension, let alone in the multitude of other dimensions that science says are out there. For example from a scientific standpoint, it’s totally preposterous to argue the non-existence of an Absolute simply by observing Nature.
Aside: By the way, isn’t it also illogical to try to prove a negative?
If atheists don’t want to believe in a higher power, I’m totally okay with that. The mistake that is typically made, though, is that they reject God based upon Christianity’s narrow definition of the Creator. After all, absence of proof of the Christian god does not equate to proof of absence (or non-existence) of God. What if Christianity is wrong?
Conclusion: Then rejection of the Christian god by atheists does not necessarily mean that they don’t believe in God. They simply have rejected the Christian version of divinity.
Aside: How about the gods of other religions, say Islam or Buddhism?
So then what about Christianity? Christianity’s holy book, of course, is the Bible – the Old Testament and the New Testament. Here’s the problem. The god of the Old Testament is different than the god of the New Testament. The god of the Old Testament actually seems more like a man than a god. He walks and talks (e.g. in the Garden of Eden), wrestles with Jacob in the story of Jacob’s ladder, makes covenants with Abraham as well as others and for good measure he frequently goes around killing people he doesn’t like (how Christ-like); finally, the gods become mortal, or always were mortal as the case may be, and then die (Psalm 82:7).
However, in the New Testament there is a complete reversal of form. God totally changes his stripes. Suddenly, he is invisible (Romans 1:20), he is spirit (John 4:24) and, in fact, no man has ever seen him (John 1:18). Pretty confusing, right?
So exactly which god is atheism rejecting? Well, for sure, they’re going to reject any god that is omnipotent, omnipresent, and omniscient.
Aside: What if God exists but is not omnipotent, omnipresent or omniscient?
Just a guess, but I think that the atheists might respond as Epicurus did, “Then why call him God?” However, if a Creator does exist, what else would you call him, maybe Bubba? Just because God doesn’t fit your idea of God, that doesn’t mean that he doesn’t exist.
The world is the way it is whether we want to accept and acknowledge it or not. Something must have caused the universe to come into existence. Why not call that something God? Certainly, great minds like Plato, Voltaire, Rousseau, Whitman and even Einstein did. If it was good enough for them, shouldn’t it be good enough for the rest of us? Belief in God never required a church or a religion, or even a Bible for that matter. So for me, I’m not at all interested in this debate. It’s just so much arguing over the smell of swamp gas (see quote below).
“If there is no God, then all abstractions are chemical epiphenomena, like swamp gas over fetid water. This means that we have no reason for assigning truth and falsity to the chemical fizz we call reasoning or right and wrong to the irrational reaction we call morality….”
– Douglas Wilson