The secular undercurrents in our culture can do something similar to belief in God. Rather than presenting real arguments for Atheism (of which there are precisely two), they simply introduce a doubt which prevents people from taking the possibility seriously.
I call these "Underminers" .... and today I want to look at two of them.
Wishful Thinking:
The first one goes like this:
"It is enormously comforting to believe that a benevolent deity has a plan for your life. And likewise, people find it much easier to face death thinking Heaven lies beyond. So people simply trick themselves into thinking it is true."The problem with this doubt is it can easily cut both ways. Sure, the Christian faith can be comforting and fulfilling. But you know what? So can Atheism.
Check out this article called, “Five Reasons Why I’m Happier After Leaving My Religion.” In it you’ll find a man explaining how Atheism allowed him to lead a more robust sex life without the fear of Hell, made him kinder, and has helped him more fully appreciate life.
The internet is filled with other such testimonies of people claiming the comforts of Atheism far outweigh those of theism. Thus, the doubt can be reversed:
"Your Atheism is the result of wish fulfillment. You were afraid of the prospect of eternal judgement. Thus you tricked yourself into disbelief so you could lead a happier, more carefree life."Ultimately, it is useless to wonder whose beliefs are a product of wish-projection. Instead the conversation needs to be moved to whether there are good reasons for believing in God. And there are plenty.
Programmed Behavior:
Another way of undermining belief in God is to say:
"Theism is a quirky instinct produced by our neurology. It ended up having an evolutionary advantage due to its social and psychological benefits. But ultimately it is just an illusion we are programmed to experience."[You'll find that argument in articles such as this gem from Newsweek.]
First of all, this is an example of what's called the "Genetic Fallacy". The Genetic Fallacy is when you attack an idea based on its origin without giving any thought to its merits. Even if it was true that theism is an instinct, it doesn't follow that it is wrong. You can show this by looking at other instances where we believe things by instinct:
- The belief that we inhabit a real physical world which we explore by our senses.
- The belief that other humans are real people with minds and first-person perspectives.
- The belief in the reality of the past - that our memories record events which really happened.
- Belief in moral truths and duties.
- Belief in cause and effect relationships in the structure of reality.
All five of these are incorrigible beliefs which are built into the structure of our neurology. Yet they nonetheless point to something true.
The aforementioned Newsweek article asserted the ability to ignore our instinctual beliefs is a sign of intelligence. To the contrary; suppose you met someone who had suppressed those instinctive conclusions and instead believes:
- The world is an absurd illusion which began five seconds ago.
- There are no moral truths.
- Everyone but himself is a zombie.
We wouldn't congratulate that fella for being so darn smart. We'd conclude something has gone desperately wrong in his psychological development and seek out help.
So even if one granted that belief in God is an inborn instinct, that is no reason to conclude Atheism is true. It might mean that Theism is the natural conclusion of a sane person.
Lastly, consider how the presence of an instinct to believe in God is actually very compatible with a Christian worldview. If it is true that God created us and desires a relationship with us, wouldn’t it make sense for God to give us an ingrained intuition of His existence?
The researcher cited by Newsweek probably think they are on the cutting edge. But they are long preceded by Saint Augustine, who said,
"Our hearts were made for you, O God, and they are restless until they rest in you."
No comments:
Post a Comment