By discussing the implications of atheism, we can help our non-believing friends see that the question of God's existence is much more than merely adding another item of our inventory of beliefs, as the question of God's existence lies at the very center of life's meaning.
By God, I mean all-powerful, perfectly good, creator of the world who gives us eternal life. If such a God does not exist, then life is absurd. That is to say, life has no ultimate meaning, value or purpose. Now, the absurdity of life without God may not prove that God exist. My claim is, that if there is no God, then meaning, ethics, values and morals are ultimately just a human illusion. They are made up, in our heads. If atheism is true-by atheism I mean the belief that there is NO God, then life really is meaningless despite our subjective beliefs to the contrary.
You see, if an atheist's stand point is true, and there is indeed no God, then man and all the universe is inevitably doomed to death, for all biological organisms must die. Our lives are but a spark in infinite darkness- facing the threat of "non-being" as the theologian Paul Tilich has called it: "for though I know that I exist now, I also know that someday I will no longer be." This is not logically unsound, unless a god intervenes. Like prisoners condemned to death, we await our unavoidable demise. There is no hope. There is no escape.
Atheism states that mankind is no more significant than a swarm of mosquito's, or swallow of pigs. The same blind cosmic process that coughed up the first microorganisms lead to the coincidence of man. That same blind Cosmo will eventually be our demise. Everything that man has worked for: a doctor's research in alleviating pain, diplomats securing peace in nations, the sacrifices of good people everywhere for the betterment of mankind all comes from nothing, will all result in nothing, because all ends in nothing...atheism states that man IS nothing. If life ends in the grave, then it makes no ultimate difference whether you live as Stalin or as Mother Teresa. Atheism states that since your destiny is unrelated to behavior, then you might as well live as you please. As Dostoyevsky states: "If there is no immortality...then all things are permitted."
Therefore an atheist arguement in return is that it is in mankind's best interest to adopt a moral lifestyle; you scratch my back and I will scratch yours! But clearly that is not always true. We all know of situations in which self interest runs smack into the face of morality. If you are powerful or wealthy, then you can ignore the dictates of the conscience and safely live in self-indulgence. Without God, there is NO objective reason why man should do anything save the pleasure it affords him. But the problem is bigger than this.
If there is no God, there is no standard objective for right and wrong. After all, on the atheistic view "there is no design, no purpose, no evil, no good, nothing but pointless indifference...We are machines for propagating DNA...It is every living object's sole reason for being." (Dawkin's) In a world without God, who's to say what is right and wrong? There can be no objective, only what our cultural and personal relative judgments. What does this mean? That without God, it is impossible to condemn war, oppression, crime and evil. Nor can you praise generosity, self-sacrifice, and love as good. To kill someone or to love someone is morally equivalent. For in a universe without God, good and evil do not exist-there is only the bare, valueless fact of existence, and there is no one to say whether you are right and I am wrong.
About the only solution the atheist can offer is that we face the absurdity of life and live bravely. The fundamental problem with this solution, however, is that it's impossible to live consistently and happily within the framework of such a worldview. If you live consistently, you will not be happy. If you live happily, it is because you are not consistent. First the issue of meaning: it is inconsistent to say life is objectively absurd,and then to create meaning for your life outside of the effort of self-delusion. Let's to the problem of value. The view that there are no values is logically incompatible with affirming the values of love and brotherhood. Man cannot live in a way in which "all things are permitted" as Dostoyevsky states, he must make a leap of faith and affirm values anyway to prevent the chaos of that statement's result.
Everyone can agree that the horror of the Holocaust is undeniable-we can not live with the implications of the denial of ethical absolutes. The Ten commandments guide moral behavior, but many are marvelously oblivious to the contradiction with these ethical subjectives.
Finally let's remember the problem of life's purpose. The only way most people who deny the purpose in life live happily, is by making up some purpose (self-delusion.) Purpose without God is as significant as rearranging the chairs aboard the deck of the Titanic would be. So what are we to do? Pursue self-fulfillment regardless of social coherence?
Biblical Christianity challenges the worldview of modern man. For according to Christianity, God DOES exist, and life does not end at the grave. Therefore we are held accountable to our actions instituting a moral code, ethics, value, meaning, purpose. Thus, biblical Christianity succeeds where atheism breaks down. If God does exist, then life is meaningful, if he does not, everything is futile. Therefore, we cannot afford to be indifferent about this, believing in God should make a crucial difference in our lives.
-This blog is a summary of William Lane Craig's arguements from ON GAURD.
No comments:
Post a Comment