Reason’s Greetings – and Suicide

By John Parsons
www.hebrew4christians.com

Go to your local bookstore these days and you might be surprised to see a spate of flashy new books advocating atheism. “The God Delusion” (Dawkins), “God is not great” (Hitchens), “The Atheist Universe” (Mills), etc., etc., are all highly marketed, big-buck productions (and even New York Times bestsellers).

These sorts of books can be destructive to sensitive souls that are uncertain of their faith, especially impressionable young people who are still sifting through their beliefs while in college or public high school. Tragically, I just read an article that links a son’s suicide to Dawkins’ book (see link in Comments, below). What makes this so heartrending is that authors like Dawkins, Hitchens, and others are really just half-rate philosophers — modern day sophists who get a “buzz” out of writing speciously “intellectual” books.  May the memory of Jesse Kilgore, the victim of Dawkins’ propaganda, be vindicated by God’s truth.

We live in a tawdry age of practiced nonsense… an entirely decadent social world bereft of hope and conscience.  And like a cancerous growth it’s just getting worse and worse. Just tonight I read a Wall Street Journal article (“Atheists Reach Out,” see link below) that mentioned that the American Humanist Society is aggressively campaigning its faith by plastering ads on buses in Washington DC (no less) with catchy slogans such as, “Reasons Greetings” and “Why believe in a god? Just be good for goodness’ sake.”  Oy gevalt!

Hold the phone, Jethro…. I thought such romantic ideals about human nature were long put to rest, especially after two World Wars, the horror of the Jewish Holocaust, the systematic barbarity of the former Soviet Union (under the failed messianism of Marxism), the prevalence of worldwide slavery (including the ongoing lack of social justice even after the Civil Rights Movement in the USA), the ruthless thuggery of Communist China, the “ethnic cleansing” and wars of various people groups, and by all the innumerable other treacheries routinely practiced on mankind since the beginning of time…  Are you forgetting that we now live in the post-modern world?  If you regard a theist as being “medieval,” I can’t help but wonder if you’re still not enamored with the puerile utopianism that marked the early rise of science and technology in the Western world (i.e., the “modern world”)…  What’s evident to me is that the wild-eyed optimism of secular humanism is indicative of a “god delusion” of another type.

The secularist, the humanist, the so-called “free thinker” and so on, seems downright offended at expressions like, “God exists,” “one nation under God,” or by other common phrases used by some who genuinely hold hope that this world is merely a corridor to the next.  But why, pray tell, should such “god talk” offend them, especially since — according to their view of the matter — the use of such language is – at most – merely an emotive appeal or a (pathetic) expression of personal hope?  Perhaps these humanists hypocritically “let the cat out of the bag” by prescriptively insisting that language — and especially language about first principles and ultimate reality — has real meaning, reference, and “traction” — though certainly not the sort of meaning which they (emotionally) prefer. If so, then their case is feeble enough, since such “reasoning” is a two-edged sword. If the “free thinker” objects to the use of traditional religious language, it is fair game to likewise object to their use of nontraditional forms of language regarding metaphysics. (This is similar to the Freudian objection that some have made regarding religious sentiment. “You believe in God because you were deprived of your father’s love,” they say. But the tables can easily be turned here: “And you don’t believe in God because you hated your father and resented his authority in your life.” Tu quoque doesn’t settle anything.)

The prevailing crusade of these anti-faith missionaries (at least in the libertine United States) is that “church and state” must be “separated.” However this is a psychologically impossible proposition, based on the myth that human beings can separate “fact and value.” Paradigms about natural law ultimately are grounded in value, but value is not something empirical or observable; it is what is brought to experience in its understanding. Before a scientist ever looks into a microscope, for example, there is a previous committment that he or she believes in the value of the scientific methodology — something inherently beyond the pale of science altogether…. All sorts of faith committments are assumed in the ways of science, but none of them find their grounding within the enterprise itself.  Hey Mr. Atheist — do yourself a favor and go read some Immanuel Kant (or at least some good love poetry)!

It’s tragic that the American Humanist Society is running such proselytizing advertisments in these darkened, postmodern days.  If ever before, our world needs real hope and salvation, not more cynical flummery and jaded commentaries about what used to be regarded as the sheer wonder of the universe.  Parasitically, the humanist/atheist cannot possibly define “goodness” without plundering the dreams and poetry of spiritual and religious reality.  (If the theist has the “problem of evil,” the atheist/humanist has the “problem of goodness”).  My (unsolicited) advice to such humanists is simply to shut up and accept the closed-loop that your system implies. On your own terms you cannot argue for any objective sense of moral structure or transcendent justice, and therefore you must resort to fallacious appeals and ad hominem abusive attacks. This is both intellectual lazy and dishonest. Moreover — and again on your own terms — what could you possibly say to those who impugn your arbitrary imperative (“be good for goodness sake”)? What if another “free thinker” took the Nietzschean view that they would rather be excused from such an obligation? Indeed, what if the idea of “goodness” for some secularist is to torture to death those who do not accept their godless theory and ideology? Didn’t Adolf Hitler (Y’SH) live as such an “ubermensch”? Wasn’t Stalin a “true believer”?

In such discussions it is often helpful to return to the Heideggerian question of “why is there something, rather than nothing,” since this approach lays bare the set of presuppositions at work. But note that any attempt to seriously answer this question launches you into the world of speculative metaphysics (certainly not “hard science”), and therefore the arguments that address the question of rationality must be made within that domain.  Ultimately, however, reason itself is a function of the will and a servant to our passional nature.  Distill the idea of “rationality” and you will find that it refers to a sense of “fitness,” “coherence,” and other aesthetic terms. Why does modus ponens work (if p then q; p, therefore q)? Because of a sense of order, symmetry, “proportion,” fitness, etc.

Atheism is just as much a faith commitment as any form of theism.  Ask a card-carrying “humanist” the Heideggerian question and — with a straight face — he or she will pontificate that “absolutely nothing” caused the Big Bang (or, with a modicum of humility, will appeal to some form of epistemological agnosticism).  If he’s clever, he might then talk about “myth” or “language games” (conveniently forgetting that such theories equally apply to atheism itself). But should someone else claim that everything exists because of a transcendent, spiritual, and personal Cause (i.e., the “Will of God”), then he or she is hypocritically vilified as “medieval” or simply “ridiculous” (the ad hominem seems to be the preferred form of reasoning for today’s “free thinkers”). Tragically, in the craven spirit of accomodationalism, this “faith commitment” is canonized in today’s indoctrination centers (i.e., public schools).

Please, if you want to intelligently discuss why people believe in God, then at least make the effort to examine the reasons passed down through the legacy of our shared human history. Don’t patronize us with sophistical nonsense that you have somehow “unlocked the magic door” and now are in possession of the truth about “God, the universe, and everything.” Your so-called truth — self-stultifying as it is — is merely that nothing of real value, meaning, or worth truly exists. And that, my friends, is nothing less than a living hell.  I’ll pass.

One final note. Full-blown atheism is breathtaking in its arrogance, claiming omniscient knowledge that there is no God. In other words, of the entire cosmic set of all objects/events/states in the universe, not one refers to the word “God” (at least as traditionally understood in the major theistic religions). The word “God,” then, is “empty of reference” or a meaningless “code word” for emotional states, wishes, etc. Now quite apart from the ludicrous idea that anyone can entertain a coherent idea of “everything in the universe,” this declaration is claimed to be an empirical truth, that is, an objective description about the nature of ultimate reality (rather than an irrational dogma). Ironically enough, the only way to be an atheist is to exercise the very attributes of God Himself.

Perhaps some of the confusion surrounding all this lies in the mistaken equation of faith in God with morality. Lori Lipman Brown, who lobbies Congress on behalf of the Secular Coalition for America, says nonbelievers are “just as ethical and moral as anyone else.” This may (or may not) be a true statement, but regardless, the question about the nature of ultimate reality concerns statements of faith, not reports about the deportment of those who make such professions one way or another…

– John Parsons

===============

Atheists Reach Out — Just Don’t Call It Proselytizing

Nonbelievers Think the Time Is Right to Better Organize Their Nonreligion and Swell the Membership; ‘Reason’s Greetings’

By STEPHANIE SIMON

Late next month, atheists, humanists, freethinkers, secularists — in short, nonbelievers of every description — will gather in dozens of cities to mark the holiday they call HumanLight.

Whether by singing from a Humanist Hymnal, decorating a winter wreath or lighting candles dedicated to personal heroes, they’ll celebrate what has been an exhilarating ride for the faithless — a surge in recognition that has many convinced they’re on the brink of making a mark on mainstream America.

During the past three years, membership has grown in local and national associations of nonbelievers. Books attacking faith as a delusion shot up best-seller lists. For the first time, the faithless even raised enough funds to hire a congressional lobbyist.

Building on that momentum, nonbelievers have begun a very public campaign to win broad acceptance. On billboards and bus ads, radio commercials and the Internet, atheists are coming forward to declare, quite simply: We’re here. And we’re just like you.

Read Full Article