The Cogitator

First, I don’t really believe there are true atheists. As Paul Tillich well pointed out, everyone has an ultimate concern and the object of their ultimate concern is their god. He called secular humanism as quasi-religion and the U.S. Supreme Court picked up on that and used it in a ruling about religion in the public square.

Second, every atheist I have ever read or met does not reject the God I believe in and worship and serve. The ones I know are rejecting an idol (and, of course, replacing it with one of their own making)–e.g., the God of the gaps, the deus ex machina of bare theism or the all determining reality of Calvinism.

Third, atheists do Christians a service by making us pay attention to what we believe and why. If it were not for atheists, there would not be the amazing renaissance of Christian philosophy that Alvin Plantinga rightly points to in his New York Times interview. We probably wouldn’t have the likes of Plantinga, Keith Ward, Richard Swineburne, et al.

Fourth, atheists do Christians a service IF they force us to purify our theism of elements foreign to Christianity. Is our “God” too often a projection of our ourselves or ideal selves into the heavens? Is our “God” too often a mere object, a prop to support our cultural values? Is our “God” too often a mere explanation for what we cannot yet explain so that he gradually disappears as science fills in those gaps?

Several modern and contemporary theologians have identified atheists as allies of true Christianity in its battle against “religion.” Barth praised Feuerbach for helping Christianity overcome its captivity to culture religion; he found Feuerbach an ally in his attempt to promote a non-religious Christianity that tried to correct the German tendency (and probably human and even American tendency!) to identify God with the cultural ideal. Bonhoeffer, of course, wrote about “religionless Christianity” in Letters and Papers from Prison. Jurgen Moltmann was stimulated by atheist philosopher Ernst Bloch to say that only a Christian can be a good atheist. Now, Peter Rollins (in his most recent book Insurrection) is promoting a form of Christian atheism–one that denies and rejects a bland theism that treats God as an object–as the explanation for things or the support for our own interests.

Fifth, having said all that, I do think that belief in a god, the sole supreme being, the creator and moral governor of the universe, is more rationally satisfying than its denial. I think Mortimer Adler’s wonderful little book How to Think about God is a good example of how that can be demonstrated. Hans Kung’s book Does God Exist? is compelling. Adler uses a form of the cosmological argument to show that without belief in god there is no explanation for the universe. Kung uses a form of the moral argument to show that without belief in god there is no escape from nihilism. These arguments have value when believers in a deity (theists) are up against aggressive atheism (e.g., in some secular schools).

However, I think that far too many Christians especially in the Western world tend to think of God along the lines of what Christian Smith calls “therapeutic, moralistic deism” and/or tend to think of God as the prop, the support for their own happiness and personal fulfillment. Rollins is right that atheism can be a kind of therapy for those idolatries.

Sorry, don’t buy it.

I appreciate the spirit of reconciliation, truly, but there are in fact true atheists.  There is no persuasive argument from logic or evidence that points to the existence of a deity.  Therefore, atheism.

I don’t require any catharsis from another source to salve my lack of a deity, because it is no lack at all.

Ghengis Khan killed more people per year than the Russian Civil War or Mao Zedong.  He killed a larger percent of the world’s population than World War 2…

cognitivedissonance:

Have you seen All-American Muslim? Here’s the description:

All-American Muslim takes a look at life in Dearborn, Michigan - home to the largest mosque in the United States - through the lens of five Muslim American families. Each episode offers an intimate look at the customs and celebrations, misconceptions and conflicts these families face outside and within their own community.

It’s actually quite a good show. As for the families in the show, they play football, are police officers, raising children, planning weddings, etc. - y’know, doing things just like us, OMG! </sarcasm> In other words, the families in these shows do not fit the stereotypes many Americans hold about Muslims. So where’s the problem?

Well, apparently it’s just that: The Florida Family Association was outraged TLC would portray Muslims in a positive light. They launched an email boycott, supported by other groups, and targeted advertisers on the show. At least one (FFA is claiming nearly sixty) succumbed to the pressure from FFA. In an email, Lowe’s Home Improvement Store. In an email to the FFA, Lowe’s said:

“While we continue to advertise on various cable networks, including TLC, there are certain programs that do not meet Lowe’s advertising guidelines, including the show you brought to our attention. Lowe’s will no longer be advertising on that program.

If I (Andrew) can be of further assistance, please do not hesitate to call 1-866-900-4650, or email execustservice@lowes.com. You may also contact us by mailing your correspondence to Lowe’s Companies, Mail Code CON8, 1605 Curtis Bridge Rd., Wilkesboro, North Carolina 28697.”

Well, I suppose I won’t be shopping at Lowe’s because they don’t meet my standards for not supporting bigotry. What do they suggest - we judge Christianity by Anders Behring Breivik, who committed the massacre in Norway? Should we pull shows about families like the Duggars because terrorists have been motivated by Christianity?

Some perspective:

I didn’t hesitate to email Lowe’s. I suggest you do the same. Use the graph above from Osborn Ink - pictures help.

Are you freaking kidding me?  The knee-jerk reaction people have to this show is very frightening to me.  If you actually watch the show, you see that these people are about as integrated as you could imagine.  I still think their religion is problematic and not really defensible from a logical or empirical point of view, and I think their subculture places some unnecessary and unethical shackles on both men and women solely because of their gender.  But these aren’t bad people and most of their views are not very far from the American mainstream.