You are currently browsing the monthly archive for March, 2008.
The fool says in his heart, ‘There is no God.’
—Psalm 14
If there were no God, there would be no atheists.
—G.K. Chesterton
Atheism turns out to be too simple. If the whole universe has no meaning, we should never have found out that it has no meaning.
—C.S. Lewis
Atheism is a crutch for those who cannot bear the reality of God.
—Tom Stoppard
The last issue of Modern Reformation (March—April 08) discusses the ‘New Atheism’. This new atheism is represented by such persons as Richard Dawkins and Christopher Hitchens who truculently peddle their religion vehemently assailing any opposing ideas. While the positions of the New Atheists are no different from the Atheism during the Enlightenment and similar hostility toward Christianity and deist religion is found in Marx and Nietzsche, the difference lies in the agenda: proselytisation.
The New Atheists see religion as dangerous and threatening to civilization. With the obvious example of modern day (radical) Islam and its association with terrorism, they search history and find examples of violence in other religions. Now while Christians have and will do terrible things in the name of heaven, just because one (or a group) fails to understand his worldview does not mean the worldview is invalid. Al Gore travelling in a private aeroplane does not necessarily disprove climate change. (Concerning church history, I quote Craig Parton’s article ‘God Does Not Believe in Atheists’, ‘If the history of the church was only a history of “sweetness and light,” it would refute a central and repeated teaching found in the biblical data—i.e., the depravity of man.’ In this the fundamental (new) atheist has all the zeal and ambition as a jihadist, Hindu nationalist, or a Bible thumping Christian fundamentalist.
Beneath the surface of these … arguments [for or against God] are some enormously complex issues; and the side that one takes — after weighing all the evidence and sometimes regardless of where the evidence really points — is still largely determined by the position one originally takes.
—Adam Francisco ‘The New Atheism’
Several arguments are presented in favour or against God. Ultimately, however, empirical evidence cannot prove (or disprove) God. Which introduces us to presuppositions; presuppositions are beliefs which a person tacitly subscribes from which her arguments follow. The atheist presupposes empiricism: only that which may be discovered by the senses is true. (Yet one cannot empirically prove empiricism.) In addition, she presupposes naturalism: natural causes explain all things, there is no place for the supernatural. Therefore when presented with God-in-history Jesus Christ, the atheist immediately rejects him without considering the evidence because it does not fit into her weltanschauung; her presuppositions will not allow it.
Therefore, the proper place to deconstruct empty philosophies is at their roots. Naturalism systematically discounts the accounts of Jesus’s life because it cannot consider supernatural explanations; the material is all there is. Miracles do not exist because they do not exist. Likewise, empiricism cannot be empirically proven but rests on deeper presuppositions. Presuppositions such as: the universe is understandable; our senses do not mislead us; everything that can be known can be discovered by the senses. These presuppositions must be taken on faith as they cannot be proved or disproved. It is an interesting note that we do not relate to our friends on the basis of the third presupposition.
Fundamentally, the desire to dethrone God and enthrone one’s self runs deep in the being of fallen humanity. While atheists oft charge that Christians’ belief in God is because of wish-projection or similar psychobabble whereby they imply that we wish for there to be an orderly universe with a purpose for us in it, we find a god who orders the universe and provides purpose and plan. However quite the opposite may be true; an atheist longs to establish himself as final authority and not submit to another and, behold, he finds no God, no purpose, and no final judgement.
The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately sick; who can understand it? ‘I the LORD search the heart and test the kidneys, to give every man according to his ways, according to the fruit of his deeds.’
—Jeremiah 17
When we engage our atheist friends let us direct our attention at the core of the matter, the presuppositions, and pray, for unless the Holy Spirit removes the cold heart of stone and inserts a living heart of flesh, no one will embrace God and truth.
Now by the title, one may think that I’m contrasting and comparing a thing against itself or that this is distinction without difference. But let me first define my terms:
profanity |prəˈfanətē; prō-|
blasphemous or obscene language : an outburst of profanity.
• a swear word; an oath.
irreligious or irreverent behavior.vulgar |ˈvəlgər|
lacking sophistication or good taste; unrefined : the vulgar trappings of wealth.
• making explicit and offensive reference to sex or bodily functions; coarse and rude : a vulgar joke.
• dated: characteristic of or belonging to the masses.
In essence, profanity is devaluing, or treating irreverently something which is holy. This is forbidden by the third commandment: you shall not take the name of the Lord your God in vain, (literally, ‘lift up the name of the Lord for nothing’ or contemporarily, ‘use the name of the Lord frivolously [or thoughtlessly or flippantly]’). Now this command proscribes the casual use of the name while expressing frustration or surprise. Profanity also includes the thoughtless nigh reflexive damning of things such as the hammer which failed to connect with the nail and quite squarely connected with your thumb. If we believe God has the power to kill and quicken, to save and destroy, then invoking curses on trivial items and situations calling God to damn them reflects a lack of care at best and a desire to manipulate God at worst. (Now this is not to say that there are not situations when curses are appropriate [and is thus not profane]: when Simon attempted simony Peter rebuked him with, ‘May your silver perish with you.’ Likewise Paul states that if anyone preaches another gospel, ‘let him be accursed/anathema.’) Also common is the practice of disparaging one’s fellow man (or woman) especially brothers and sisters in the church. In creation God created man and woman with his own image, and though this was disfigured in the Fall, it was not effaced. To revile a person is too do such to God in effigy. How much more heinous if we profane God by despising our brothers and sisters in whom the image of God is being reformed.
Vulgarity is essentially coarseness. Previously, it was referred to as ‘strong language’. Many of the terms are from Anglo-Saxon roots which express strong feelings when uttered. This, however argues that they should be used sparingly and carefully. To keep the power of vulgar words they should not be used often, but only when the situation requires. (Consider the example of arse/ass; the word is now so common it can no longer be considered vulgar.) However, when the situation requires, express yourself with vulgarity. Luther is quoted as saying, ‘I know that without God’s grace there is nothing good in me, and that I am as much a piece of useless stinking shit as anyone else, if not more,’ which references the Apostle Paul’s ‘Yea doubtless, and I count all things but loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord: for whom I have suffered the loss of all things, and do count them but dung [the word here is σκυβαλα or shit], that I may win Christ.’ [Phil 3.8 KJV]
This past weekend my wife and I along with a few of our friends drove to Apache Junction to attend the Arizona Renaissance Festival. We enjoyed the event, where we got to see jousting, and other somewhat period displays. About as interesting as the acts was the people watching. Never will you hear such bad British and Irish accents as at the fair.
My friends and I paid a small sum to throw four axes. Three of mine struck in the board.
I was aiming for the heart in the centre of the shield.
Today, Mrs Hall ends her first trimester and begins the second trimester. Woo, a third of the way there. I’m sure she is excited to be getting over the nausea. Last week we got to hear the fœtal heart beat and look forward to the sonogram that lets us determine the gender of the baby.
