The Problem Of Atheism

Joe Bell

I recently discovered the Freedom From Religion Foundation web site. The organization refers to its members as “freethinkers” because they are “atheists, agnostics and skeptics of any pedigree.” The FFRF declares the “history of Western civilization shows us that most social and moral progress has been brought about by persons free from religion.”

Reviewing the web site one encounters the predictable confusion regarding the phrase “separation of church and state” and a variety of inaccuracies as individuals struggle to deny the existence of God. The most easily refutable error is that most social and moral progress was initiated by “persons free from religion.” History shows the opposite. The issue of slavery in America demonstrates the point.

As Paul Johnson pointed out in “The History of the American People,” it was the certainty that God created all men equal, as expressed in the Declaration of Independence, that ended slavery.

Johnson wrote “the identification of American moral Christianity … with democracy made slavery come to seem both an offense against God and an offense against the nation. Ultimately the American religious impulse and slavery were incompatible.”

Pro-slavery politicians appealed to the “separation of church and state” as they opposed the abolitionist movement.

The American civil rights movement was energized not by those who were free from religion but by those who were fortified by God. In December 1955, in Montgomery, Alabama, Rosa Parks refused to give her seat on a bus to a white passenger. Black residents, led by the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., boycotted the bus company, resulting in a desegregation victory for King and his supporters. In 1957, King became the leader of the Southern Christian Leadership Conference. The name of the organization expressed its source of strength.

Those who deny God and his authority and his ability to produce social and moral progress should familiarize themselves with King’s “Letter From Birmingham Jail,” in which King quotes the prophet Amos, the apostle Paul and Jesus Christ. Surely moral progress can only be made by following the will of God.

“Human progress never rolls in on the wheels of inevitability,” King wrote, “it comes through the tireless efforts of men willing to be co-workers with God…”

A universal moral law cannot spring from the mind of man because each man has his own idea of what is moral and immoral. Absent a lawgiver superior to mankind each individual is a sovereign entity and would have no, and need no, reference beyond his own craving as to what is good and evil. If the principles by which we live have no support beyond individual desire then anything anyone does becomes permissible.

As G.K. Chesterton remarked, “The danger of loss of faith in God is not that one will then believe in nothing, but rather that one will believe in anything.”

That is not a recipe for freedom – or for “freethinkers” - but for internal disorder and social chaos.

Part of the FFRF web site features writings from Dan Barker, who informs, “I was one of Christ’s disciples for over nineteen years.” Barker wrote he did not lose his faith but “gave it up purposely.”

He wrote about having doubts as a Christian. Having doubts is understandable, but faith is not an absence of doubt. In the Bible Jesus’ disciples had doubts. In Matthew 14:28, Peter saw Jesus walking on a lake and said, “Lord, if it’s you, tell me to come to you on the water.”

Jesus told him to come. Peter did as instructed but when the wind rose he became afraid and began to sink.

Jesus reached out to him and said, “You of little faith, why did you doubt?”

Those who saw Jesus perform miracles had doubts; how can today’s Christians not have questions? Doubt germinates in man’s free will and arrogance. We are free to accept God or not. He will not force himself upon mankind. Men are not truly free unless they are free to choose the wrong things.

Barker wrote it is up to those who believe to make their case and “everyone else is justified in refusing to believe until evidence is produced and substantiated.”

First, everyone would be free to reject God even if evidence were produced and substantiated.

Second, man will never be able to prove the existence of God as if he were conducting a laboratory experiment.

Barker makes a demand that can never be met. Yet, he is free to make his demand.

One of Barker’s writings is a letter from God to a theologian. The letter begins with God seeking his own meaning from a religious scholar: “You have examined philosophy and world religions and you have a degree which makes you qualified to carry on a discussion with someone at my level…”

The notion that a university education equips someone with the intellectual capacity to enlighten the Almighty is absurd. The letter is filled with cerebral gymnastics that would puzzle man but never God. At one point in the letter “God” asks: “How am I supposed to choose what is moral? Since I can’t consult any authority, the thing to do, it appears, is to pick randomly.”

God doesn’t require theological counsel regarding morality. God is morality. God’s commandments are not principles to be weighed against other principles and accepted when convenient. They are the principles by which all others are judged. The fact that there is no higher authority than God does not mean God chose random principles. Morality does not flow from randomness but from an infallible ethical compass.

Barker cites excerpts from the Bible that he says are contradictory. According to Barker, the Bible answers ‘yes’ and ‘no’ to the question: “Should good works be seen?”
Barker writes in Matthew 5:16, the Bible says, “Let your light so shine before men that they may see your good works.”

In Matthew 6:1-4, the Bible warns, “Take heed that ye do not your alms before men, to be seen of them … that thine alms may be in secret.”

The first verse, when taken out of context, may cause one to believe that people are supposed to do good works so they can brag about them. When considered with the previous verse the meaning becomes apparent.

At Matthew 5:14 we see that followers of Jesus are supposed to do good deeds to set an example. The verse says when people light a lamp they do not hide it but put it out so “it gives light to everyone in the house. In the same way let your light shine before men that they may see your good deeds and praise your Father in heaven.”

Matthew 6:1-4 teaches about the proper attitude for charity. The verse says when giving to the poor “do not announce it with trumpets as the hypocrites…”

When sharing with those who have less it is improper to parade your compassion to solicit praise. Jesus condemned pride.

Atheism is arrogant. It proclaims man the ultimate judge of all things with nothing to guide him but his own appetite – which changes from day to day and from individual to individual. Atheism is conjecture without an anchor.

The lesson of Jesus, as reflected upon by E.P. Sanders, who was a Professor of Religion at Duke University, tells the true story.

Sanders wrote, in “The Historical Figure of Jesus,” that despite the things that are unknown about Jesus’ life, “We know who he was, what he did, what he taught and why he died. Perhaps most important, we know how much he inspired his followers, who sometimes themselves did not understand him, but who were so loyal to him that they changed history.”

That cannot be said of atheism.

###

Joseph Bell has hosted a radio talk show and is a former editorial writer/columnist for several Connecticut newspapers. A former liberal Democrat, Bell has not been on the conservative side of the aisle for very long. He voted for Clinton/Gore in 1992. Abandoning the convictions that he had held and defended through adolescence and into adulthood was not easy. Sincere soul-searching and a commitment to distinguish fact from fiction compelled him to accept that liberal ideology was bankrupt.

jbellopedresponse@hotmail.com