Many times, as Christians, we find ourselves on the defensive
against the critiques and questions of atheists. These
questions, then, are meant to be a part of a
conversation. They are not, in and of themselves, arguments or
"proofs" for God. They are commonly asked existential or
experiential questions that both atheists and theists alike can
ponder.
1. If there is no God,
“the big questions” remain unanswered, so how do we answer
the following questions: Why is there something rather than
nothing? Why is there conscious, intelligent life on this
planet, and is there any meaning to this life? If there is
meaning, what kind of meaning and how is it found? Does human
history lead anywhere, or is it all in vain since death is merely
the end? How do you come to understand good and evil, right
and wrong without a transcendent signifier? If these concepts
are merely social constructions, or human opinions, whose opinion
does one trust in determining what is good or bad, right or
wrong? If you are content within atheism, what circumstances
would serve to make you open to other answers?
2. If we reject the
existence of God, we are left with a crisis of meaning, so
why don’t we see more atheists like Jean Paul Sartre, or Friedrich
Nietzsche, or Michel Foucault? These three philosophers, who
also embraced atheism, recognized that in the absence of God, there
was no transcendent meaning beyond one’s own self-interests,
pleasures, or tastes. Without God, there is a crisis of
meaning, and these three thinkers, among others, show us a world of
just stuff, thrown out into space and time, going nowhere, meaning
nothing.
3. When people have
embraced atheism, the historical results can be horrific,
as in the regimes of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot who saw religion as
the problem and worked to eradicate it. In other words, what
set of actions are consistent with particular belief
commitments? It could be argued, that these behaviors – of
the regimes in question - are more consistent with the implications
of atheism. Though, I'm thankful that many of the atheists I
know do not live the implications of these beliefs out for
themselves like others did! It could be argued that the
socio-political ideologies could very well be the outworking of a
particular set of beliefs – beliefs that posited the ideal state as
an atheistic one.
4. If there is no
God, the problems of evil and suffering are in no way
solved, so where is the hope of redemption, or meaning for
those who suffer? Suffering is just as tragic, if not more
so, without God because there is no hope of ultimate justice, or of
the suffering being rendered meaningful or transcendent, redemptive
or redeemable. It might be true that there is no God to blame
now, but neither is there a God to reach out to for strength,
transcendent meaning, or comfort. Why would we seek the
alleviation of suffering without objective morality grounded in a
God of justice?
5. If there is no
God, we lose the very standard by which we critique religions and
religious people, so whose opinion matters most?
Whose voice will be heard? Whose tastes or preferences will
be honored? In the long run, human tastes and opinions have
no more weight than we give them, and who are we to give them
meaning anyway? Who is to say that lying, or cheating or
adultery or child molestation are wrong –really wrong? Where
do those standards come from? Sure, our societies might make
these things “illegal” and impose penalties or consequences for
things that are not socially acceptable, but human cultures have at
various times legally or socially disapproved of everything from
believing in God to believing the world revolves around the sun;
from slavery, to interracial marriage, from polygamy to
monogamy. Human taste, opinion law and culture are hardly
dependable arbiters of Truth.
6. If there is no
God, we don’t make sense, so how do we explain human
longings and desire for the transcendent? How do we even
explain human questions for meaning and purpose, or inner thoughts
like, why do I feel unfulfilled or empty? Why do we hunger
for the spiritual, and how do we explain these longings if nothing
can exist beyond the material world?
I am submitting the above questions for serious discussion,
dialogue and debate. No trolls please.
Source:
http://www.rzim.org/community/engagingconversations/tabid/105/entryid/14/default.aspx
1. If there is
no God, “the big questions” remain unanswered, so how do
we answer the following questions: Why is there something rather
than nothing? Why is there conscious, intelligent life on
this planet, and is there any meaning to this life? If there
is meaning, what kind of meaning and how is it found? Does
human history lead anywhere, or is it all in vain since death is
merely the end? How do you come to understand good and evil,
right and wrong without a transcendent signifier? If these
concepts are merely social constructions, or human opinions, whose
opinion does one trust in determining what is good or bad, right or
wrong? If you are content within atheism, what circumstances
would serve to make you open to other answers?
I honestly don't
care. Moral views are that of the individual's. One man's wine is
another man's poison. What is yours is yours and what is mine is
mine. And why is there something rather than nothing? Cause there
is something, lah! If death is the end then it is the end. If there
is afterlife then there is afterlife. So what?
2. If we reject
the existence of God, we are left with a crisis of
meaning, so why don’t we see more atheists like Jean Paul
Sartre, or Friedrich Nietzsche, or Michel Foucault? These
three philosophers, who also embraced atheism, recognized that in
the absence of God, there was no transcendent meaning beyond one’s
own self-interests, pleasures, or tastes. Without God, there
is a crisis of meaning, and these three thinkers, among others,
show us a world of just stuff, thrown out into space and time,
going nowhere, meaning nothing.
Humans are born
(though with a mind) but are materially naked. We are born naked
and we die naked (figuratively, of course). And again, if there is
nothing, then there is nothing. If there is no transcendent meaning
beyond one's own self-interest, pleasures or tastes, there is no
meaning then. Honestly, life is too short to care about material
needs or philosophical needs.
3. When people
have embraced atheism, the historical results can be
horrific, as in the regimes of Stalin, Mao and Pol Pot who
saw religion as the problem and worked to eradicate it. In
other words, what set of actions are consistent with particular
belief commitments? It could be argued, that these behaviors
– of the regimes in question - are more consistent with the
implications of atheism. Though, I'm thankful that many of
the atheists I know do not live the implications of these beliefs
out for themselves like others did! It could be argued that
the socio-political ideologies could very well be the outworking of
a particular set of beliefs – beliefs that posited the ideal state
as an atheistic one.
There are also people
who embraced religion and used them as their basis of war. No one
is greater than the other. Two wrongs don't make one right. In this
context, it is of little debatable value.
4. If there is
no God, the problems of evil and suffering are in no way
solved, so where is the hope of redemption, or
meaning for those who suffer? Suffering is just as tragic, if
not more so, without God because there is no hope of ultimate
justice, or of the suffering being rendered meaningful or
transcendent, redemptive or redeemable. It might be true that
there is no God to blame now, but neither is there a God to reach
out to for strength, transcendent meaning, or comfort. Why
would we seek the alleviation of suffering without objective
morality grounded in a God of justice?
I base it on Newton's
Third Law of Motion, whereby an action results in a reaction. Call
it karma or whatnot, I don't care. But NTLM, that I believe in. For
the Christians I thus ask, why is there redemption when an action
does not beget a reaction?
5. If there is
no God, we lose the very standard by which we critique religions
and religious people, so whose opinion matters
most? Whose voice will be heard? Whose tastes or
preferences will be honored? In the long run, human tastes
and opinions have no more weight than we give them, and who are we
to give them meaning anyway? Who is to say that lying, or
cheating or adultery or child molestation are wrong –really
wrong? Where do those standards come from? Sure, our
societies might make these things “illegal” and impose penalties or
consequences for things that are not socially acceptable, but human
cultures have at various times legally or socially disapproved of
everything from believing in God to believing the world revolves
around the sun; from slavery, to interracial marriage, from
polygamy to monogamy. Human taste, opinion law and culture
are hardly dependable arbiters of Truth.
Whose opinions matter
most? Everyone has one opinion, and that of his/her very own. It is
only the amount of people that support one opinion/view that makes
it stronger. No more, no less. And that is why different people
from different parts of the world have different opinions about
different things. Why is abortion illegal in some countries but
legal in others? It is all because the respective culture in that
country permits or disallows that. It is as simple as that. In the
same logic, if that is what you say, how can you be so certain that
God speaks the Truth and nothing but the Truth? Standards are
derived from values. Different people have different values. Other
people can have different values from me. I respect that. But if
they don't respect me for what I value, then I don't care about
them. It is as simple as that.
6. If there is
no God, we don’t make sense, so how do we explain
human longings and desire for the transcendent? How do we
even explain human questions for meaning and purpose, or inner
thoughts like, why do I feel unfulfilled or empty? Why do we
hunger for the spiritual, and how do we explain these longings if
nothing can exist beyond the material world?
We don't make sense?
Why so? In the same token, if there was also a God, why would the
supreme being not make us all believe in its existence? And not
everyone hungers for the spiritual. For me, if nothing exists
beyond the material world, then so be it. If there lies something,
then so be it.
