RSS
Home
Does atheism need a moral justification?
Print
Email
RSS
Subscribe
.JPG)
Spooky enough to turn a guy godless!
At the Christian Post's Food for the Soul blog, Randal Rauser makes what I think is a good faith attempt to bridge some divisions and salve some misunderstandings between theists and nontheists. He writes:
I think here of a well known academic who avowed disbelief in the Christian God because he was told -- with a notable absence of pastoral sensitivity -- that a childhood Jewish friend who died in a car accident was burning in hell. As a result this academic came to believe that the Christian God is arbitrary, capricious, and unjust. So when he says that he disbelieves in God, he is saying he disbelieves in a god who is arbitrary, capricious and unjust. But I don't believe in such a god either.
He cites another example of a "distortion" of Christian doctrine (regarding a fundamentalist's idea of who goes to Hell), and expresses understanding as to why someone might reject faith when faced with such representations. He concludes:
The discussion boils down to this. Perhaps before we judge the disbelief of the atheist, we should judge our own household. To put it bluntly, how often does our witness in the world offer moral justification for atheism?
I was, overall, glad to read this. As Sam Harris has so urgently pointed out in his writings, religious moderates bear some responsibility for the cover they (often unwittingly) give to radicals and fundamentalists simply by advocating for belief in things that are absurd and supported by no evidence. That Rauser can see that his "own household" might benefit from some tending, I think is a good sign. These uglier faces of Christianity and religion in general are not only hateful and hurtful, but make for easy targets for we angry, militant atheists. Everyone benefits if those views are marginalized.
But, coming from someone who presumably believes in the literal truth of Jesus's divinity, and that salvation is only possible through Jesus, he comes from the perspective that atheists are somehow fallen, missing the bigger point -- if understandably misguided by these unpleasant manifestations of religion. So where I disagree with Rauser is the idea that because someone may become a nonbeliever because of a bad encounter with a harsh or heartless representation of religion, they may be 'blameless' (my words, not his), and therefore what follows is that any atheist who comes by their nonbelief honestly ought not be let off the hook so easily. One is an accident, manslaughter of the soul, if you will, while the other is premeditated murder. Rauser offers an outstretched hand for the atheist-by-mean-God, but implies an upturned nose to the atheist-by-independent-thought.
Indeed, according to his last sentence, atheism requires a moral justification, not an intellectual one.
I don't know what the statistics are, but I would imagine that most atheists arrive at their atheism by means similar to my own: Exposed to the various inconsistencies and the logical impossibilities of religious claims, our reason simply said, "no, you'll have to do better than that." I was a doubter long before I was revolted by Jerry Falwell or Osama bin Laden, or knew anything about the burning of "witches" or the Spanish Inquisition. I would not fall under the understandably-atheistic category for which Rauser shows sympathy, nor do I imagine would most atheists. But I could be wrong (please correct me if I am).
I want to be clear: This is what is implied by Rauser's blog post to my mind, not what he has said explicitly. I'll be posting my points in the comments of his post so he can respond if he wants. I do want to reemphasize that he makes an effort at conciliation that is all too rare in the discourse between believers and nonbelievers. But the effect is somewhat lessened when the sentiment is thus qualified. I hope to hear from him on this.
* * * *
Related Posts:
An atheist's convictions: A response to 'What is Atheism?' A place for atheists, and atheists in their place: A response to 'simple arguments' - I'm an atheist, no matter what Beliefnet says
Related Articles:
Comments
