I woke up early this morning and decided to cruise the web rather than just lying there staring up at the ceiling and I came across this quote on the Skeptic’s Dictionary website:
I contend we are both atheists, I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.--Stephen F. Roberts
This got me thinking (though I admit it took me a while to figure out exactly what Roberts means...hey, it early!) and I have to say his line has merit. When it comes to the Hindu god Shiva, I am an atheist. So too with Buddha, Kali, Allah*, Mother Earth...I could go on. And that started me thinking about Roberts’ second line, about why we say our God exists and those other gods don’t. Why do I dismiss those other gods? I must confess to ignorance about most of them. All I know about Shiva is that she’s got lots of arms. I don’t know why the Hindus believe in her, what ‘proofs’ they have for her existence, yet I am wiling to dismiss her without further investigation. Is that bad? Is that anti-intellectual? Should I be conducting a thorough analysis of a god, any god, before I dismiss his/her/its being? Clearly I can’t do that, for it would take many lifetimes to conduct such a study. Besides, I am still learning stuff about Christianity, and I’ve been an adherent to that for a long time! Oh, sure, I could look them up on the internet, but there is so much bad info about Christianity out there that I would have no way of knowing that what I was reading about another religion was accurate.
I guess on one hand the answer is actually very simple: Jesus said He was the only way, and if Jesus is the only way then these other religions must be false. Simple. But why do I believe Jesus? Ah, now that’s the question! And this is where Mr. Roberts and I part ways. I understand why I dismiss all the other possible gods – mine has all the evidence! Any thorough investigation into the historicity of Christ usually results in the conversion of the one investigating**. It happened to C. S. Lewis. Apparently it happened to Anne Rice of The Vampire Chronicles. Even Anthony Flew, world renowned atheist, became a theist after an honest examination of the evidence for design. (Not yet a Christian, but that’s still gotta count for something!) The evidence for our God is so conclusive that I believe only those who WANT to disbelieve still do so after such an investigation. Clearly, if the evidence supports Jesus as being all that He said He was and is, and He said He is the only way.... You get the idea. So, Mr. Roberts, the reason I dismiss all the other gods is because the evidence tells me mine is true. Let’s now apply this line of thought to the above quote and see where that leads us. I agree that we are both atheists (up to a point – maybe call me a Christian atheist?), but I disbelieve in those other gods because that’s what the evidence tells me. Why do you disbelieve? A supposed lack of evidence? Or a choice? I think the latter. ‘Nuff said.
*Muslims will tell you Allah is the same god as our God, but a closer look will show the difference.
**The interested reader is directed to Lee Strobel’s book The Case for Christ. See the evidence for yourself - Lee did, and it changed his life!
4 comments:
Yes, the quote has its merits, because it is a good point against most modern American evangelicals. G. K. Chesterton said somewhere that you don't have to tell him that the old testament God was one among many; that was evident all along. The problem is knowing which God to serve, and that's why God said "You shall have no other gods before me."
Whether you take a god to be something you deeply respect (and the Hebrew word supports that meaning) or a spirit, it is obvious that God is just one choice. A person so skeptical that he can just dismiss all the other gods that devout and educated humans believe in is only one step away from atheism.
Great post DaveE!!
Matthew, welcome! Glad to have you join us!
Larry Wall once said, "I expect a good deal of the problem is that you are busy disbelieving a different God than the one I am busy believing in." I think that says a lot right there in summing this up.
I think the definition of "god" is at question here more than anything else.
English does not have the diversity that Hebrew has, there are thousands of names for gods in the OT, Aal (as in B'aal) Elohim is literally the plural form of the word (but we will get to that in a moment), El (the same as in Elohim, El Shaddai, et al) but the English language has just one: god.
We capitalize the "g" when we speak of Adonai (another name, but it doesn't mean, "God," per say, as "The Lord" - Jews do not speak God's Name. - That is why we write out LORD in the Bible, so that people don't go around committing blasphemy saying the Hebrew form of "I AM." (by Your Grace, Lord))
Spelled with the little "g," god just means, as Matthew pointed out, one with power, eg Thor, Hermes, one of the gods over something or other. Thunder, and Magic etc. Thoth, Ra, etc.
Psalms 82:6,7 says, "I said, 'You are gods, And all of you are sons of the Most High. Nevertheless you will die like men, And fall like any one of the princes.'" God Himself refers to us as ones with power. In that sense, we may as well substitute SUPERHERO instead of "god." "Magistrate over thunder, Thor." Hebrew does allow for this, and God created us as such.
That may be an actual spirit though, many false gods are demons that have set themselves up as something or other. Many are just the imaginations of men. I imagine.
God means something else entirely when He says "You shall have no other gods before Me." He means, yes Matthew, that 'You will respect nothing more than you do Me.' (See some previous posts) That may mean that soccer is your god if you are willing to skip church or ignore an ailing aunt to watch a Celtic game on the box. Money is often sited - in fact, Mammon (the god of money) is the one to which Jesus refers when saying one cannot serve two masters.
But God, the capitalized version, the One that most people refer to means the Eternal, Self-sufficient, Uncreated One. To this God, there is no plural for that word. There cannot be. (In fact, the Hebrews are and always have been fiercely monotheistic. So when saying their prayers, "The Lord, our God is One!" The term "one" in Hebrew in this case actually means composite. A very good debate for the Trinity of Christianity (and the only form of God that I can imagine, even if not fully understand) but it is a term meaning The One Who Encompasses All. or The All.
Elohim, the plural form of god (God) in the OT is not an acknowledgment of polytheism (try seeing where that will get you in a conversation with a Jew) but more of "And the heavens declared..." kind of statement. G.K. Chesterton I am not sure grasped the entirety of what God was saying - I'm positive I don't. (And if you think you do, you should probably reevaluate.)
So, am I an atheist if I don't believe in these other "gods?" No. If they were real, as in laying claims to being the One Creator God, then as DaveE points out, they must stand up to the test. And if they don't pass the test, I am not atheist, just honest.
Note also, only the God of the Bible made all of creation out of nothing, from His very Word. All others formed it from the "something" that was already there. The body of the beast they slayed or the dirt they picked up... * So DaveE has hit the nail on the head.
Matthew's statement, "Whether you take a god to be something you deeply respect (and the Hebrew word supports that meaning) or a spirit, it is obvious that God is just one choice. A person so skeptical that he can just dismiss all the other gods that devout and educated humans believe in is only one step away from atheism," is wide of the mark though, I think. This is simply henotheism disguised as political correctness.
I have a theory about the Hindu gods... later. Includes Buddha. Allah was the 6th century Arabian male god of the moon (that is why there is a cresent moon on the top of mosques and on flags and such. More on that later perhaps. Perhaps.
Fascinating, pertinent quote. It actually displays one of the things that irritates me most about atheists: a subtle, sly form of arrogance. This belief that because they do not buy into "religious stories" is not grounds for arrogance, but for humility. Most people who are really in search of truth (as many atheists claim they are) are humble, openly looking for evidence to speak to them.
Roberts' point is interesting, because he doesn't actually consider any evidence. True, his logic fits nicely into a snappy little quote, but he doesn't take the time to persuade that he knows exactly what's what - if there's even a difference between Shiva, Allah, Dagon, etc.
He seems to be basing his words on a firm confidence that Christians will never understand exactly why they choose God above Shiva, Allah, and the rest. Such is not the case. As Matthew said, devout and educated humans believe in this God...and have for thousands upon thousands of years. This is not a blind faith.
Excellent and well-timed! I was just considering this question myself, due to a rather prolonged discussion with a friend on this very topic. Well thought! Encore.
Post a Comment