The Invisible Things

Articles in Apologetics

Atheism by Default?

with one comment

It is important to begin our discussion of atheism with a proper definition of the term. Webster traces atheism from the Greek atheos (godless, from a- + theos god) and defines it as “the doctrine that there is no deity.” It is immediately clear that atheism is absolutely not a philosophically neutral position. It actually affirms the absence of God; it does not affirm the absence of evidence or plausibility. (Many sincere questioners may be better suited to identify themselves as agnostics, which Webster defines as “a person who holds the view that any ultimate reality (as God) is unknown,” or “one who is not committed to believing in either the existence or the nonexistence of God or a god.”) It is crucial to differentiate between such positions because each results in a different deduction toward reality. Atheism asserts the non-existence of God, presumably because of lack of evidence, or in essence, by default.

The argument becomes problematic because to assert such an absolute negative requires that one has ultimate knowledge with which to make such a claim. It is not plausible to make such a statement purely on the basis of doubt or lack of evidence. In fact, even if the atheist could provide coherent arguments against the existence of God, the conclusion that God does not exist has not truly been proven. Atheist Kai Neilson says ‘To show that an argument is invalid or unsound is not to show that the conclusion of the argument is false….All the proofs of God’s existence may fail, but it still may be the case that God exists (Kai Nielsen, Reason and Practice, New York: Harper & Row, 1971, 143-44).” In other words, without transcendent knowledge of the universe, one cannot assert an absolute negative such as that God does not exist. Now here is the counterpoint: Though one may logically prove the illegitimacy of the atheistic argument, theism by default has not been shown to be true. One must defend theism with positive argumentation, not merely by assuming that since atheism is untrue, theism is true. Legitimate argumentation in this area can take many forms and approaches.

The cosmological argument that makes use of observational and philosophical points will be more coherent as our understanding of God’s existence must coincide with our understanding of reality. Thus, as we look at the apparent contingency of our universe as validation of the idea that it is not eternal, but has been caused. One may philosophically deduce that a universe that has come into being must have a first cause- one that transcends the essential existence of that which it causes. In other words, for God to be able to create the universe in which we exist, with all of its complexity and contingency, He must be essentially other- complete and sustained without His creation, and eternal in His nature. This understanding is necessary, as the typical argument against the first-cause proposition is that the first cause must have a cause, which in turn must have a cause, ad nauseum. The reason why this argument cannot apply to God as first cause is because God, as creator of the universe and all of its properties by which it operates (specifically and most important for our purposes: time, physics, etc.), must transcend those properties by not having come in to being Himself. Dr. Jonathan Sarfati provides a helpful illustration to this issue: “a more sophisticated questioner might ask: ‘If the universe needs a cause, then why doesn’t God need a cause? And if God doesn’t need a cause, why should the universe need a cause?’ In reply, Christians should use the following reasoning:

  1. Every thing which has a beginning has a cause.
  2. The universe has a beginning.
  3. Therefore the universe has a cause

(Read Dr. Sarfati's article here).” God cannot be subject to the laws of physics or time in his creation. Though He creates and employs those laws, He cannot be subject to them! Thus, logically, God requires no cause.

Advertisements

Written by Christopher Butler

August 23, 2005 at 11:10 am

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. We are born non-theists until we gain the capacity to realize God or deny it.

    Quique Trujillo

    July 30, 2006 at 7:15 am


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: