In debate circles often atheist ( or anti-theist) Christopher Hitchens hails that even Christians are atheists. Even stating the following:
 |
| Atheist Christopher Hitchens |
"Everyone in this room is an atheist, there's not one of you who isn't. You don't believe in the temple of Diana at Ephasus. You don't believe in the Egyptian Thor. You don't believe in Oden. You don't believe in Quetzalcoatl, y'u-know the other Aztec gods. None of you do. You're all atheists so far as that's concerned. Some of you believe that one of these is OK and that it's true. I just say, I'll go you one better and say I'll be an atheist and I'll be a consistent one."
With false statements like these in debates, Hitchens tries to do a number of things. First, establish credibility for the claim that atheism is some type of default when it comes to non-preferred religious claims in general. Second, he is throwing a dig at the religious basically claiming "theism-hypocrisy". This is the thought that the religious are inconsistent and bias in their belief system only willing to affirm their particular view of God. Third, it seems that he is communicating, like Richard Dawkins who uses the same type of shoddy reasoning, that Christians, who obviously don't believe in multiple gods or the gods of other religions, are also intellectually dishonest and faulted for not admitting that the only thing that separates them from being atheists is their belief in their particular God. The question is, is any part of his statement, and what is ultimately drawn from statements like these, true? I don't believe so. Here's why:
- Theism is described as the belief that at least one God exists.
- Atheism is described as the belief that no God exists.
In other words Hitchen's statement is a logical contradiction. It is impossible that a person is an atheist when they agree, affirm or believe that at least one God exists. Further it is intellectual
confusion to claim that a person is an atheist because they don't believe that another God from some other religion does not exist. There is no such thing as being an atheist against [insert religion here] Neither is it intellectually dishonest to reject a false or contrary religion or faith based on the same premise by which one accepts faith. In fact being faithful to a belief system or faith is a virtue when that belief system can be examined and be found to be true such as we find within Christianity, which delivers benefits in real time and has proven itself over the ages to be a benefit to all mankind.
confusion to claim that a person is an atheist because they don't believe that another God from some other religion does not exist. There is no such thing as being an atheist against [insert religion here] Neither is it intellectually dishonest to reject a false or contrary religion or faith based on the same premise by which one accepts faith. In fact being faithful to a belief system or faith is a virtue when that belief system can be examined and be found to be true such as we find within Christianity, which delivers benefits in real time and has proven itself over the ages to be a benefit to all mankind.
What is a person that does not believe in other gods, alternate gods or the gods of whatever other religion or faith, but yet maintains the belief in the God of their faith? They are theists who do not believe in alternate faiths, not atheists.
Conclusion
Christiopher Hitchens has rendered multiple, logically inconsistent statements such as these in his debates. Sentiments such as these appeal to a post-modern culture which has been seduced into believing that all truth is relative and morals are contrived by men and mankind. Those who have a difficulty identifying ultimate forms of truth or subjective moral value statements such as his, are the targets of this type of rhetoric. Statements such as these sound good in public forums even generating applause and laughs and cheers for more. Biblical and religious criticism has made it en vogue, in may ways, to be a non analytical proponent of atheism by simply affirming what sounds like a religious or biblical inconsistency. However statements like these are either intellectually sloppy, deceitful or simply (and this is what I believe) grandstanding for the masses and a source of mere entertainment designed to sell more books and resources.
Two things are for sure, we will never forget how easily it is that that masses can be spiritually seduced by lies. Secondly, spiritual discernment is an essential tool for every believer as he/she engages with a culture that has been sold and purchased a lie based on personality, entertainment and a rejection of moral authority. It is the willingness of so many to redefine truth that demands that those of us who know real truth, rise to address false concepts and value systems, whether secular or religious ones, for the consequences have an eternal weight.
Blessed!
Christiopher Hitchens has rendered multiple, logically inconsistent statements such as these in his debates. Sentiments such as these appeal to a post-modern culture which has been seduced into believing that all truth is relative and morals are contrived by men and mankind. Those who have a difficulty identifying ultimate forms of truth or subjective moral value statements such as his, are the targets of this type of rhetoric. Statements such as these sound good in public forums even generating applause and laughs and cheers for more. Biblical and religious criticism has made it en vogue, in may ways, to be a non analytical proponent of atheism by simply affirming what sounds like a religious or biblical inconsistency. However statements like these are either intellectually sloppy, deceitful or simply (and this is what I believe) grandstanding for the masses and a source of mere entertainment designed to sell more books and resources.
Two things are for sure, we will never forget how easily it is that that masses can be spiritually seduced by lies. Secondly, spiritual discernment is an essential tool for every believer as he/she engages with a culture that has been sold and purchased a lie based on personality, entertainment and a rejection of moral authority. It is the willingness of so many to redefine truth that demands that those of us who know real truth, rise to address false concepts and value systems, whether secular or religious ones, for the consequences have an eternal weight.
Blessed!
I think more of us need to speak out against the absurd claim that atheists are "only rejecting one more god" than Christians. It is so much deeper than that; it's failing to seek the Truth.
ReplyDeleteI have some thoughts on that on my own blog, here.
Cory,
ReplyDeleteVery that's good. I like your commentary on it. You said this:
"You’re not asking me, the Christian, to reject one more nonexistent god. It’s bigger than that. You’re asking me to discount any sort of Divine Authority. You’re asking me to view the very movements of God as a pure natural force. No personality behind it, no guidance, nothing of the sort. Other religions may have failed to identify the One True God, but they are at least searching for him. You’ve stopped, and you’re asking me not only to stop searching for God, but to view his very actions as something other than what they are. That is the essence of the Unforgivable Sin, and a society that goes down that path isn’t a pretty picture (see Rom 1:24-32)."
What they see is that religion spoils and taints everything. That's one of the greatest lies. Without religion we could argue that there is virtually no convention of medicine or medical aid especially to the poor and needy. Even the conventions and discovery of modern science are driven by a foundation of scientists who sought out to "discover" the hand-print of God upon his creation.
Radicals want a purely secular society and they have no clue as to what that entails. I would even say that under the survival of the fittest mentality that half of the ones calling for such wouldn't survive. If God didn't exist they certainly wouldn't be around to even spout off.
Thanks for commenting.