“Atheism and Judeo-Christian Belief and Outcomes”

“Atheism and Judeo-Christian Belief and Outcomes”

Recently in a discussion about the veracity of Christianity a comment was made about atheists and that it was secularism that is responsible for more death than all religions combined.  In response a comment was made something to the effect that, “You cannot lump all atheists together because there is a great difference in and among us.”

While only the most naïve would question the truth of the response, there came a further discussion.  You see the person defending atheism was very adept at dividing out all atheists while at the same time grouping all theists together.  Then as the argument progressed the theists would be labeled because of the excesses of a few.  

Among the arguments tendered was the notion that Theism in general and Judeo-Christian belief in particular was and is not a valid truth system because of the Crusades, the Inquisition, and other overreaches by “Christians.”  Thus the Christian “truth” system is invalid.  Of course no such criterion was applied to atheism.

So in the course of the discussion it became apparent that there were two different standards by which to evaluate belief systems.  The system embraced could be hospitably accepted despite its excesses while the other is disproved by similar excesses. 

However, while discounting a truth system based upon excesses may be valid and true, it is also legitimate to note that one can argue for the veracity of any overarching truth system by looking at general trends and outcomes.  For example while both atheism and theism can “take a bad rap” for the times in which they have devalued human life, there is a glowing difference and it is found in outcomes.

Travel from the destructive end of the scale to what have both systems contributed to the betterment of mankind.  Even a cursory reading of history (not revisionist history but genuine history) will show it is those who’ve embraced Judeo-Christian truth that have added to the quality of life for mankind in general and people in particular.

Those things that we assume and thus presume upon in the West like benevolent government, places that serve the sick and dying, and benevolent organizations etc. all had their start because of the Judeo-Christian truth ethic.  As well helping and service organizations in many cases had their start because of the Judeo-Christian truth paradigm. 

Look to science and medicine and one finds the same to be true.  Look to humanitarian organizations and one find that most of them come or at least had their start as faith based organizations.

So when one evaluated the claims of the atheist truth system in its multivariate sub-parts and Judeo-Christian truth system in its multivariate sub-parts there is one question that demands an answer.  It is not that of excesses and misdirected people for both systems have many.  However, it is this.  

"Generally speaking, which system has done the most good for humanity?"

20 Reasons...a Final Thought!

Christianity – A Final Word?

The pamphlet that gave rise to the previous nineteen postings is 20 Reasons to Abandon Christianity by Chaz Bufe.  (Available at http://www.seesharppress.com/20reasons.htm).  This will be the last posting tied directly to the pamphlet, though the subjects of the previous postings will be revisited from time to time.

The pamphlet concludes with the following observation.

“A Final Word: These are but some of the major problems attending Christianity, and they provide overwhelming reasons for its abandon-ment (sic). (Even if you discount half, two-thirds, or even three-quarters of these arguments, the conclusion is still irresistible.)”

Three points to be made regarding this statement.

1.       “A Final Word” suggests that there was or is coming the final authoritative statement regarding some matter or another.  That seems a bit arrogant especially when it comes to arguments that are weak on data and philosophically illogical.

2.       Taking the “Final Word” statement and testing the hypothesis thereof by considering it in the reverse one arrives at the thought in the form of a question,

 Even if one cannot discount half, one-third, or even one-quarter of the arguments proffered, does that not leave the possibility that Christianity is indeed valid?

3.       The irony is in the statement of irresistibility.  Except for the extreme determinist, there is absolutely nothing outside of the material world (and even some things inside the material world) that is totally irresistible. 

So it is that all that is found here leads one to make a choice.  The choice is this.  After examining all of the evidence that Mr. Bufe presents and that which I’ve argue in response, which is more likely to be true?  Again, what is the truth of the matter when it comes to the treatment of these subjects?

Anecdotal Arguments

The best that Mr. Bufe and others can offer is anecdotal evidence for the criticisms that they have of Christianity.  Such evidence is often chosen without consideration of the larger body of truth/reality as evidence by history and/or data. 

One can point to the Crusades and the Inquisition and make the claim that more people have died because of religion than for any other reason.  Conveniently ignored since the data does not fit the paradigm are the millions killed by secularists (Mao, Stalin, etc.)

There are many examples of the “good” brought about by people of faith.  These too are conveniently ignored.  Most certainly included would be the Christian Church’s place in the establishment of healthcare, in the founding of educational institutions, and in the launching of humanitarian organizations.  These are but three of the many.

Erroneous Assumptions

When the discussion includes science, the erroneous assumption is that it was the dawn of the Renaissance and secularism that exponentially increase scientific discovery.  Again the data does not support the point.  In reality it was the Protestant Reformation and the Roman Catholic Counter Reformation that set the environment for scientific discovery. 

It would appear that one's biases formed the underlying assumptions.  Would it not be more profitable to seek out genuine truth/reality by doing serious inquiry into history, the history of science, and Church history.  Well, perhaps the truth is not as important as the argument. 

Disregarded Data

When the discussion is broaden out to include other religions Mr. Bufe and his kind find themselves seriously disadvantage in that 83% of the world’s population believes that there exists something beyond the material world.  Often this claim is discounted again with wild speculation as opposed to hard data. 

What about Speculative Assumptions?

The point is that some things have to be believed in order to be seen.  The reverse is also true!  Some things have to be doubted in order not to be seen.  The argument that God is illogical is only logical to the one who steeps his mind in such skepticism and doubt.

Such a mindset sets forth such important “reality” questions as, “Does the chair upon which you are sitting really exist?”  Well, yes, I know it is real.  A great deal more real than the speculative assumptions upon which the question is formulated.  So too the validity of Christianity!  It is a great deal more “real” than the speculative assumption upon which the doubter bases his conclusion.