“I do not believe in God,” “I am an atheist”
Out of nowhere, in the middle of an inconsequential conversation, a friend blurts out: “The thing is, I am an atheist.” “Well, and what of it? For all we care, you may be a Buddhist, a Muslim, or a Real Madrid supporter,” another participant replies. The atheist began to deflate when he noticed our indifference toward his “religious” position, of which he seemed eager to boast. This led the group into a varied discussion, in everyday language and without delving into philosophical or theological depths. Since the group was of a medium-high cultural level, the ideas that came up may interest more than one reader:
It became clear that an atheist is one who does not believe in the existence of God. Prove to me that God exists, the atheist demanded. Prove to us that He does not exist, another replied. To demonstrate “rationally” the existence of God in the manner of the exact sciences is impossible; but it is still more impossible to demonstrate that He does not exist. For the believer, God is outside time and space; therefore, He does not exist as other things exist, but He exists, and He manifests Himself in those things. The unbeliever, on the other hand, excludes from consideration whatever is not in time and space.
Far be it from me to try to convince anyone “with reasons” in matters of religion, party politics, or football fanaticism; it would be perfectly useless. In these matters, either we convince ourselves, or no one convinces us. We simply place on the table a few lines of reasoning, always deficient, in case they may be of use to someone.
The ordinary atheist is a believer with a faith: he believes that “what exists explains itself,” something science has never justified. Any chain of reasons always ends in indemonstrable principles, and mathematics itself is built upon postulates or propositions whose truths are indemonstrable. If science is based on indemonstrable principles, why do we demand a demonstration in order to accept the existence of God? Is the observation of the marvels of the universe, or of the beings that inhabit it, not enough? Are the millions of souls who live only for and by their God not enough? Are they all mistaken? Wherever one looks, signs of God appear: churches, cathedrals, crosses by the roadside, books, paintings, poetry, music; besides, we feel Him in our heart. Chesterton said that “when a man ceases to believe in God, he goes on to believe in anything.” In light of experience, there must be some truth in the statement.
Faith has little to do with reason; it surpasses it. So let us not waste time trying to prove by logic the truths of any religion. If on earth we know almost nothing — we do not know what electricity is, or the atom, or force, or man, or the dove… — this means that we do not know, and never shall know, the ultimate truth of any being or phenomenon. It is another matter that we know and make use of some of their properties, as we do with electricity or force. Man cannot obtain faith by himself. God gives it to the one who asks for it with humility. For thousands of years atheism has been caught between a “no” that leaves it unsatisfied and a future without any light. Its root is negative: No! And on that root no grass grows.
Saint Augustine said that “man is a sack of desires.” From the beginning of History, religious feeling has restrained that tendency toward desires: do not kill, do not lie, do not commit impure acts… Restrictions and positive commandments — “You shall love God and men” — appear as commandments of God. To deny God entails serious and unforeseeable consequences:
a) If there is no God, if Christ did not exist, if His Gospels are not valid, if His commandments do not bind, then everything is possible! Once the sense of God is eliminated, the sense of guilt disappears, and with it the duty of self-restraint. One person’s desires collide with those of others, exposing him to reprisals. Besides, we Christians would have to rewrite two thousand years of history.
b) No one can behave entirely as if there were no God. The unleashed desires of each person clash with those of others, and their satisfaction would require tyrannizing one’s neighbor. Society would become a shelter for generalized crime. Moreover, liberated desires, through their multiplicity and mutual contradiction, bring about a parallel increase of fear and anguish, to the point of tearing apart the individual psyche. Both effects manifest the punishment of the gods.
c) In a democracy, norms can be imposed to regulate human relations. A large part of Western thought has revolved around this problem. But norms, once their religious reference is removed, would be mere social conventions, which can be established, removed, or changed. Divine norms are essentially eternal. The weak man would accept conventions out of fear of social sanction, but the strong and daring man could reject them. He could resort to violence. Since norms would have no foundation other than convention, the possibility of replacing them arbitrarily with others becomes obvious. But Christ said: “I am the way, and the truth, and the life.” When He is set aside, the north of our moral compasses disappears, and existential anguish takes hold of the men and women of today.
d) Present-day relativism about what is true or not, good or evil, beautiful or ugly… has led in large part to estrangement from God. Absolute truth would not exist; the media have certified its death. Yet there are absolute truths: 2+2=4; Christ existed; and, moreover, relativism contains an insuperable contradiction. When one says “Everything is relative,” one is making an assertion of absolute character. If we assert that “everything is relative,” then the phrase itself is relative and becomes meaningless; it destroys itself, losing its validity. Since Judeo-Christian, Western, or European civilization is steeped in Christianity, the denial of Christ would honestly require replacing it with another civilization. Which one?
e) In reality, thoroughgoing atheists are, and have been, very few throughout history. Personally, I do not think that they do not believe in a God, but rather that they do not want to believe, since doing so would lead some of them to change their way of life, and many would not be willing to do that. They do not believe until misfortune tightens its grip on them or death draws near; then almost all raise their eyes to heaven or ask for confession. The examples are numerous.
Mérida, December 15, 2002
Author: Alejo Fernández Pérez
Source: Apologetica.org
