I often discuss Christianity as a means of providing a contrast with Atheism. Some theologians take the view that God allows evil to exist so that his creation would better understand good. In the same vein, criticizing Christianity helps to illuminate the virtues of Atheism. This is useful, because basic tenet of Atheism -- There Is No God -- is negative. By criticizing Christianity, I can explain the problems with believing in God, and how Atheism fares as an alternative. I pick on Christianity because that is the religion with which most people in the West are familiar. Of course, showing one religion has problems does not prove that no religion, much less no possible deity, could be true. It just shows how a choice is possible.
I also have a more general desire to promote a humanistic morality. I point out the flaws in the Bible to explain why one shouldn't use it as a cudgel against those with opposing political or social views. For instance, if you base your opinion of homosexuals on Leviticus, I have news for you. Throughout the Bible, the good Lord seems to endorse (or at least turn a blind eye to) slavery, polygamy, genital mutilation, human sacrifice, and genocide. Today, most of us reject those things as evil. Why then would it make sense to use the Bible as a moral compass? The correct thing to do is to apply the moral compass we've developed over the last few centuries to understanding the Bible.
Of course, challenging a literal interpretation of Biblical morality is not merely the job of an Atheist, but of any humanist. Indeed, many Christians adopt this approach, and have come to terms with the nasty bits of their faith. Perhaps they believe that Jesus has rendered the Old Testament obsolete, so they can focus on the "better" portions of the Bible that relay Jesus's words. Some denominations, such as Anglicans, have gone further and applied modern moral reasoning to embracing women in the priesthood and sanctifying gay marriages. The may believe that the true faith was corrupted by humans. Or, they may decide that the beauty of their faith lets them live with its earlier failings, so long as those failings aren't present now. Telling them, "Look what your book says!" is a bit silly. They know. They've read it too.
That is why, while the counter-Christian rhetoric can be useful, it is necessary to explain that Atheism has its own unique benefits as an outlook on life. Penn Jillette, in a short radio piece that was part of the This I Believe series, was the first person I heard to express this well. If you haven't heard or read his brief essay before, I suggest you stop reading this now and follow the link. If you're interested in other expressions of lack of faith, well, I can share mine...
Atheism appeals to me because takes a step beyond religious humanism. It rejects the premise that there is an unseen Maker of the Universe, and therefore that the Universe has a purpose. By abandoning these assumptions, Atheism is able to make some positive moral contributions.
First, Atheism follows science in demanding that we only believe in the things we can see, experience, and infer by interacting with the physical world. While this might at first seem limiting, the belief in a common reality provides a path toward greater understanding among diverse peoples. Adopting science, rather than canon or subjective spiritual experience, means that reality can be verified by anyone. In principle, it is possible for everyone to come to a shared understanding of reality. Atheism can use science as a common language for communicating across cultures.
Second, Atheism can incorporate scientific advances in our understanding of what it means to be human, and what our place in the universe is. I believe that an Atheism that respects both humanism and science can expand our circles of empathy, which helps to make humans less violent.
Third, Atheism claims that this life is the only one we will ever experience. This demands that we make the most of our mortal lives. Our legacy is how other people will remember us. We will not be redeemed if we harm others. Repentance will not save our souls. There is no higher power whose "will" we can appeal to as justification for our transgressions. Some sins are indeed so egregious, some wounds so deep, that we might never be forgiven. Therefore, we have to think more about how our actions affect others. Looking inward is not enough; we have to look outward. Successfully doing so can make Atheists better people.
Currently, the way that most Americans think about morality is colored by our Judeo-Christian background. I cannot avoid discussing it. I need a contrast to deliver the good news: not believing in God frees me to think about how to better humanity, and to hope that humankind's' capacity for empathy and considerate actions will lead to a better world.
No comments:
Post a Comment