The Rise Of Atheism Conference 2010

You might have missed the Rise of Atheism Conference in Sydney, Australia, so let me fill you in on one of the troubling results of this recent conference. I can’t describe it much more succinctly than atheist superstar Richard Dawkins does. “The enlightenment is under threat. So is reason. So is truth. So is science…We have to devote a significant proportion of our time and resources to defending it from the deliberate attack from organized ignorance.”

Atheism isn’t new, although I don’t think it’s ever been so trendy. What concerns me is not so much the discussion of theism (belief in God) vs. atheism, but that atheists no longer seem to want to have a rational discussion about atheism, they’d rather use inciteful language about the danger of believing in God. Propaganda is the order of the day. The person with the loudest voice and the cutest soundbite wins the match. And sometimes the arguments just don’t hold together.

For instance, Dawkins makes it sound like theists are making great headway in their attempt to take over the sciences and do away with the truth as we know it, and yet in the next breath they will talk about how atheism is on the rise. How can society become increasingly secular and believers become increasingly powerful? Where is the proof that science is being hijacked by religious zealots? There is no proof, just phrases like “organized ignorance.”

The same thing has happened politically. The best argument no longer wins a debate. Logic and reason no longer decide the outcome of an issue. People no longer agree to disagree. Instead, they offer caricatures of opponents, fuzzy numbers, and inflammatory rhetoric. Although its original context is a spiritual one, I believe the statement that the truth will set you free also has significant application to the world in general. I want to know the truth, no matter who speaks it, and I want to have the courage to follow it diligently.

Source Documents

As a teacher I sometimes sounded like a broken record. A student might ask why some ancient writing that didn’t make it into the Bible. I would say, “go read it and then come tell me why you think it didn’t make it.” The assumption was that, although the document was translated into English, they couldn’t really know enough about it to have an opinion. But time and time again they would come back and say, “that was weird-it doesn’t sound anything like the rest of the Bible.” Yes. There’s nothing like reading the source.

I’ve thought about it again because so many discussions of the course of our country come down to how we read the source documents of our nation. Particularly when Supreme Court Justices are nominated we want to know how they read the constitution. I often wonder how many people have read the Constitution or how many think they are “qualified” to read it. While I fully recognize that there need to be experts in constitutional law, I also believe that it can be understood by a person of average intelligence, and that it should be read. It’s been some time since I’ve read it, so I’m beginning to read it again.

Ultimately the same applies to the Bible. Unfortunately, because of the growth of specialists in a number of different fields that apply to understanding the Bible, people have begun to feel once again like they need an expert to explain it to them. And while there are wonderful insights that come from deeper study, God’s Word is not for experts. All by itself it cuts through dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow. Martin Luther talked about the perspicuity of Scripture-although some of it may be unclear, as a whole, and for the most part, it is very, very clear. And no document in history is as powerful or life-changing.