Share on facebook
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin

Should We Rid the Mind of God?

Here is a video that is right up our recent chain of posts on the existence of God. This debate is between Alistair McGrath and Peter Atkins. It is poorly moderated, but the accents of the speakers makes up for it. Why do the British sound more intelligent? Unfortunately, the audio is rough in spots, especially during the Q & A. It is also over an hour in length if you choose to watch it.

I think there are some important elements to notice here that are characteristic of the current debate between theists and atheists.

Atheists, or scientists who are atheists of the sort as the speaker here (Peter Atkins) and Richard Dawkins et. al. believe that the only way to know anything is through science. There is no other truth available to us, and that all we can know can be shown through science. As a result, there is no basis for conversation about God, because from a scientific standpoint God cannot be proven, therefore it is delusional to speak of a God. This epistemological starting place rules out God’s existence before the discussion has begun. They view philosophy and theology with disdain as deceitful supporting institutions which need to be done away with as well. They refuse to discuss the possibility of knowledge outside the boundaries of science and the scientific method.

Secondly, a question is asked in the Q&A section about arrogance. Peter Atkins, the atheist, repeats a phrase he claims to regret saying in a previous venue: “It’s ok to be arrogant when you are right.” I find that to be a frightening posture for anyone to put themselves into. As amazing as our puny minds are, they remain puny. To arrogantly land on our present plateau of scientific knowledge with anything other than an overwhelming sense of what we still do not know, and how that knowledge may affect our worldview is stunning arrogance. At least in my view.

Third, another point made in the video is that Atheism is a philosophy that needs to show justification. Alistair McGrath says (and I agree with him) that the honest starting point for scientists (empiricists) in all of this is not atheism, but agnosticism. The most science can say in this debate is that we cannot know whether or not there is a God. It cannot prove or disprove, and in this way it demonstrates its limitations. Peter Atkins response, which is a common one, is to say that the idea of God is the equivalent to the idea of “a teapot once revolving around Mars.” It is simply absurd.

Not all scientists subscribe to what is seen here as “scientism.” Scientism is the belief that science is the only way to know whatever it is we know. For Scientists who subscribe to scientism, nature is all that there is and there is no reason to talk about anything else. Science for them explains everything.

In the next few days I am going to post portions of a lecture given by University of Georgia professor Dr. Henry Schaeffer on the relationship between faith and science.

Technorati Tags: , , , ,

ht:Between Two Worlds

0 Responses

  1. I look forward to reading your up-and-coming posts on this topic. And I agree . . . “To arrogantly land on our present plateau of scientific knowledge with anything other than an overwhelming sense of what we still do not know, and how that knowledge may affect our worldview is stunning arrogant stupidity.”

  2. I regret using the word “stupidity” because it is unkind. I think I should rephrase to simply “stunning arrogance.” My apologies to any friendly atheists who may stumble upon this post.

    Thanks for reading…

  3. Nice of you to cover yourself like this! 🙂 I think you’re point was perfectly clear, however, you need not worry about offending “friendly atheists”. I’ve been taking scientism to task on my blog for a while now, so I won’t bore you with reiteration here. I find it fascinating that anyone can place such faith in a body of knowledge that, by its very nature, is subject to constant revision. Don’t get me wrong, I’m pro-science, but let’s not make our tools into our gods and then attempt to use them to attack the resulting “infidels” that spring from our own confusion.

    Best wishes!

Subscribe to the TempleBlog

Top Posts

What's TheTempleBlog?

The TempleBlog started as my personal blog in October of 2006 with my first post: John Stott – it was a listing of John Stott quotes.

Now it is a different place. I mostly write about two of my convictions: Pacifism and Racism. But I also offer resources: both digital and personal. 

If you need Bible Study materials, want to take a more serious look at theology via an online course, or want to dialog with me about ministry and what I call Spiritual Construction, fill out the form here and we can connect and see where the relationship goes. 

SBK Productions

KellyBagdanov.com is your online source for Homeschooling Resources and Art History Curriculum. She also offers several unique devotionals which incorporate Art History with the Church Calendar. Check out her upcoming Christmas Devotional series which would work for individuals, families, small groups, and churches. 

More Articles

Church

What is the Church?

I miss going to church on Sunday. Our church has decided to not meet during COVID-19. We are taking what we consider to be the safe, love your neighbor approach. Other churches have chosen  a middle ground approach: modified meetings in public. Others have chosen to simply meet.  Surrounding the challenges and variations  of Sunday

Read More »
Life

Over, and Next

Sabbath thoughts inspired by Norman Lear as he was briefly interviewed on Wait, Wait, Don’t Tell Me. Two simple words: over and Next

Read More »