I knew an atheist who seemed more devout to me than many who were very convinced of God's existence. The atheist was intelligent and irenic, and I could see he had applied his brain to the problem. He believed Christianity had brought about good developments in Europe, and he thought it behooved atheists to avoid arrogance, since the vast majority of the world's populace believe in God. He and his wife decided not to have amniocentesis when they were expecting, because there are risks involved and they had decided in advance that they weren't going to abort their child no matter what might be wrong with him. So he could really think things through and embrace the conclusion even if it wasn't what the majority believed. I admired that about him.
That's what that article makes me think of. Some people might become atheist because their intelligent minds won't let them just accept whatever is generally believed. Their conclusion is wrong, but their devotion to truth is a good thing. I wonder if they're not better off in God's sight than folks on the other side who "have faith" only because they're too lazy and uninterested to buck the status quo. They don't try to learn more about God unless someone's teaching how God wants to make them rich. And they don't try to figure out how God wants them to live. Meanwhile this athiest who's about to become a father asks himself, "What is the right thing to do?" and then DOES it.
One other thought: I'd like to have seen this study done in the Roman Empire around the year A.D. 100, when pagans were the status quo and Christians were the energetic rising minority. Or let it be done in some other country of the world now-- say, a country where communism has made atheism mainstream and Christians are persecuted. I don't know just what the outcome would be, but it would be interesting!
1 comment:
I knew an atheist who seemed more devout to me than many who were very convinced of God's existence. The atheist was intelligent and irenic, and I could see he had applied his brain to the problem. He believed Christianity had brought about good developments in Europe, and he thought it behooved atheists to avoid arrogance, since the vast majority of the world's populace believe in God. He and his wife decided not to have amniocentesis when they were expecting, because there are risks involved and they had decided in advance that they weren't going to abort their child no matter what might be wrong with him. So he could really think things through and embrace the conclusion even if it wasn't what the majority believed. I admired that about him.
That's what that article makes me think of. Some people might become atheist because their intelligent minds won't let them just accept whatever is generally believed. Their conclusion is wrong, but their devotion to truth is a good thing. I wonder if they're not better off in God's sight than folks on the other side who "have faith" only because they're too lazy and uninterested to buck the status quo. They don't try to learn more about God unless someone's teaching how God wants to make them rich. And they don't try to figure out how God wants them to live. Meanwhile this athiest who's about to become a father asks himself, "What is the right thing to do?" and then DOES it.
One other thought: I'd like to have seen this study done in the Roman Empire around the year A.D. 100, when pagans were the status quo and Christians were the energetic rising minority. Or let it be done in some other country of the world now-- say, a country where communism has made atheism mainstream and Christians are persecuted. I don't know just what the outcome would be, but it would be interesting!
Post a Comment