A Manuel for Creating Atheists

Peter Boghossian has written A Manual for Creating Atheists. The subtitle of chapter one gives the purpose: “To give people the conversational tools to talk people out of their faith and help them embrace reason.”

In one script he asks what it would take for someone to change their beliefs. When they ask him he borrows this scenario.

I’ll use a variation of American physicist Lawrence Krauss’s example in his debate with William Lane Craig: if I walked outside at night and all of the stars were organized to read, “I am God communicating with you, believe in Me!” and every human being worldwide witnessed this in their native language, this would be suggestive (but far from conclusive as it’s a perception and could be a delusion).

On Real Time with Bill Maher, Maher has a humorous response to what it would take for him to believe: Jesus Christ coming down from the sky during the halftime show at the Super Bowl and turning nachos into bread and fish.

Boghossian, Peter (2013-10-26). A Manual for Creating Atheists (Kindle Locations 1428-1431). Pitchstone Publishing. Kindle Edition.

For many atheists and agnostics the simplest answer to the question “why don’t you believe in God” is “I’ve never seen God. Why should I believe in something I can’t see or know by my senses.”

It’s a reasonable and understandable answer. If God is so big and important why not just show himself in an indisputable way so that everyone can see he exists. Why doesn’t he speak from his uniqueness and tell us what is right and what is wrong. Surely this would improve things on the planet and short cut all the often pointless wrangling and debating we do not only about God but mostly about what we should and shouldn’t do.

Saying “My Holy Book says…” Usually Doesn’t Help

Religious people will often wade into the debate at this point with their holy book(s) and declare that God has spoken and they know the truth. If people would only listen and comply then the world would be saved from its calamities.

Skeptics will respond that there are many holy books and many conflicting accounts. How can we choose? We must KNOW that it is God who speaks and we must KNOW that his commands are clear and understood. Skeptics will point to the fact that because we have no such agreement surrounding either the source or the content of this divine revelation then no such revelation has occurred.

A Singular Event

Exodus 19 is a story about such a singular event. This is the one place in the Bible where it is asserted that God came down as himself, revealed himself directly to an entire nation at once and told them exactly what he wanted them to do.

Exodus 19:1–6 (NET)

¹ In the third month after the Israelites went out from the land of Egypt, on the very day, they came to the Desert of Sinai. ² After they journeyed from Rephidim, they came to the Desert of Sinai, and they camped in the desert; Israel camped there in front of the mountain.

³ Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain, “Thus you will tell the house of Jacob, and declare to the people of Israel: ⁴ ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt and how I lifted you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.⁵ And now, if you will diligently listen to me and keep my covenant, then you will be my special possession out of all the nations, for all the earth is mine, ⁶ and you will be to me a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.’ These are the words that you will speak to the Israelites.”

Exodus 19:16–19 (NET)

¹⁶ On the third day in the morning there was thunder and lightning and a dense cloud on the mountain, and the sound of a very loud horn; all the people who were in the camp trembled. ¹⁷ Moses brought the people out of the camp to meet God, and they took their place at the foot of the mountain. ¹⁸ Now Mount Sinai was completely covered with smoke because the Lord had descended on it in fire, and its smoke went up like the smoke of a great furnace, and the whole mountain shook violently. ¹⁹ When the sound of the horn grew louder and louder, Moses was speaking and God was answering him with a voice.

The people have two responses to this appearance by God.

Exodus 20:18–21 (NET)

¹⁸ All the people were seeing the thundering and the lightning, and heard the sound of the horn, and saw the mountain smoking—and when the people saw it they trembled with fear and kept their distance.¹⁹ They said to Moses, “You speak to us and we will listen, but do not let God speak with us, lest we die.” ²⁰ Moses said to the people, “Do not fear, for God has come to test you, that the fear of him may be before you so that you do not sin.” ²¹ The people kept their distance, but Moses drew near the thick darkness where God was.

Exodus 24:1–3 (NET)

¹ But to Moses the Lord said, “Come up to the Lord, you and Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, and seventy of the elders of Israel, and worship from a distance.² Moses alone may come near the Lord, but the others must not come near, nor may the people go up with him.” ³ Moses came and told the people all the Lord’s words and all the decisions. All the people answered together, “We are willing to do all the words that the Lord has said,”

This should fix everything. Right? God has validated himself (even before a group of polytheists who might imagine this is one of many gods) and his show of shock and awe has impressed them greatly, even to the degree that they’re ready to be done with it.

Now maybe this isn’t the stars aligning but I think this enough demonstration for just about anyone. It would certainly have to be a unique case of massive delusion to have this falsified.

The Project

It seems Yhwh wants this people he has called out of slavery in Egypt to be his new representatives to the world. They are called to bear witness to this singular event, to march to his orders, and to communicate to the rest of humanity that this Yhwh is the most mighty god of all the gods (remember, they’re polytheists coming out of Egypt) and that he has revealed to them how people should behave and what they should do.

This set of instructions in fact is supposed to resolve all the world’s disputes. You can find this vision in the book of Isaiah.

Isaiah 2:1–5 (NET)

2:1 Here is the message about Judah and Jerusalem that was revealed to Isaiah son of Amoz.
2:2 In the future
the mountain of the LORD’s temple will endure
as the most important of mountains,
and will be the most prominent of hills.
All the nations will stream to it,
2:3 many peoples will come and say,
“Come, let us go up to the LORD’s mountain,
to the temple of the God of Jacob,
so he can teach us his requirements,
and we can follow his standards.”
For Zion will be the center for moral instruction;
the LORD will issue edicts from Jerusalem.
2:4 He will judge disputes between nations;
he will settle cases for many peoples.
They will beat their swords into plowshares,
and their spears into pruning hooks.
Nations will not take up the sword against other nations,
and they will no longer train for war.
2:5 O descendants of Jacob,
come, let us walk in the LORD’s guiding light.

The project seems simple, straight forward, reasonable and clear.

I hear preachers often return to this project and demand that we double our efforts to complete it in terms similar to what we find in Exodus 20. God’s presence was indisputable, his words clear and he provided the smoke and fire to motivate the children of Israel on penalty of death to comply with the directives and they agreed. Why don’t we just keep pounding this nail harder. Certainly this can fix the world!

The pattern of this project is clear, well known and in many cases well tested: Certainty-Fear-Compliance. We know the truth, we understand the risk and rewards, we comply with the commands that will yield the outcomes. This is offered as the solution to the problem of the human race.

What the Story of the Old Testament Says about the Project

While preachers and Christians find the project in the Old Testament what they regular seem to miss in the story is that it is a colossal failure. These people who are terrified by the indisputable presence of God, who tremble in fear at his display of power, who eagerly agree to comply with his wishes will very quickly instruct their equally compliant cultic leader Aaron to construct a far less scary and more pliable god in the form of a golden calf that they may worship. They exchange the terror of Mt. Sinai for indulge in the kind of revelry they were accustomed to before meeting this intrusive deliverer from Egypt. This generation will in fact be so intractable in their own ways that Yhwh will keep them in the wilderness for the next 42 years until a generation all dies out.

If there is a nail that the Old Testament is pounding it is that this project fails again and again. After the temple is constructed the nation will split in half and the two factions war. Both nations will fall victim to stronger empires and the temple that was supposed to be the source of this light will be destroyed. This project fails, fails, and fails again.

Ironic Atheist Mirroring

A tremendous irony in the atheist project, at least as suggested by Peter Boghossian is that it essentially mirrors the Sinai project. Convince the people not of the presence of a god but his absence and then from the basis of reason and science the world will come to agreement about how it should live and then there will be peace and love and flourishing.

Ryan Bell, a Seventh Day Adventist pastor who has recently gotten a lot of attention by announcing that he’s going to live a year as an atheist notes the differences in the projects. 

Two weeks ago, at the beginning of this journey, I asked the question, “What difference does God make?” This is a question for theists. For those who say that God makes all the difference, or a significant difference, what is that difference? I have found, in the past, as I have attempted to answer that question, atheists and some agnostics have answered that they experience the things I attribute to God without needing a god.

The answer I have most often given, which I discussed with a friend just this evening, is hope. One of the most significant theological concepts for me, as a progressive Christian, was the notion of hope, especially as articulated by one of my favorite theological, Jürgen Moltmann. Put simply, God is the horizon of history and the driving force moving history toward its fulfillment. Many atheists I’ve spoken to also express a deep sense of hope, but instead find the source of their hope in people and the power of people to create the future they desire, without a need for God.

Faith in Humanity? 

I have to confess I don’t share this faith in humanity. When I look around at the world I don’t find people acting reasonable and rationally from first principles. I find people all over the map. In some moments they display an amazing capacity for love and goodness, and in other moments an equally amazing capacity for evil, cruelty and destruction.

A convenient as it would be to declare that this is the result of “bad people” or some evil group I find that I too am like this. I am self-destructive. I am not only capable of evil but hurt people around me on a regular basis. Is it only me?

Alexandr Solzhenitsyn made the same discovery in the gulag.

…. It was only when I lay there on rotting prison straw that I sensed within myself the first stirrings of good. Gradually it was disclosed to me that the line separating good and evil passes not through states, nor between classes, nor between political parties either, but right through every human heart, and through all human hearts. This line shifts. Inside us, it oscillates with the years. Even within hearts overwhelmed by evil, one small bridgehead of good is retained; and even in the best of all hearts, there remains a small corner of evil.

…. If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956

 Do you Believe What “Scientists” Say? 

I’ve been reading a fascinating book by a psychologist Jonathan Haidt called “the Righteous Mind.” He’s a atheist writing from a strictly scientific evolutionary perspective trying to account for how equally reasonable people can be so divided by politics and religion. This is what he says.

I could have titled this book The Moral Mind to convey the sense that the human mind is designed to “do” morality, just as it’s designed to do language, sexuality, music, and many other things described in popular books reporting the latest scientific findings. But I chose the title The Righteous Mind to convey the sense that human nature is not just intrinsically moral, it’s also intrinsically moralistic, critical, and judgmental.

The link also appears in the term self-righteous, which means “convinced of one’s own righteousness, especially in contrast with the actions and beliefs of others; narrowly moralistic and intolerant.” 5 I want to show you that an obsession with righteousness (leading inevitably to self-righteousness) is the normal human condition. It is a feature of our evolutionary design, not a bug or error that crept into minds that would otherwise be objective and rational.

Haidt, Jonathan (2012-03-13). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

According to him our capacity for self-righteousness is not simply a facet of religion or bad education, it is wired into us at a very deep level by our struggle for survival. He goes on to account for our behavior not as the product of rationally working through options leading towards some good but rather as the result of how we have evolved and developed. It shouldn’t be a mystery that we can’t get a grip politically, our grip on ourselves as individuals is equally tenuous.

The central metaphor of these four chapters is that the mind is divided, like a rider on an elephant, and the rider’s job is to serve the elephant. The rider is our conscious reasoning— the stream of words and images of which we are fully aware. The elephant is the other 99 percent of mental processes— the ones that occur outside of awareness but that actually govern most of our behavior.

Haidt, Jonathan (2012-03-13). The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion . Knopf Doubleday Publishing Group. Kindle Edition.

Should Religious People Dismiss this Scientist? 

Now for some of us it may be easy to say “well that’s just a scientist who is working from the faulty pre-disposition of a godless world. We can’t believe him!”

The irony of the matter is that his conclusion isn’t far from that of the Heidelberg Catechism.

4 Q. What does God’s law require of us?

A. Christ teaches us this in summary in Matthew 22–

Love the Lord your God
with all your heart
and with all your soul
and with all your mind
and with all your strength.
This is the first and greatest commandment.

And the second is like it:
Love your neighbor as yourself.

All the Law and the Prophets hang
on these two commandments.

5 Q. Can you live up to all this perfectly?

A. No.
I have a natural tendency
to hate God and my neighbor.

Is there Any Hope?

The Christian story says that God sees our mess and has acted on our behalf in the most surprising way. He sent his son to us, into this violent world not in judgment to condemn us but in humility to save us. We need to be remade from the inside out and Jesus leads us through this process, which, like for him, involves both our death and resurrection.

This Jesus came, the icon, the image of the invisible God and both the appearance and the teaching was insufficient to achieve the hope of the old project. People were divided about him.

Satan wanted him to take up the old project and to do for Israel essentially what Bill Maher suggested, to come floating down at the first century Jewish Superbowl and prove to everyone he was God. Jesus didn’t take the bait. Sinai did not accomplish what the project imagines because of who and what we are. It was insufficient to address us. Something stronger is needed.

In his mistreatment even his friends couldn’t see the work of God or understand its mission. It was in the resurrection, the renovation of Jesus that the words and the sacrifice began to make sense.

The Apostle Peter picks up on both Jesus and God’s announcement to Israel in 1 Peter 2.

1 Peter 2:4–5 (NET)

⁴ So as you come to him, a living stone rejected by men but chosen and priceless in God’s sight, ⁵ you yourselves, as living stones, are built up as a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood and to offer spiritual sacrifices that are acceptable to God through Jesus Christ.

We are to fulfill the episode on Sinai, not through fear of the fire and smoke, but through love and gratitude. The project doesn’t begin with certainty but confusion.

Misery-Deliverance-Gratitude

We don’t let go of the Certainty-Fear-Compliance project until we realize our own incapacity to fulfill it in either its atheist or theistic form. It is at that point that I become open to the one Christ offers: Misery-Deliverance-Gratitude.

I first recognize a truth about myself that I know more surely than any science can deliver to me. It isn’t theoretical or impractical. It is concrete, confirmed daily. That I am a terrible lover who fails to love my fellow human being in a regular basis. This trend in me, also in the rest of us is responsible for what we have done with this world. I am also incapable of making this right out of force of will or some sort of regime of training. I may be able to improve, but with each step of moral improvement I also heighten my self-righteousness. The higher I climb the more I build Babel and seek to control and despise my God and my neighbor.

Jesus comes to me humbly and relieves me of my burden. I cannot do what he did, so I need to let him do it for me. He rescues me from decay. He rescues me from myself. He rescues the world from both decay and humanity. He saves me and us.

If I see him doing this, believe he is doing this, and surrender my life to his “your well-being at my expense” I can begin to participate, not out of a world-saving program (theistic or atheistic) but out of gratitude for the saving he has already accomplished and has promised to effect on my and the world’s behalf.

In this way I become an emissary, not of certainty-fear-compliance but of misery-deliverance-gratitude.

Sermon Audio