The Irrelevant "God Debate"

One of the things that has been a pleasant surprise to me over the past several years is how many books on atheism (by writers like Christopher Hitchens) have been published to critical acclaim and sales success.

FROM THE ARCHIVES (Columns)

THE IRRELEVANT "GOD DEBATE"

by Jeremy Patrick (jhaeman@hotmail.com)

Published in Free Inquiry, v. 21, No. 2 (2001)

"It is philosophy that supplies the heresies with their equipment."

--Tertullian, The Prescriptions Against the Heretics

"Certainly a little philosophy inclineth a man's mind to atheism, but depth in philosophy bringeth men about to religion."

--Francis Bacon, On Atheism

Philosophical debate over whether God does or does not exist has taken place for millennia and seems unlikely to end anytime soon. Theists still trot out the old Aristotelian "First Cause" and “Argument from Design,” while non-theists respond with Theodicy, Humean empiricism, and arguments that the very idea of God is incoherent and undefined. The "God Debate" is a favorite topic in journals of philosophy and theology. The problem, however, is that the debate is largely irrelevant.

Even if these abstract reasonings could conclusively prove the existence of God, the revelation should have little impact on our lives. Establishing the existence of a deity is a far cry from proving that this deity is intelligent or beneficent; and without these attributes, taking part in most of the rituals associated with religion would still be irrational, or at best, nothing more than a crap-shoot. As Hume said:

While we are uncertain whether there is one deity or many; whether the deity or deities, to whom we owe our existence, be perfect or imperfect, subordinate or supreme, dead or alive; what trust or confidence can we repose in them? What veneration or obedience pay them? To all the purposes of life, the theory of religion becomes altogether useless...

--Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion (Hume 1992)

Regardless of how successful either side is in making their arguments, the evidence indicates that the debate has very little (if any) impact on the vast majority of humanity. In the United States, for example, between 95% and 98% of people profess a belief in God (Kaminer 1996; Stark 1994). Sadly, the skillful and powerful arguments of philosophers like David Hume, Anthony Flew, and Kai Nielsen have lain unnoticed by the "average" person.

However, these "average" people are the ones who act on their religious beliefs, whether it involves attending services every weekend, tithing, or making medical decisions on the basis of their faith. If philosophical inquiry into religion is to be more than an academic exercise and actually influence lives, it must be conducted in a manner that is relevant and understandable by laypeople. This might be accomplished by examining and discussing the particular tenets of each religion on a practical, common-sense level.

For example, one might make the "God Debate" more accessible to a Christian by using arguments drawn from Scripture or Christian doctrine as opposed to general, abstract arguments about God. (My examples involve Christianity since that is the majority religion in the United States and familiar to most readers). Arguments along this line could include:

1. The Problem of Cain's Wife "One day after church was over, a little boy walked up to the minister with a confused look on his face and said: 'But if Adam and Eve only had two children, and Cain killed Abel, where did the rest of us come from?' The minister slapped him and the conversation was over."Although apocryphal, the story raises a good question. Who did mate with Cain to perpetuate the species? One possible answer could be an incestuous relationship with Eve or a sister not mentioned in the Bible, but of course, this answer would not be satisfactory; another answer is that God created a new woman for Cain, but the Bible's complete failure to mention this would call its entire accuracy into question.

2. The Injustice of "Original Sin" According to orthodox Christian doctrine, access to Heaven can only be gained through faith in Jesus Christ because all human beings are born sinners; the cause of this "original sin," of course, was Eve's eating of fruit from the Tree of Life. This act introduced sin into the world. In effect, her act was imputed to us.Upon reflection, the doctrine of original sin seems terribly unjust; it violates the maxim "Punish not the child for the sins of the father." (Deuteronomy 24:16) It was Eve who committed that sin; to threaten everyone with the possibility of eternal damnation because of it would be a harsh punishment indeed.

3. The Irrationality of Prayer A belief in the necessity and efficacy of prayer is a fundamental principle of Christianity. The Apostle Paul commanded: "Pray much for others; plead for God's mercy upon them; give thanks for all he is going to do for them" (1 Timothy 2:1).If, as Christian doctrine asserts, God is omnipotent and omniscient, prayer could have absolutely no effect; God would already know what you want before you pray for it, and presumably he is not going to change his mind because you "verbalize" it. Another kind of prayer is gratitude; again, God would already know you were grateful before you prayed, and therefore the only function of prayer would be to boost his ego and self-esteem, which should be in pretty good shape as it is.

4. Analogy to Slavery Arguments from analogy can be tremendously effective when kept simple and short. For example, when the rulers of Egypt said to the Jews: "You must obey me completely or I will torture and kill you," the ruler was a slave-master and the Jew was a slave; Jesus said "You must obey the Word of God and accept me as your Lord and Savior or you will face eternal torture and damnation in Hell." The analogy is strong, but clear.

Arguments drawn from an individual religion's particular principles, are more relevant (and therefore effective) to worshippers of that religion. If the above examples do not induce doubt, little will. Results, however, are never certain. The examples above might cause someone to rethink their position, or may only provoke a pithy "The Lord Works in Mysterious Ways." Some individuals may even embrace Kierkegaard's belief that Christianity is not rational and cannot be proven but that a leap of faith is the only escape from despair. As he said in The Sickness Unto Death, "Christianity! Yea, he who defends it has never believed in it."

Regardless of which particular arguments are used, the debate itself must be conducted on a level accessible to broader groups of people than just philosophers and theologians.

Otherwise, the question of whether "God" exists doesn't really matter at all.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Hume, David. Writings on Religion. Edited by Anthony Flew. Open Court, 1992.

Kaminer, Wendy. "The Last Taboo." New Republic. Vol. 215, Issue 16.

Miller, Ed. L., Editor. Classical Statements on Faith and Reason. Random House, 1970.

Stark, Rodney. Sociology. Fifth Edition. Wadsworth, 1994.