The Twilight of Atheism

I went to the Smith Lecture tonight. The Smith lecture is put on by CBF (with CASE, and The Fifth Estate), and aims to provide an opportunity for a Christian public figure to present his or her perspective on a subject relevant to the life of the city.. Our speaker was Professor Alister McGrath (Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University), who spoke about the Twilight of Atheism. I quite enjoyed the lecture, so here are some my notes.

McGrath began by detailing three main objections to theistic faiths.

1. Religion leads to evil
2. God is a consoling delusion
3. Science has disproved God

1. Religion leads to Evil

There is a degree of truth to this statement, but question is this capacity different for other world views. It seems that intolerance has come from both theistic views (for example the Spanish Inquisition), and through atheism (Stalinism). So from the same stimulus both good and bad can come.

Freud calls religion a pathological disorder, but there is a (very complex) and tenuous link between religion and well-being. (Of 100 studies, 79 showed at least 1 positive correlation, only 1 showed a negative correlation, and the remaining 20 painted a complex picture).

2. God is just a delusion

Feuerbach (1804-72) argued that God is a projection of human longing – we invent God to fulfill a need, but this is not an argument against theistic views, as the argument works against both the theist and atheist – both the aspiration to believe (or disbelieve) is the fulfillment of a desire. (I found the comment that atheism could be a “wish to escape judgment for their deeds" (Milosz), interesting.

3. Science disproves God

Faith is blind trust, and cannot justify itself by evidence - Anything worth knowing can be proved from science (Dawkins)
Science cannot answer childlike questions of why we are here, and what does it all mean? (Medawar)

The world can be explained in both an theistic and atheistic way, nature doesn’t push either way. Science cannot answer the question of the existence of God. Darwinism is equally compatible with theism and atheism. Science it seems does not push towards atheism.

As there is no position of certainty; each individual looks for the explanation which explains the data best. For example; CS Lewis’ famous quote (paraphrased) that God is "the light by which I see all else" or Dawkins, who states that the world is exactly how we would expect if there was no good, no evil.

Post-modernity

In a sense religion is identity giving, as people begin to seek “spiritual” answers.

Some of the concluding comments, and answers to questions:

Evolution does not provide a basis for morality.
Secularism is position of faith; has no vision, suppresses the vision of others; accepts the fruit (social action, community involvement), but not the roots.
Reason can not take us all the way, we take hold of our “best fit explanation” by trust (faith).
Faith can engage with reality, and hold its own.

Perhaps not surprisingly McGrath did not provide a compelling argument to believe in the Christian God but rather argued that the position of atheism is as much a position of “faith” as Christianity.

All things considered it was quite an interesting lecture, and I’m quite looking forward to reading McGrath’s book. I’ve quite enjoyed the two lectures I’ve been to this week. I've quite enjoyed the intellectual stimulation.