Sunday, February 8, 2009

No post-modern atheists

Atheists are very strong in their opinion that there is NO God. Not Christian, not Muslim, not Hindu, NOTHING. They are unbending in this conviction.

I'll bet there are no post-modern atheists; post-modernism says that all opinions are valid. (By contrast, the Bible seems to indicate that even though all opinions are not valid, all opinions deserve to be heard. This is because all people are God's image-bearers and as such they deserve our respect.)

What do you think?

8 comments:

Derek Ashton said...

I think it's ironic that in a post-modern world, Bible-believing Christians have more in common with atheism than with the prevailing philosophical current.

Nathaniel said...

That depends on what kind of atheists they are. I'd say that the most vocal atheists share that opinion, though. Other people just don't care enough to bother with rationalizing their non-belief.

I don't really get this "post-modern atheist" thing. Why, should there be those? I think it's a mistake to try to intellectualize atheism this way. Atheists are defined by what they are not, not by what they are.

Chris said...

It may be a mistake to intellectualize atheism that way, but I'll bet no atheists think that a Christian's opinions are valid (as post-moderns do). Post-modernism seems to be a struggle going on within a theistic mindframe.

I was just positing my thoughts that day; there is nothing ultra-critical about this blog entry :-)

Nathaniel said...

Well, I guess I'm one of those Comfort-branded non-existent atheists then, because I fully respect the opinions of Christians. All opinions are valid, but I wouldn't consider them equal.

You mentioned in your posting that some opinions weren't "valid" according to the bible. Care to share some?

Chris said...

"All opinions are valid..."

If my opinion is valid, does that mean truth is both, that there is a God and there is not? I guess that's what I'm getting at saying that it doesn't seem possible to be both atheist and post-modern.


"You mentioned in your posting that some opinions weren't 'valid' according to the bible. Care to share some?"

Pick an opinion: Humans are basically good and the God of the Bible is basically evil, if He even exists at all. Humans are the ultimate hope for mankind. The human race is to be hoped in, trusted in, believed in, esteemed (self-esteem), exalted. These all demonstrate that the believer indeed does worship a god, because of the verbs hope in, believe in, trust in, cherish, love, adore, exalt, esteem, etc. That god is man. Just a reflection of the Genesis 3:5 lie and is a man-centered enemy to the self-centered* God of the Bible.

* I'll explain that if you'd like.

But I respect you because you are a person is made in the image of God. That is an amazing fact, and even the Stalins and Dahmers deserve respect. Furthermore, trying to figure all of this stuff out is tricky, tricky, tricky and requires taking in many, many facts and sorting them through. So I am not surprised that you'd come to conclusions that are not described in the Bible. I am not surprised that there are many opinions (e.g. the world is on the back of a giant turtle). But truth is narrow; there can only be one truth, so while I respect your opinion and want to hear it (it actually helps me), it is not truth and is not valid. You deserve to be heard (e.g. book burning and inappropriate censorship are unjust) but in the end are not correct. So for example the inquisition was wrong, but mankind is so very good at overcompensation so its polar opposite, post-modernism, is now popular. How long before the pendulum swings back too far the opposite way and America becomes a place where Christians fear their lives?

Nathaniel said...

I think I'm just not understanding your choice of words. I would never claim that a certain opinion is invalid, but being valid is not the same as being true. At least not to me, and I think the same is true for most people.

I can consider an opinion valid, and will myself consider it, but just because someone has a differing opinion, that doesn't have to mean that either one is true. An opinion that tides are caused by the gravity of the moon is valid, and is backed by evidence and measurements. To me, the opinion that tides are caused by God is equally valid, but I wouldn't consider it equal in any other sense, because it's only an opinion. I could just as well say that tides are caused by clowns!

I was just using God as an example here, I don't think anyone thinks that God controls the tide.

I guess I just don't want it to sound as if you can't have an opinion if it's ridiculous. You must, however, be prepared to accept the fact that your opinion might be ridiculous if someone else can show you why.

Chris said...

Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh OK thanks for clarifying your thoughts. Semantics are a killer, aren't they??

Nathaniel said...

Haha, they sure are :)