The Virtues of Atheism appeared in Vance Morgan’s Freelance Christianity column on the Patheos website.
He suggests that religionists might benefit by practicing atheism for a period of time-Doing the right thing not because of fear of eternal punishment or or anticipation of eternal reward, not because you think or feel that God would want you to do it, but because you feel it’s the right thing to do. Instead of telling someone “I will pray that God will help you”, you say to yourself “What does this situation require of me?” This author writes
This short article ranks among the best I’ve read on the subject in recent years, by atheist or religionist.
I’m pretty sure he’s saying that saying to oneself “What does this situation require of me?” instead of (just) telling them “I will pray that God will help you” is something that Christians are already supposed to be doing, with the Bible verse he linked to as a cite for this.
More generally, he may be dubious that there’s anything to be gained from “practicing atheism” that couldn’t also be gained from practicing Christianity as it should be practiced.
I am in no way qualified to discuss scripture or philosophy, but: as a person who was given no religious instruction as a child and who has found soft atheism the natural sequel, it gobsmacks me that so many Christians think people only do “the right thing” because the Bible tells them to.
No, dipwads, you do the right thing because you’re not a psychopath.
Yes, religious instruction can deepen a person’s actions of empathy–lead them to help more than they might have otherwise–but it isn’t as if the religion-free are out raping, defrauding, and murdering because they don’t have Jeezus.
Well, Sattua, that’s part of the challenge that atheists face, isn’t it: convincing the religious populace that not believing in god is not a sign of psychopathy? Because to a lot of them, from their world view, not believing in any god at all (even tho they’d prefer that you believe in approximately the same one they do) is a sign of psychopathy or some other inscrutable and possibly dangerous disorder.
When Christians finally agree on what “practicing Christianity as it should be practiced” actually consists of, let me know. In the meantime, I seem to have done pretty well without it.
I’m saying that Christians don’t have to become atheists to do it, as the author of your article seems to think.
Well, that’s nice, but you linked to an article whose author apparently doesn’t recognize a point that Christians have been making for the last two thousand years.
Your article also recommends that Christians should practice atheism for a while. What do atheists agree should constitute “practicing atheism as it should be practiced”? Please let us know.
I’ve gone back and forth on God all my life. I was raised in a conservative Baptist household. I fell away from that, but I’ve had some rather unique experiences that lead me to come back to a belief in God. But I absolutely do NOT believe in the religions of Men, as their God always comes out in the exact image of the people who claim to speak for him.
God the Creator cannot be so petty and concerned with trivialities as his ‘prophets’ tell us. ‘God’ isn’t going to punish you for eating shellfish, for example, or having tattoos. However, for the culture those rules were laid down for (by men), those were pretty good rules.
But that said, I’m going to agree with Shodan here. If you claim to believe in God and are genuinely interested in following his* will, then merely praying for people and not helping them (as pretty much every religion commands you to do) is not godly.
I can see the point of the article. Doing the right thing because it is the right thing to do, not for fear of punishment. Be a good person because being a good person is right. Because if you’re only being a ‘good person’ because you fear punishment, then you’re not actually a good person. So it is an exercise in 'If God didn’t exist, would I still be a good person?"
So really, it isn’t about externals. It is about internals. Who you are inside. Be a good person, love one another. This is pretty much the highest law for humanity and we as humans put together millions of words of Law trying to tell people how to do it, and failing miserably at it.
God is outside and above any pronouns, sex or other ‘divisions’ and limitations we tend to impose on such a being. So don’t sweat hearing God called male or female.
I wasn’t too impressed. The author still doesn’t seem to understand that atheists reject the Christian or Muslim god for the same reason Christians reject the worship of Thor, Ahura Mazda or Zeus. Atheists aren’t looking at a world with Zeus and a world without Zeus, and then deciding the world without Zeus requires them to be more humane and responsible. They reject Zeus because it is an ancient custom written long before humans had the tools to actually understand how reality works. Zeus was created by illiterate, frightened, helpless people to make sense of a dangerous world they couldn’t control or predict.
Not long ago plagues, natural disasters and famines were considered signs of an angry deity. Now we know they are natural phenomena and we know how to predict or avoid them to a large degree.
I consider myself more post-theist than atheist. We don’t have a term for people who reject the existence of Santa Claus, we don’t have Clausists, and anti-Clausists. Post theism is more the idea that human culture has advanced beyond the need for religion to make sense of existence and make us feel like we can predict and control our lives.
Not sure; what’s the best method for withdrawal from chronic tranquiliser use?
The UK is pretty uninspiring in a variety of ways, but atheism here does tend to be the default position, with the Church of England types as unobtrusive Nice Guys. It seems pretty shocking that US atheists suffer this, ahem, stigma.
I don’t think the author of the article was literally advocating that Christians somehow temporarily become atheists somehow or to renounce their faith or anything like that.
What he was suggesting is for Christians to look at the world in the way an atheist would- not from a position of knowing that God is out there and all that implies and entails, but rather from a position that the here and now is it, and if there’s going to be any improvements in how people are treated, how things are done, etc… it’s going to have to be done by people and that you’re a part of that change.
And I think that’s a good thing- too many people use religion as an intellectual and compassionate crutch, for lack of a better word, and become smug about their place within the whole system.
Exactly. That’s why you rely on your feeling that Christianity is a good guide to the right thing, correct?
That’s great but not how many religious people act, even if you do. All Xtians selectively ignore bits of the bible. So he’s suggesting an exercise aimed at such people. Exercises never do precisely match the real thing.
Uh… I’ve always considered myself Catholic and I’ve never done things out of fear of God. My mother tried to teach me the God of Fear and Guilt, and I rejected him. My daily-Mass Dad taught me: when in doubt, choose the path that brings the greater benefit to the most people, because that way we all end up gaining most; pure math. People whose only reason to “behave” is fear of some dude up in the sky who looks a lot like Zeus and eagerly waits for people to make mistakes so he’ll have an excuse to smite them scare me.