Adherent?

Friday Freethought Perennial #7 An Atheist Writer Contributes to a Christian Handbook--3 March 2023

About the Friday Freethought Perennials in general: This subset of my blog is to answer questions, nearly always already answered by me and by many others but posed again and again—over many years and in many places—on freethought, atheism, secular humanism, secularism/church-state/”This is a Christian Nation,” and similar topics. These answers are mostly not intended to be original analyses, breaths of fresh air, so much as just putting a whole series of things on the record (I’d say “forever,” except I know better). One source for many of these answers is the 2012 Prometheus Books book by me and my son (Michael E. Buckner), In Freedom We Trust: An Atheist Guide to Religious Liberty. It’s available in many libraries and pretty readily in the used book after-market. I’ll cite writings of others that answer these things in more depth if I’m aware of them when I post these.

Over a decade ago (2009? 2010?—I was President of American Atheists at the time—and at that time the organization preferred that “atheist” be capitalized, by the way) a guy named Terry C. Muck, who I didn’t know, e-mailed me to ask if I would write what he called an “adherent essay” for a book he was editing. I agreed and sent him the essay posted (recycled?) below. I didn’t hear back and thought the project had been abandoned—but then I recently ran across Handbook of Religion: A Christian Engagement with Traditions, Teachings, and Practices (2014) in the public library—a reference book that includes my essay, virtually unchanged from what I submitted. (The publisher then sent me, on request, a couple of complimentary copies of the book.)

Here’s Muck’s explanation that he sent me back then of what an adherent essay should be—

Adherent Essay (1500 words)

            The Adherent Essay (AE) is written by a person who belongs to the religion in question. He or she writes primarily about the relationship between his or her religion and Christianity. 

            The essay should have both personal and scholarly elements.  The personal elements should include self disclosure and should answer questions such as who the writer is, how long he or she has been a member of the religion, any specific professional or ecclesiological roles one plays in the religion, and perhaps a brief characterization of what it is like to belong to this religious tradition.  One might even include a brief testimony of what this religion has meant in the author's life.  Although the answers to all these questions are certainly in the personal realm, one should expect that as to matters of fact about the religion mentioned in these personal disclosures, one can count on scholarly accuracy, even a certain amount of objectivity.

            After the personal elements are taken care of, the essay should focus on the relationship of the religion in question with mainstream Christianity.  First, what is the official relationship of this religious tradition with Christianity?  Does the religion in its "official" form see itself as a competitor with Christianity?  Or does it see itself as simply a different religious option?  Or does it see itself as a form of Christianity?  Historically, has the relationship with Christianity been peaceful or antagonistic?  

            The essay should then shift back to the personal, in the form of comments on what the author sees/feels as the nature of the relationship between his or her religion and Christianity?  Is it easy, for example, to be a Muslim today in its relationship with Christianity?  What are the difficulties for individual Muslims vis a vis Christianity?  What are the positive elements of this relationship? What are the negatives.

            Finally, in the author's opinion, what are the key issues between the two religions that must be dealt with today?  What are the most important points of relationship their either hold great promise or great peril?

--Terry C. Muck

Editor, The Christian Handbook of Religions

____

And here’s my essay.

____

Atheism (1571 words)

Ed Buckner, President, American Atheists

As my good friend the late Clark Adams often noted, “If Atheism is a religion, then health is a disease.” As Clark’s wording and other, similar formulations (“If Atheism is a religion, baldness is a hair color,” or “If Atheism is a religion, not collecting stamps is a hobby”) make clear, we Atheists do not accept the frequent assertions by some theists that we, too, follow a religion—or that it takes faith to be an Atheist. Quotes like these also hint at the sometimes tendentious and antagonistic relationship between Christianity and Atheism, with all sides often refusing to accept assumptions deemed crucial by the others. A key starting point that Atheists usually make but that Christians seem usually to reject relates to requiring evidence in proportion to beliefs, as David Hume (An Enquiry Concerning Human Understanding, 1748) suggested.

I agree with the analysis offered by philosopher Keith Parsons: “Generations of Christian apologists have assumed that fruitful communication is possible.  They have assumed that enough common ground exists for reasonable debate between belief and nonbelief.  I share that assumption.  That is, I think that believers and nonbelievers share enough background beliefs, values, and standards to engage in fruitful debate about the reasonableness of Christian claims (though some of the wilder effusions of creationists and fundamentalists tempt me into doubt).” (Why I Am Not a Christian, Freethought Press, 2000, p.1).

Given that Atheism, defined essentially as an absence of supernatural beliefs, is not a religion, nor even according to most Atheists a coherent philosophy, this essay will necessarily be unlike others in this handbook. I can quite literally write only of my own personal viewpoint, despite being the leader of a national group of like-minded people, because we are so far from being politically or philosophically monolithic. What I write about here can fairly be said to be a roughly typical set of experiences and ideas, but it cannot be said to be definitive.

Demographics (culture, geography, etc.) predict religious belief far better than theology, and this suggests that most people’s religious beliefs are not their carefully considered opinions—they just inherit them. I was born into Christianity (my father was a low-church Episcopal clergyman; my mother was in some ways more committed to Christianity than my father) and left it only gradually, not in a sudden burst of not-seeing-the-light and not out of childish rebelliousness against my parents or against a god in whom I disbelieve. I do not see my lack of faith over the last forty plus years as a loss, but rather as a valuable gain. That gain was the result of numerous conversations, some casual, some intense, with believers and Atheists; of an anthropology course in comparative religion; and of much reading, from C. S. Lewis to Bertrand Russell. I have been active in many different local, regional, and national freethought, secular humanist, and Atheist groups, and I have debated dozens of theists, most of them Christians (and all but one of the Christians a Protestant of one variety or another). I personally enjoy debate and think it has at least modest potential for education.

Atheism and Christianity are, with those rare exceptions based on unusual definitions, quite incompatible. When Richard Dawkins wrote a book titled The God Delusion (2006), it is almost certain that most (not all?) Christians not only disagreed with Dawkins but found the book and its title offensive, while most (not all) Atheists were exhilarated by the title and pleased by the arguments. Atheists are not persuaded by Christian (or other theistic) arguments and apologetics for many reasons, but the main reason for most of us is that the declared connections between the alleged divine and the actual universe simply do not match. The inadequacies of theodicies—elaborate philosophical justifications that purport to explain away the “problem of suffering (or ‘of evil’)” in a universe designed and controlled by an all-knowing, all-loving, and all-powerful being—are a big part of the problem, but not all of it. For those Christians who suggest that faith is the answer, it must be asked, “Why?,” as well as, “Faith in what?” The answer most often reduces to having faith in what another human claims is what a god wants.

Atheism matters to me because I am convinced that only by being realistic and reasonable about human problems and needs can we hope to make human progress. And believing that there is a power above and beyond human beings that designed or cares about human affairs undermines human social development (or worse), as both human history and basic logic demonstrate. I do not think my life or humanity in general ultimately matters—I find no reason to believe there is any externally created purpose or meaning available. Yet I find considerable joy and satisfaction in life, treasure my friends and family, enjoy contemplating beauty, stand in awe of the natural universe, and share pretty much the whole range of human emotions with my fellow human beings. The myth of Atheists as cold, unhappy, rationally calculating Mr. Spocks is, so far as my experience demonstrates, only a stereotype. The same can be said, emphatically, for the big lie that Atheists lack moral standards or integrity. Like most Atheists I know—and I know thousands, many of them reasonably well—I think that value, morality, beauty, and meaning are all human developments but are not the less important for that.

What does an Atheist value? The reputation for decency and integrity of every individual Atheist, mostly his own to protect, is somewhat affected by that of Atheist organizations. It is not nearly as simple for us in some ways as for a dogmatic Christian organization. I can assert no right to speak for, much less to direct, all Atheists; the moral code and political philosophy of every Atheist is his or hers, not any organization’s. No Atheist worthy of the name would ever allow some pompous authority figure to make important moral or political decisions on his behalf, and we proudly disagree with one another on the death penalty, gun control, abortion, tax policies, and virtually every other issue of the day (a strict separation of government and religion comes the closest to achieving unanimity among us).  But, powerless as I am to issue decrees, I can comment nevertheless on key values or goals that I think most Atheists are resolved to follow, based on principles that all Atheists I know consider worthy:

·      Honor commitments, be honorable—it is not always easy to do what you promise to do, and there are times when commitments must be changed. But those should be rare and, when they do occur, such changes should be made openly and with justification. Atheists want to be taken seriously, and we will be if we do what we say we will. Contracts matter in the eyes of the law, but contracts and other commitments matter even more in the court of public opinion.

·      Enjoy life—because Atheists have an undeserved reputation for being unhappy or bitter, we should be eager to relish the joys that come our way openly. We have learned, sometimes the hard way, that life without an imaginary supreme being ordering us around, forgiving our sins, and supposedly dictating our morality is rich and fulfilling. We must cope with death and illness and great pain at times, and with stress and difficulty always, but we must not forget to recognize the joys of life as well.

·      Be gracious—one of the steadiest pleasures of life, unrelated to religiosity or the lack of it, is to attend to the feelings and personalities of our fellow human beings.

·      Be a good friend, parent, spouse, lover, boss, assistant, etc. Loyalty and support for those we love or work with must have some limits sometimes, but we have richer lives if we err on the side of acceptance, supporting one another even with insufficient grounds.

·      Have an ethical code, be open about it, follow it, and return to it when you slip.

The biggest lie ever told about Atheists, the one most flagrantly and even viciously repeated about us, is that Atheists are not, cannot be, moral, ethical people. This is a grave insult not merely to Atheists but to human beings of all sorts: to claim that decency is impossible without fear of divine punishment is as absurd as to claim that human beings will always treat each well whether anyone pays attention to ethical standards or not. We are highly developed animals, but we are capable of immense cruelty as well as of astonishing sacrifice and of kindness.

Atheists and Christians can certainly live in the same society and can respect and tolerate each other, can even fight for the religious liberty of the other. But many of us—many Atheists and probably an even a higher proportion of Christians—are so fully identified with our position on theism that trusting or being at ease with our opposite numbers is difficult. It is, as I discovered when trying to calmly discuss the evidence and arguments with my mother many years ago, not a mere rational or intellectual disagreement. Emotions and self-perceptions are heavily involved. I am not especially optimistic about the relations between Atheists and Christians, but I know of some Christians who allow me to think that my pessimism may be misplaced.

___

To add to what I wrote in that essay, or rather to comment on what I didn’t: am I an atheist or an agnostic? And given what Perry Mitchell and Pam Woodley wittily wrote about that here on Letters … a while back, who do I side with? Next Friday (on 10 March 2023), I’ll discuss that.

Note: Anyone may copy and publish what I or my guests write, provided proper credit is given, that it’s not done for commercial purposes, that I am notified of the copying (you can just leave a comment saying where the copy is being published), and provided that what we write is not quoted out of context or distorted.