Literal Atheism

I have been in discussions with atheists, of all types, for many years. I have seen several trends among them, the one uniting quality being anti-religion. But another common trait is a very literal, almost Lutheran view of the Bible. Almost every atheist I have talked to not only makes no effort to examine the Bible's various literary styles, historical backgrounds and traditional interpretations, but views these methods as merely the attempt to cover up supposed internal flaws and contradictions in the Bible.

This view was also held by Martin Luther, one of the inventors of the Protestant movement which broke away from the Catholic Church in the 16th century. According to him: "But since the devil's bride, Reason, that pretty whore, comes in and thinks she's wise, and what she says, what she thinks, is from the Holy Spirit, who can help us, then? Not judges, not doctors, no king or emperor, because [reason] is the Devil's greatest whore." (1) The Bible should be interpreted literally, without any rational inquiry into its deeper meanings, its use of figurative or allegorical language, or any other methods the authors used. This view, that the authors of the Bible were overwhelmed (rather than guided) by God, their words dictated by Him without any real input from the author's mind and writing techniques, has been common throughout the history of Protestant biblical exegesis. It is also considered the standard by a majority of atheists. If the Bible is not interpreted this way, atheists say, it cannot be considered authentic. They believe Christians simply use these methods to cover up the parts of the Bible we cannot explain or that offend us, such as Old Testament stories of killings or biblical references to supernatural events, like the talking snake in Genesis or similar instances throughout the Scriptures.

It is interesting to me that around the same time in history that Protestantism was beginning, modern secular and atheist belief systems were also beginning to emerge. This occurred alongside other significant historical events, such as the Black Plague, the rise of mercantile in its wake, the prominence of monarchs and emperors considered divinely ordained and infallible in their judgments, and followed quickly by modern science, modern national revolutions and capitalism. While many goods things came out of this period, including modern science, the similarity between many Protestant views, particularly from those early times, and those of modern atheists is intriguing. Atheists seem to consider the Protestant worldview to be the standard of truth which, if Christianity cannot be verified according to it, our beliefs cannot be true.

Two ideas were prominent among the first Protestants: a rejection of Catholic hierarchy and lifestyle constructs, such as the priesthood, a prohibition of divorce, strict religiosity, monasticism, etc.; and a rejection of many Catholic sacraments. The Eucharist was considered superstitious; praying for the dead and to the saints was considered idolatry, as was the Catholic use of statues, icons, relics, etc. as remembrance of the saints. This rejection of the direct physical connection between God and the world, expressed in the Eucharist physically becoming the Body and Blood of Christ (rather than just His spirit in the hosts, or as a memorial, or other versions Protestant leaders espoused) reflected the materialism of the times. For example, because the transubstantiation of the Eucharist was invisible, many early Protestants considered it to be merely a wafer - the spiritual could not become physical, and vice versa, within that wafer. Too much reverence or adoration of the Eucharist was strictly prohibited, as was any reverence for anything other than God Himself. Transubstantiation was considered an import of "pseudo-philosophy" from Aristotelian ideas. (2)

Another similarity between early Protestantism and many modern atheists is the denial of free will. While it is a relatively new idea in atheism, it is a logical conclusion from the atheist acceptance of materialism, determinism, and the nonexistence of the human soul. The most thorough explanation of the atheist view of this I have found is in the new book by Sam Harris, "The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values". (3) While strictly against relativism and subjective interpretations of morality that have been popular over the last few decades, this vision of morality states that our actions are determined, without any volition on our part. If we commit an immoral act, it is the direct consequence of our genetic, neurological and environmental makeup; we have no choice in the matter. They also say that our conscience and our capacity to disagree with immoral actions or to desire justice (or revenge, as Sam Harris says) is also hardwired into us, and so when we do something wrong, something good, or when we want justice for wrong deeds, it is not out of choice, but the determined behavior of our internal makeup. We are at the whim of our body, mind and experiences. Immorality is a mental disorder, not a choice. And, by evolutionary determinism, all morality derives from self-preservation or the survival of the species, not true altruism.

This is strikingly similar to Martin Luther's beliefs about the nonexistence of free will. According to him, sin dominates human nature so strongly that we are too corrupt to ever make good choices. Even our good choices are either selfish, flawed, or purely by the overwhelming power of God's grace (which, he says, is usually insufficient to overcome our sinfulness). (4) I have noticed how frequently that, when atheists deny free will, or other Christian teachings or practices, they often do so by "redirection". Rather than present an argument to disprove or invalidate a teaching, they attribute it to a material or immoral origin. For example, with Christian charity, they say it is not that Christianity itself motivates charity, but is merely a determination of evolution for the benefit of our species and our survival - namely, it is selfish and involuntary. Charity and altruism are not truly selfless, according to their attempt to disqualify it. (5) And accordingly, with free will, they say it is just a mental delusion humans have created to make ourselves feel powerful or independent, justified by belief in a completely improvable supernatural reality - namely, the soul. They often cite the ability of scientists to trick or overpower the human brain and thus compel our body to do certain things as evidence of the nonexistence of free will, despite the unnatural intervention and domination of scientists using those methods.

The similarity and shared origins of many Protestant beliefs and those of atheism are very clear. It is difficult to deny the literalist and Bible-alone views of atheists, as well as their denial of many things Protestants themselves denied. While Protestantism has grown overtime and through deeper study of the Bible and Christian history has outgrown many of the errors of their founders, many continue, and atheism is one of the greatest bearers of these errors in modern times. Even many Catholics, living in a world full of these ideas, have been tainted by them. I pray that Catholic apologists can address these issues, and that Catholics around the world can acknowledge the error of these ideas and to return to a truly Catholic worldview, based in the truth and power of our Traditions as instituted and guided by God. I also pray for Protestants, that they may see the error of their founders and return to the fullness of truth in Catholicism, and that atheists may renounce their doubts and imaginative speculations and recognize the truth of Christianity, the authenticity of Christian morality, and to gain the courage for a life of faith.



Endnotes

1 Martin Luther's Last Sermon in Wittenberg ... Second Sunday in Epiphany, 17 January 1546.Dr. Martin Luthers Werke: Kritische Gesamtausgabe. (Weimar: Herman Boehlaus Nachfolger, 1914), Band 51:126, Line 7ff

2 Luther, M. The Babylonian Captivity of the Christian Church. 1520. Quoted in, McGrath, A. 1998. Historical Theology, An Introduction to the History of Christian Thought. Blackwell Publishers: Oxford. p. 198.

3  The Moral Landscape: How Science Can Determine Human Values, Sam Harris, published by Free Press, October 5, 2010, ISBN 978-1-4391-7121-9

4 Erasmus-Luther, Discourse on Free Will, translated and edited by Ernst F. Winter, published by Frederick Ungar Publishing Co. Copyright 1961. Specifically, part two of said publication, entitled "On the Bondage of the Will" by Martin Luther, published December 1525.

5 See: Graham (2008). Selection: the mechanism of evolution. Oxford: Oxford University Press. pp. 367–368. ISBN 0198569726. And: R.L. (1971). "The evolution of reciprocal altruism". Quarterly Review of Biology 46: 35–57. doi:10.1086/406755 And: Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion.