The ongoing debate between atheists and Christians is really a waste of time for Christians.
Perhaps I should refine that some. There are all sorts of issues being debated. For example, the matter of whether it is possible to have a moral code without religion. This is a good fundamental question, because it stands on the different assumptions which are central to the debate. The problem is this: By choosing to use Aristotelian logic, Christians have already ceded the field of battle to the atheists.
Granted, it’s easy enough to shoot down the notion of morality sourced in human reason alone, but it depends on the definition of morality. If moral goodness is nothing more than utilitarian seeking of the maximum benefit for the majority of humanity at any given time, then we are left arguing over what benefits humanity. In other words, we keep chasing new chimeras. Now, we acknowledge obeying the moral laws of God will bring to humanity the greatest good possible for the greatest number, but that’s a poor motivation. The whole point of asserting there is a God who revealed His Laws, His standards of morality, is not to simply seek human welfare. Human welfare is simply a by-product.
The point of pursuing morality is it is good and right by definition, regardless of the by-products. The problem you run into is when you approach that from Aristotle’s epistemology, you can’t breathe life into it; you end up with Law, and there’s no room for grace. Without grace, there is no Christ, no Christian faith.
Nor can this be a question of whether this or that representative of Christian faith is actually a genuine born-again Christian. No one outside that person can determine such a thing, so the question is hypothetical when applied to specific individuals. It will forever remain academic and theoretical. Grace is not theoretical, but is a living spiritual principle beyond explanation.
Surely no atheist can claim to be born-again in that sense. That’s the whole point. If an individual does not have a living spirit as host to the Holy Spirit, it won’t matter what is logical. You can’t prove something for which they lack all capacity for interest. Professing Christians at least have the presumption of interest. A genuine Christian has no mere interest, but an inescapable drive to extinguish their human self in favor of the spiritual self. And once again, it matters not at all what is logical.
Christians don’t embrace morality because it gets them to Heaven; they embrace morality because it owns them and they can’t walk away from it. Atheists don’t embrace Christian morality because it doesn’t exist for them. Any morality they have will forever be derived from that which has been revealed, even as they refuse to accept that fact. Even the most horrific utilitarian lack of morality is itself a reaction to the moral nature of the world. Asserting that as a Christian comes across as smart-Aleck circular reasoning to them.
I don’t bother reasoning with atheists about faith because faith is not reasonable. If it were reasonable, it would not be faith. It’s a call to divorce the self from this life, to escape with all speed this awful fallen plane of sorrow, not try to make it somehow better. Of course, by paradox, such an effort to flee this world does make it better, because I’m drawn inevitably to the sort of sacrificial love and caring which makes life better for all. Without that consuming desire to escape this prison, I can’t possibly have power to care about anyone but myself.
Because I love the atheist too, I don’t harass him with something he can’t accept regardless of how it’s offered. Instead, I offer something which is within his human grasp. There is absolutely nothing else I can do for him.
