Uncommon Descent Serving The Intelligent Design Community

The Atheism Delusion: The Destructive Power of Materialist Indoctrination

Share
Facebook
Twitter
LinkedIn
Flipboard
Print
Email

I was an atheist, brainwashed by the establishment, into my 40s. I got a triple dose of indoctrination: from the public schools, from the secular environment in which I grew up (a small college town, surrounded by intellectual university types), and from the university itself. There was no doubt in my mind that God was a human fabrication and that we were the product of purposeless Darwinian mechanisms. In retrospect, however, I realize that I accepted these conclusions completely uncritically, which is ironic, because educated intellectual types supposedly take pride in critical thinking.

I was once debating “evolution” with a friend, and I was spouting all the platitudes I had been taught. He said, “Look, rather than debating me, why don’t you read a book, Evolution, A Theory in Crisis, by Michael Denton”? I assumed that it would be some nonsensical religious hogwash, but I was in for a big surprise.

I devoured the book in a couple of days, and when I was finished I slapped myself on the forehead and thought, “I’ve been conned all my life!” My atheism was quickly unraveling.

This is what the hysterical anti-ID folks fear: Once the evidence of modern science is evaluated without the blinders of a passionately materialistic worldview, design screams at us from every corner.

Since 1994 my Christian walk has been the most rewarding experience of my life, and I can’t imagine life without it. Sunday morning is the highlight of my week. Contrary to what Richard Dawkins thinks, our Calvary Chapel ministry has produced nothing but good. I’ve seen nothing but positive influences in people’s lives. I’ve seen marriages and families healed, drug addicts liberated, and people serving and supporting each other in many ways. Safe Harbor, an international relief organization, was founded through our church and pastor Gary Kusunoki. I play keyboards in the praise band, and our worship team has been active in Teen Challenge, a Christian drug-rehab program that has an 85% longterm success rate, unheard of in the secular world. I mention all this in support of my claim in the title of this post, that materialist indoctrination is destructive, and deprives people of all the gifts, opportunities and rewards I’ve listed above.

And the destruction continues. The son of our praise band bass player, a freshman in high school, came home a couple of weeks ago and announced to his dad that science has proved that we are the product of “evolution” and that he no longer believes in God. His dad told me that his son really respects me and asked if I would talk with him. The son, who inherited his dad’s natural musical ability, asked if I would teach him piano, and I said yes. I’ve decided to make it my personal mission to teach him music and attempt to undo some of the damage that has been done by the public schools, which is an absolutely unconscionable travesty.

Last night I took the son to the Case For A Creator conference at Biola university. It was an amazing event with clips from the new Illustra Media DVD, Case For A Creator, and presentations by Lee Strobel, Jay Richards, Steve Meyer, JP Moreland, and more. I think it had a big impact.

The irony is that, especially based on what we now know from modern science, materialism is the irrational and illogical conclusion, yet this is what is promoted in public education. Furthermore, atheism is way too much trouble. It takes a tremendous amount of effort to explain away all the blatant evidence for the existence of God.

Comments
To pick up on a few pieces of "evidence": IDist:
1- Universe is not eternal
Huh? I can't see how this would be evidence either way.
2- Extreme fine tunning of the universe for life to be possible
This is something that a lot of people make a fuss about, but in the weak form is a tautology (i.e. we exist, therefore the universe must have the right tuning for us to have come into existence). A stronger form would depend on knowing more about the process of universe formation: it's possible that the parameters are "chosen" in a way that is biased, or that there are som many universes created that inevitably one will have the conditions for life. It seems to me that we don't know enough to be able to say one way or the other: there seems to be some speculation by physicists, but I'm not aware of anything more than that. So for me the evidence isn't compelling, and it's an open question.
3- Information rich and irreducibly complex biological systems
I don't see why information rich systems are evidence against materialism, and there are plenty of explanations for how IC systems can evolve. But even if we were to accept that IC systems were a problem for the theory of evolution, it doesn't then follow that their cause is anything other than material. Or does Intelligent Design claim differently? Lurker - as far as I can parse your argument, it boils down to the problem of consciousness. If you have to provide evidence that a materialist description of consciousness is impossible. CranDaddy - I'm aftraid I can't understand your argument. I hit this and can't work out where it comes from:
But if materialism is true, then reasons-explanations cannot be causes-explanaitons.
Overall, I'm hoping that Gil had something more convincing in mind. BobBob OH
December 10, 2006
December
12
Dec
10
10
2006
04:17 AM
4
04
17
AM
PDT
Agree. What's the problem with my argument ?kairos
December 10, 2006
December
12
Dec
10
10
2006
02:37 AM
2
02
37
AM
PDT
brad “1111000011110000 … 11110000" Why oversimplified?DaveScot
December 10, 2006
December
12
Dec
10
10
2006
12:53 AM
12
12
53
AM
PDT
"Lately I’ve been thinking of converting to Judaism..." From what? Atheism? Christianity? Buddism? "A Rabbi I recently met said Jews don’t deal with middlemen, they go right to the manufacturer." If by 'the manufacturer' you mean God, then that statement applies to Christianity just as much, if not more so.StephenA
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
11:36 PM
11
11
36
PM
PDT
Materialist deny thyself !! Because that's your only option. If everything boils down to matter and energy then the "you" that you know and love really doesn't exist. You're nothing but an equation: E=MC^2Lurker
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
09:42 PM
9
09
42
PM
PDT
...add oversimplification to that list of logical fallacies: "1111000011110000 … 11110000 But, be fair, is this really possible? "brad richert
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
08:53 PM
8
08
53
PM
PDT
... why don’t you read a book, Evolution, A Theory in Crisis, by Michael Denton”? ...... Denton’s book, coupled with ReMine’s book “The Biotic Message” are good resources to heal people from the atheism delusion. I recommend both of them. There are many books out there that are extremely convincing concerning this on-going and ultimately futile debate, but I have to say that (1) referring to anyone as delusional, whether it is the atheist or the theist, really boils down to straw-man name calling rather than any argument of substance. I have thoroughly read the works of Denton, Dawkins, and recently Collins, and find all quite lacking in substantive evidence for any side of the argument. I do not believe this to be the poor argumentation (especially from Denton) or blinding hatred (on Dawkins' part), but rather the essence of futility. Although I hardly find it necessary to oppose Dawkins' work here, I would stress anyone who finds Denton's "Evolution. A Theory in Crisis" remotely convincing to check out a Mark Vuletic's response to the book, just one of the many critiques of Denton's methodology. Remember that in undermining your opponent's argument with straw-man, ad hominem, false analogies and non sequiter statements only undermine your own side of the debate, ultimately creating your own lie. It is unfortunate that this whole creative/ID versus evolution debate has looks more like the American political system rather than a civilized symposium of concerned truth-seekers.brad richert
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
08:52 PM
8
08
52
PM
PDT
Lately I've been thinking of converting to Judaism, which is almost a herculean task. Many might ask why? A Rabbi I recently met said Jews don't deal with middlemen, they go right to the manufacturer. Also Jews will bargain with God.platolives
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
03:02 PM
3
03
02
PM
PDT
Denton’s “Evolution:A Theory in Crisis” is one of my favorite books… I often hear that Denton's criticisms have largely been answered. What of that?dopderbeck
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
02:58 PM
2
02
58
PM
PDT
Gil, I attended the Biola event also and was struck by Strobel's message of how he literally turned the corner to atheism upon hearing about the Miller/Urey experiment. An experiment that may have been built upon a false premise, (and ultimately hit a dead end) apparently left in it's wake a generation that believed God was 'out of a job'. I found the atmosphere at Biola positively electric. I don't see how that kid could not have been inspired.chunkdz
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
02:53 PM
2
02
53
PM
PDT
Flattened-out '82 Buicks Denton's "Evolution:A Theory in Crisis" is one of my favorite books...frequently I suggest it to Darwinians I meet in my internet travels...I tell them to pay attention to chapter 9 and especially include a paraphrased account of Denton's take on randomness--Random components will never produce an aerodynamically-feasable structure...its like using flattened-out '82 Buicks for propellor blades on a ship.... Eric Peterson, author of "Teleology" at ResearchID.orgplatolives
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
02:52 PM
2
02
52
PM
PDT
dopderbeck -- I wonder if our evangelical churches, which often take a culture war stance towards evolution, are failing to innoculate kids against materialism precisely because of that culture war stance. Well, you have to concede that the evangelicals are doing a bit better than the Unitarians and Epsicopalians but you raise a good point.tribune7
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
02:49 PM
2
02
49
PM
PDT
DaveScot Positive Atheist 1971 - 1991 Many thanks to Michael Denton (Evolution: A Theory in Crisis) for persuading me to reexamine what I thought I knew about the mechanisms behind chemical and organic evolution.DaveScot
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
02:28 PM
2
02
28
PM
PDT
I empathize very much with all of this -- even the music stuff, as I play guitar and lead worship often in my church! And of course, I hope and pray this kid will soon find assurance that evolution, whether true or not, doesn't elide a robust Christian faith. Let me ask this, though: why was this kid so easily bent towards atheism merely by hearing evidence for biological evolution? I wonder if our evangelical churches, which often take a culture war stance towards evolution, are failing to innoculate kids against materialism precisely because of that culture war stance. Not to knock the Calvary Chapel movement and all the wonderful ministries Gil describes, but my understanding of that movement is that it's strongly YEC. Was this kid taught anything other than YEC in church, youth group, etc.?What if this kid, for example, had understood early on that Christians can take a variety ofperspectives towards evolution, one of which is a complementary view in which genuine Christian faith isn't threatened even if it's true that God created life through natural selection? What if this kid had learned to separate metaphysical claims from empirical claims, such that he could investigate and debate the evidence for deep time and common descent without a threat to the core of his faith? I raise these questions because my own faith story is in many ways an opposite image of Gil's. I grew up in a Christian home, which I appreciate immensely. One downside to that, though, is that the evangelical-leaning-to-fundamentalist culture I grew up in was in many ways anti-intellectual and anti-science. This kind of naive worldview is easily shredded. Thankfully, I went to an evangelical college where I learned about various perspectives on these questions, and learned how to think about them critically for myself. I think we miss the point when we spend most of our energy with kids trying to point up flaws in the details of evolutionary theory. The primary point should be that, whatever processes God used to create life, "science" cannot make metaphysical statements about the existence of God. I think that if kids heard this sort of message early on, rather than a message that implies that a scientific claim can falsify belief in God, they would be less liable to crumble when confronted with the complexities of natural history.dopderbeck
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
01:28 PM
1
01
28
PM
PDT
Heh. No, I'm not Joe Boot. I just realized my initials are the same as his, and I was plugging his book. But I'm not him. :Djb
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
12:48 PM
12
12
48
PM
PDT
Bob, I can't prove that materialism is wrong, but I can offer you one reason why it is unreasonable to believe it. If materialism is true, then rational inference is invalid. A proposition is a meaningful unit of information which has the property of either being true or false. Propositions serve as reasons for rationally inferred beliefs. It appears to be true that beliefs (which, if they exist, must be identical to or merely epiphenominal of brain states given materialism) are causally influenced by the content of propositions (i.e. reasons). But if materialism is true, then reasons-explanations cannot be causes-explanaitons. Thus the belief that materialism is true cannot be causally influenced by any reason. It follows that materialism is an unreasonable belief. (hat tip: C. S. Lewis and Victor Reppert)crandaddy
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
12:09 PM
12
12
09
PM
PDT
#11, 13
Different strokes for different folks. I see evidence for intelligent causation, you do not. You are right I can’t rule out a materialistic explanation, but I do think it is highly, highly, highly improbable – and becomes more improbable every day.
Good point. IMHO this is the real asimmetry between the two positions. Bob, I agree that atheism isn't confutable in principle; but is really his position probable? If you toss a coin, well balanced and tested for random exits, 10,000 times it is certainly possible "in principle" that the following configuration could arise by chance: 1111000011110000 ... 11110000 But, be fair, is this really possible?kairos
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
11:52 AM
11
11
52
AM
PDT
“shaner74 - it looks like we’re in agreement: it’s not that there is blatant evidence, but that we choose to interpret it in different ways. And that’s fine.” Yes I do agree with you on this. Although I think that an objective view of the evidence, without throwing in philosophy or too many preconceived notions, points very much to a creator now more than any other time in human history, and ironically atheism has become the “long shot” IMHO. But yes I don’t believe there exists evidence that can’t be interpreted anyway you like, if, as the late A. E. Wilder-Smith once said (I’m paraphrasing here), you’ve chosen to “run ball bearings through the grinder that is your thought process” Even if we found a stamp on something that said “made by God” it could still be interpreted to mean many things.shaner74
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
11:48 AM
11
11
48
AM
PDT
Bob OH I agree that we can't prove God's existence by science alone (but there are other ways beside science of course). I mean, science is always changing and if one is not willing to believe he can still have hope that there will be materialistic reasons. That's how Dawkins and other darwinists deal with irreducible complexity, we don't know how this could possibly evovle, however we'll wait for more research. The problem is that atheists are always claiming to be the only intelligent guys over here! that if you are not an atheist (or at least agnostic) then you're stupid, ignorant bla bla bla. As far as I can judge, I see all the evidence pointing towards a Creator(s). 1- Universe is not eternal 2- Extreme fine tunning of the universe for life to be possible 3- Information rich and irreducibly complex biological systems and many others.IDist
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
10:56 AM
10
10
56
AM
PDT
shaner74 - it looks like we're in agreement: it's not that there is blatant evidence, but that we choose to interpret it in different ways. And that's fine. I was asking about Gil's "blatant evidence" because he was saying that there is more than just how the evidence is interpreted: he's saying that there is actually evidence that has to be interpreted as showing materialism is wrong. I just want to know what it is! BobBob OH
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
10:53 AM
10
10
53
AM
PDT
Awesome testimony Gil :) You know I have to admit that what you learn about evolution at the 9th grade level, it would be very, very tough not to believe it. I remember in my classes thinking they had ever hominid fossil perfectly fossilized, all the phylogeny charts were filled out, and that no one in their right mind would not believe in evolution. I'm glad there are Godly men like you out there fighting for the truth!jpark320
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
10:36 AM
10
10
36
AM
PDT
“shaner74 - All you’ve given me is God of the Gaps:” Bob, Sorry if I’ve misled you but I’m not trying to prove anything to anyone. I merely presented some facts as we (humans) know them. We each then make our own decisions about what is true and what is not. I do not see “God of the gaps” I see “atheism of the gaps”. For example, physics point to incredible fine-tuning of our universe (the real one), biology shows incredible, almost incomprehensible complexity at every turn with no explanation as of yet. I see much more evidence for God than not. God of the Bible is a different thing. I can’t think of a lot of evidence in nature for the Christian God per say, but for an eternal intelligence of some kind I do. I personally think atheism requires great faith to believe in it (m-theory, for example). “But neither of these are evidence for the existence of a god: how can you rule out the possibility that there is a materialistic explanation for both?” Different strokes for different folks. I see evidence for intelligent causation, you do not. You are right I can’t rule out a materialistic explanation, but I do think it is highly, highly, highly improbable – and becomes more improbable every day.shaner74
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
10:19 AM
10
10
19
AM
PDT
shaner74 - All you've given me is God of the Gaps: we don't know how the universe came into existence, and we don't understand consciousness. But neither of these are evidence for the existence of a god: how can you rule out the possibility that there is a materialistic explanation for both? It's possible that there is a materialistic explanation, but we haven't worked it out yet. Of course it's also possible that there isn't a materialistic explanation, but my point is that you haven't given me any evidence either way. BobBob OH
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
10:07 AM
10
10
07
AM
PDT
I also recommend a book by Joe Boot (of Ravi Zacharias' ministries) called "Why I Still Believe." It does not go into scientific "evidence," but rather lays out a compelling rational basis for Christian belief and covers the "meaninglessness" aspect of atheism. His target audience is the skeptic. In fact, the book started as a speech he was going to deliver to a group of skeptics; once he started writing, he couldn't stop until to his surprise he had written a book.jb
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
09:10 AM
9
09
10
AM
PDT
IDist, No I haven’t forgotten about m-theory, I just don’t believe it holds any water, and I’ve never seen any atheist really try to defend it, at least not like they defend evolutionism. We know for sure of only one universe – the one we live in. Aside from that, even if there are billions of other universes, we have no reason to believe any of them would be different (have different “fine-tuning”) from this one.shaner74
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
08:55 AM
8
08
55
AM
PDT
He said, “Look, rather than debating me, why don’t you read a book, Evolution, A Theory in Crisis, by Michael Denton”?
Denton's book, coupled with ReMine's book "The Biotic Message" are good resources to heal people from the atheism delusion. I recommend both of them.Mats
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
08:18 AM
8
08
18
AM
PDT
shaner74 It seems like you've forgotten the atheists' GOD, I mean .. Infinite MULTIVERSEIDist
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
08:06 AM
8
08
06
AM
PDT
“I’m curious: what is this “…blatant evidence for the existence of God.”?” Well call me crazy but for starters, a universe that “poofs” into existence with all its laws and time itself is good one. That little bit of scientific evidence caused the good ole’ atheist favorite, the “eternal universe” to go “poof” as well. Oh and I almost forgot, materialism still has no explanation for consciousness, no matter how many times the term is redefined to mean nothing. But never fear, atheists still have Darwin! For now…shaner74
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
07:31 AM
7
07
31
AM
PDT
Gil, "I play keyboards in the praise band, and our worship team has been active in Teen Challenge, a Christian drug-rehab program that has an 85% longterm success rate, unheard of in the secular world." I would appreciate it if you would email me, as I have a question about the Christian drug-rehab program you mentioned. (One of my brothers has struggled with a drug problem the past few years.) You can email me at douglasjbender@hotmail.com . (Please just use your name in the subject heading, so I don't accidentally delete the message.) Douglas J. BenderDouglas
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
07:17 AM
7
07
17
AM
PDT
I'm curious: what is this "...blatant evidence for the existence of God."? BobBob OH
December 9, 2006
December
12
Dec
9
09
2006
07:09 AM
7
07
09
AM
PDT
1 2 3 4

Leave a Reply