This is Part 2 of a four-part series on the self-evident nature of God. Be sure to check out Part 1 (If There Is No God, There Is No You), Part 3 (If There Is No God, There Is No True Value), and Part 4 (If There Is No God, Then Something Came from Nothing).
Yesterday I mentioned that the atheistic approach to life leads to an unsettling conclusion: Without God, we have little reason to think of ourselves as selves. In a godless universe, the “self” is an illusion. All that is real is biology.
Closely related to that is a second indication of God’s existence: If there is no God, then there is no such thing as free will.
If all we are is biology and chemistry, then our behavior in any situation is solely due to what our genes and chemicals in us compel us to choose. Even when we think we’re acting freely, it’s only because some chemical construct in our minds pushes us to act that way, because there is no “us” behind it all. There is only our flesh.
We Christians have our own bundle of issues to wrestle with when it comes to free will and predestination. I’m not pretending that it’s an easy idea. But if you deny God’s existence—or if you are one of the “Nones” straddling the fence by waffling on God’s existence—you’ve got to wrestle with this. The implications of a closed system, in which biology and chemistry are all that there is, lead to frightening conclusions when you apply them to human action.
If there is no freedom for us to act against our sinful instincts, then there is no free will. That means that every decision you’ve ever made is an illusion. You might think you “chose” to marry your wife or quit smoking or move to Raleigh. But remember, without God there isn’t really any you to speak of. Your biology made you do those things, and your mind just tricked you into thinking it was voluntary.
How does that sit with you? Does that approach to life work?
The most consistent atheists attempt to reconcile their lives with this uncomfortable implication. But I don’t think any of us would like the conclusions they reach.
For instance, I once heard a scientist explain on a talk show that people who committed rape were just carrying out the pre-programmed instincts their DNA had built into them. He said, “Ethically, that repulses me. But scientifically, we can’t deny that certain people are programmed by evolution to pursue this as a way of propagating their species.”
We know this can’t be true. We know that the person who acts on the impulse to rape ought to be held responsible for that choice. We aren’t caring for that person or his victims when we simply explain that behavior away as genetics and chemical out-workings. Thank God our legal system doesn’t buy that scientist’s line of argumentation either. We still hold people responsible for murder and rape and all manner of evil, because we know that people have the capacity to choose otherwise.
Now, of course, there is a role that biology plays. For some people, that role is significant. Our DNA predisposes each of us to specific tendencies, including specific vices. But there is a world of difference in recognizing that I get angry easily and giving in to a murderous impulse.
And yet, when you take God out of the equation, it becomes more and more difficult to say why following those impulses is wrong. All we are is impulses wrapped up in meat-suits.
You cannot live as if you are just biology. If you try that, as Andy Stanley says, you will be locked up by other biology. It doesn’t work!
I am indebted to Andy Stanley’s helpful series, “Who Needs God,” for the concept of this series and the structure of the posts’ titles.
