The column starts by debunking the myth that those who are "religious" are simply by-products of parents of parents who brainwashed them dogma, pointing to large amounts of those who were raised as non-religious who eventually became people of faith in a recent Pew study.
Where Mr. Blow possibly unintentionally drops the ball is his premise and implication that "while science, logic and reason are on the side of the nonreligious" (his words), those who come to faith do so because they feel a void in their lives around questions as weighty as "But when is the choir going to sing? And when is the picnic? And is my child going to get a part in the holiday play?"
Ugh. This is basically a restating of a major atheist and humanist argument, that is, faith is completely irrational and illogical, and religion is simply a creation of man largely build upon human neediness for things such as group singing, social companionship and a chance to have your kids engage in community activities. Yup, that's the ticket. Your religion is a complete fabricated fraud, but live in that fantasyworld because you can satisfy your emotional neediness. It's a salute to Karl Marx's observation that religion is the opiate for the masses.
So if Mr. Blow is a Christian, I think he seriously needs to be a little more "prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have." (1 Peter 3:15) That is unless he's essentially the type of person he alludes to above - a closet humanist who keeps a religous affiliation for the sake of picnics, choirs and holiday plays. If our arguments presume a framework where "logic and reason" and "love and compassion" of religion are somehow mutually exclusive and the case for faith essentially boils down to people's emotional neediness, I'd anticipate that most of our New York metropolitan post-modern contemporaries will be unimpressed.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment