The Best of the Interweb is moving to this afternoon, so that we can continue to squeeze in the series on apologetics.
This morning, we tackle the objection that all religious beliefs are just culturally conditioned. In other words, if you grow up in Israel will you, in all likelihood, be Jewish but if you grow up in Iran you will, again, in all likelihood, be muslim and so on and so on.
This is one of Dr. Richard Dawkins’, (an evangelist of atheism), favorite lines when confronted with a skeptic of naturalism. He likes to shoot back in a tone tinted with condescension, “You just don’t believe me because you have been raised to believe in God!”
How should a Christian respond?
There are two quick responses to this argument:
(1) This commits the “genetic fallacy” by trying to invalidate a position by criticizing the way a person came to hold it. As Dr. William Lane Craig writes in his fine book, On Guard: Defending You Faith with Reason and Precision (David C. Cook, 2010), “The fact that your beliefs depend upon where and when you were born has no relevance to the truth of those beliefs.” (p.270).
Moreover, (2) The atheist or skeptic’s view may be just as influenced by culture. For example, you won’t find many atheists or skeptics in the Middle East. Thus, by their own standard, the skeptic’s argument is just as erroneous and falls apart.
Finally, is it really true that what we believe is so culturally conditioned? Our culture certainly influences but is it ultimately determinative? I was raised in a Christian home and was an outspoken atheist for 10 years. Also, we live in such a pluralistic society that there isn’t A “Christian culture” anymore. If anything, we return to response #2 in that the rise of atheism is arguably more culturally conditioned in a pluralistic society than religious belief.
The objection is really an attempt to evade the real argument on the table as to where the evidence leads–to a creator or to a purely naturalistic universe that somehow sprang into being from nothingness.
Yet, remember, we need to respect our conversation partner and, using questions gently posed, to guide them to truth (i.e., Greg Koukl’s Columbo Method!).
Tomorrow, we will look at the objection that a loving God would never send anyone to hell.
Until then, grace and peace.
Of course culture isn’t ultimately determinative, but it undoubtedly plays a huge role. I’ve only heard the popular atheists say things like that when the other party will not give evidence of their God and ignore evidence that it doesn’t exist, while still asserting that it does; which means that the atheists’ assumption holds some weight and is not simply avoiding criticism. If they don’t want to hear any evidence against naturalism (which is what I read your post to say) then I agree that their proclamation would hold very little weight.
That being said though, even with the rise of atheism, it has in my experience been far easier to be a Christian in society than to be an atheist and I don’t know many people who are atheists who haven’t been treated poorly (even by family and friends) because of it.
Steven, I love you but everything you wrote is demonstrably untrue. Aside from the anecdotes, most atheists who have proffered such a ridiculous argument have done so in professional debates with folks like William Lane Craig and were rightfully called on the carpet. Also, to argue we are in a Christian culture is silly. Evangelicals make up roughly 10% of the population and is dropping. As a lawyer with a 1st Amendment law firm, the number of cases of Christians denied tenure or their jobs for simply being a theist are so numerous, we can’t keep up with them. Finally, if you think there isn’t a Christian apologist unaware of naturalistic arguments, then you need to read more widely. Most apologist read dozens of books and hundreds of articles by naturalists every year while most naturalist arrogantly refuse to deal with counter evidence, which is why people like Craig wipe the floor with folks like John Crossan and others. This former atheist, hopes you will keep an open mind as I continue to unpack these arguments. I love you, bro.
Perhaps I didn’t make the point I was trying. I know that many Christian apologists are aware of naturalist arguments, but when talking about specific faiths those arguments become less relevant unless naturalism is proved (which I have never seen done.) As I said I agree completely that if someone uses the argument of cultural faith in spite of evidence against naturalism then it doesn’t hold weight; I believe they should be called out on it and asked to address the evidence. It simply doesn’t address the question of naturalism vs. the existence of God and would be irrelevant of the truth of the claim. However, if someones faith is refuted (which doesn’t require naturalism) and they still proclaim it then the other person may be in a position to accurately and relevantly make the claim of cultural and irrational faith. As you said, all worldviews (including atheism) can be subject to that claim.
I know that there are many theists who are wronged for being theists and it is truly unfortunate. That doesn’t mean that atheists are not mistreated by religious family and friends.
How are you defining “Evangelical Christian”? From my research 70-75% of Americans poll Protestant or Catholic Christianity while between 5-10% poll no religion. I know that not everyone lives their faith seriously, but there are certainly people who fall into that category who are still judgmental of atheists.
The discussions and articles I watch/read are with guys like Craig, Plantinga, Lennox, and D’souza and it was my understanding that they are some pretty heavy hitters; do you have some other suggestions?
Love you too, bro and I appreciate you discussing apologetics. My mind is still as open as it was last year during my deconversion and I am certainly not here to pick a fight for the sake of arguing or anything like that.
Your Willy Wonka meme is pretty funny btw.
D’Souza’s not really an apologist. Craig is, JP Moreland, Plantinga, Richard Swinburne, etc.
The definition I’m using is the Bible’s. Many polls, like Barna’s, fall prey to the Halo Effect, where those polled reply to quick questions. When pollsters take their time and ask “Do you attend church weekly?”, “Do you read your Bible?” Etc. the numbers drop big time.
Also, there is a difference between disappointing or angering one’s family and being persecuted by the state without much, or any, outcry. One may be cultural, the other definitely is!
Also, keep in mind that better polls show that 2/3 to 3/4 of young people raised in Christian homes will abandon the faith between 18-30…so much for the overwhelming power of “religious culture.”
I will deal with objections one-at-a-time including the failures of nauturalism but my only point today was to deal with evasive and logically fallacious statement about culture that Richard Dawkins and his disciples often use to avoid actually discussing the issues. Again, truth is truth regardless of how one comes to it.
Again, I love you and am always here for you no matter what and I pray for you every single day.
IDK Moreland; thanks! If that was your only point I definitely still agree with you. My bad if I read it differently than you intended.
I believe the main reason we don’t see more Atheists in the Middle East is because they’d be punished if they spoke out. I actually think there are a lot more Atheists in all countries. They just don’t speak up. But who knows? Interesting read tho.
Actually, before fundamentalist took over atheism was rare and is still rare in places like Africa and South America.
I’m not saying Atheism is cultural. I believe it to be a product of education in a society. It’s certainly influenced by culture in that some cultures are more tolerant or educated than others. Interestingly, the middle east is a very educated area. They were once at the top of the game in science & philosophy yet their religion has interfered in more recent years. As a cultural develops their understanding of the world around them the more skeptics arise. That’s likely why there are so few skeptics in Africa…in my opinion at least. With more time & education we’ll see more skeptics pop up in Africa.
Not necessarily. China and South Korea are kicking out butts in science education and Christianity is booming in both places. More and more of the leading scientists here are becoming outspoken Christians like Francis Collins, William Dembski, Stephen Meyer and Jonathan Wells. Even more philosophers are joining the Christian ranks. When I was at Cornell, the head of the philosophy department was a conservative Catholic.
Also, even if you are right, the objection still falls because it commits the genetic fallacy. How one comes to hold a certain position says nothing about the truth or falsity of that position. Does that make sense?