Atheism Defined

First Thought    

  Many atheists choose to define atheism as a “lack of belief”, but is this really a proper way of defining atheism? According to the New Oxford English Dictionary, atheism is “the theory or belief that God does not exist.” Clearly these two definitions conflict with one another as one defines atheism as lacking belief and the other as a belief. The statement “lack of belief” the individual came to this conclusion without choice. For instance, if someone is unaware of, let us say, the Christian God then he very well cannot believe in the Christian God and therefore would lack belief because he is unaware. With the majority of today's atheists, they are well aware of, not only the Christian God but many other religions as well. How is it that they can lack belief in something they are aware of? The statement, lack of belief, makes it seem as if they have made no conscience decision to believe or not to believe. 

As humans we are distinctly different from animals in that we have free will. So while atheists do lack belief in God, they are aware of Him and His religion. When an individual is aware of something, they can then actively decide whether or not to believe. So for an atheist, who is aware of God, who says they lack belief in God, they are not giving the complete definition. Nobody defines themselves by what they do not believe in and nobody would define themselves by things they do not believe in and that they are not aware of. To be an atheist, in its true form, a conscience decision is made and therefore when this is done the person “believes that God does not exist.”

What of those who are unaware of God? While they would fit into the definition of atheism by atheists, a lack of belief, and technically would classify them as atheists, I see fit to distinguish them from those who made a conscience rejection of God. Let us say that a group of individuals who live on a secluded island and have no religion and no knowledge of God. By atheists definition this would mean that these people are atheists, however I disagree. These people have not been made aware of God and therefore do not have the capacity in which to choose to believe or choose to reject Him. According to St. Paul this would not matter “For when Gentiles, who do not have the law, by nature do the things in the law, these, although not having the law, are a law to themselves, who show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and between themselves their thoughts accusing or else excusing them.” Rm. 2:14-15 Here St. Paul makes it very clear that even those who were unaware of God and His commandments, are still subconsciously aware of what is right and wrong, His law. Therefore since they have not actively rejected that, they cannot be equivalent to those who have knowingly rejected God. 

What of children? I have heard the argument made by atheists that infants and children are atheists, based on their lack of belief definition. This is a little bit different in that children lack not belief but the capacity to understand belief. Infants also cannot be considered atheists because they lack belief, in this circumstance the infant in not unaware of God, but lacks the ability to make a choice because the infant has not developed enough. Over time the infant becomes a child and begins to develop the capacity with which to understand and to choose. The simple fact is that to be an atheist one must choose to believe their is no God. Simply because someone lacks belief does not make them an atheist, the two are separate states of being.

Second Thought

Atheists reject God, yet they accept the idea of God. How can you lack belief, as they claim, if you believe in the idea of God just not His existence? So while they are atheist in the sense the do not believe in the existence of God, they still believe in the idea of God and therefore cannot “lack belief” completely in God. If we take the argument set forth by Richard Dawkins of a teapot that orbits the earth, would I lack belief in that? No. Mr. Dawkins has put forth this idea, let us assume he truly believes this, I do not have the capacity to disprove his theory but for all I know he could be right. Therefore I cannot “lack belief” in his theory no matter how absurd it may seem to me, so I have to take a position and say, I believe the teapot is not there, I believe your belief is wrong. So while you lack belief in the teapot orbiting our planet, you still have to believe it is not there on the basis that you cannot disprove it. 

      Religion has much more credibility than it is given, simply because it has been with us our whole recorded history. Because of this it must be taken seriously. Our ancestors should not be looked down upon for their religious beliefs, and should not be considered superstitious. After all some of them have created marvels to the likes we cannot even conceive of doing today with our advanced technology. The Egyptians built the great pyramids, and many other fantastic works of art. The Mayans also built spectacular monuments and were able to calculate precise astronomical events well into the distant future. The list is quite lengthy actually. So it is very unfair to perceive our ancestors as living in the dark ages or being primitive in any way, at least until we can accomplish what they have done. It is only fair to take the idea of religion seriously, even if only in a historical sense, we must acknowledge the possibility of a God or gods. Since the majority, without question, acknowledge the historical existence of religion and the role it has played in our history, there is belief, not lack of belief, even if only belief in the idea or history of religion.

Protestantism: The Belief and the Individual

         Is it acceptable to consider protestants Christian? This is something that I cannot answer with any amount of certainty. I do not know the hearts of anyone and therefore cannot pass judgment on my fellow human beings. What I can say with absolute certainty is that protestantism is not Christian. The individual being separate from the belief is subject to be judged only by God, the belief the individual adheres to, however, is subject to all for judgment. This may seem confusing so bear with me in my attempt to explain my position. As a former protestant I have the experience to understand and know the belief system and that I was truly seeking Christ and others are only seeking momentary bliss and self directed worship, not of the true God but a God they want to believe in. So it is possible that a person who is not Orthodox but is actively seeking Christ, be Christian. Again I am not a judge and have no place pointing out who is and who is not, and this is why I condemn the belief system adhered to by protestants and not the actual individuals associated with the belief. 

Why is it that some may consider protestantism to be Christian? I have been told that the Christology of protestantism is the exact same as the Orthodox belief, therefore protestantism is Christian. I think this tends to confuse our youth and those with little knowledge to Orthodoxy. Essentially we are to believe that the same result can be achieved through protestantism as Orthodoxy, both of which are polar opposites. Orthodoxy embracing suffering and rejecting the worldly and protestantism embracing politics, the worldly, often times material pleasure as well as the physical, and the list goes on. Since protestantism is much easier and apparently it is acceptable to many Orthodox to have faith only, why do we struggle the Orthodox spiritual life? If protestantism is Christian and we can achieve the same result as Orthodoxy, what we are doing is pointless and void of meaning. Protestantism cannot be considered Christian without making Orthodoxy relative and insignificant. “You believe there is one God. You do well. Even the demons believe-and tremble! But do you want to know, O foolish man, that faith without works is dead?” (James 2:19,20) If we are basing our acceptance of protestantism based on their belief in God, then logically we must assume that the demons are Christians as well. St. James makes this plainly obvious in the verse above. He recognizes that it is a good thing to believe in God, but where exactly does faith alone get you? He states that “..even the demons believe, and tremble!” So the demons believe in Christ, and must understand Christology because they “tremble” according to St. James.

What exactly is the etymology of the word “protestant”? Protestant comes from the word protest which is defined by the New Oxford American Dictionary as: a statement or action expressing disapproval of or objection to something : the Hungarian team lodged an official protest | two senior scientists resigned in protest.

• an organized public demonstration expressing strong objection to a policy or course of action adopted by those in authority : [as adj. ] a protest march.

2 Law a written declaration, typically by a notary public, that a bill has been presented and payment or acceptance refused.

Protestantism is to protest, but protest against what? In this case against religious authority, mainly the Roman Catholic Church or anything similar to it. Protestantism is to rebel against religious authority, the authority passed on to us by the apostles. How is it that we can accept a belief completely opposed to Orthodox Christianity in every way. Protestantism rejects everything that, according to Orthodox tradition and doctrine, makes us Christian. That is a contradiction of our own self and what Orthodoxy is, we accept protestantism as Christian, while protestantism actively rejects what is deemed as a necessity for salvation. 

By accepting protestantism we are creating confusion amongst our people and we cannot buy into this liberal ideology that “we all believe in God, who we share no common opinion.” Accepting this tells our people that protestantism is acceptable, their beliefs, their doctrines, and even their worship. How is this acceptable, but if protestantism is Christian then there is nothing wrong with leaving the church for the path of least resistance. The mind of our youth works like this, they are not mature and tend to find the easiest way to do things, as opposed to the right way of doing things. This is something that cannot be reconciled, why stay in the Orthodox church if indeed protestantism is one in the same, just much easier? Anyone who regurgitates this phrase that protestantism is Christian is contradicting themselves in the same sentence.

“And in one holy, universal, apostolic church..” (The Creed) If indeed you believe that protestantism is Christian, part of the same Christian church, then you must omit this phrase from the Creed and never say it. Protestantism is not one but around 40,000 very different denominations, which also contradicts Ephesians 4:5 “One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism.” You must believe that there are many Lords, many faiths, and many baptisms. Simply because there are so many denominations that are distinctly different, their views on our Lord differ, their views on baptism differ, and of course they are distinctly different faiths. So this belief, that protestantism is Christian also contradicts the creed that we have said for centuries, and the Holy Scriptures. 

Let us look back in history and see just how protestants viewed our own Coptic Orthodox Church. Here are some correspondence from the Church Missionary Society about our church.

i. 1752, Moravian Brethren. "..in all their conversation to endeavour to direct attention to the essence of Christianity ... and teach them how, by means of Jesus' merits, they might obtain rest for their souls, true holiness of life, and evangelical liberty, which leave the conscience unfettered by human traditions".

ii. 1850, Church Mission Society. "The missionaries seem to follow almost too strictly the plan on which the mission was begun, to seek the friendship of the clergy, especially the higher clergy of the Eastern Churches, with a view of influencing them gently, in the hope that by slow degrees they would become convinced of their errors and themselves reform their respective Churches. But the system has failed... Individual conversions [of Copts] must be the aim, as the only means of prosecuting reformation".

iii. 1850, Church Mission Society. "Through the Church Mussuin Society missionaries throughout the Nile Valley, hundreds of persons had their knowledge of the way of salvation corrected, their faith directed away from their own works, to the death and suffering and obedience of the Son of God as the reason and ground of salvation from sin and its consequences".

iv. 1852. "Rev Mr. Leider has done good among the Copts, and the young men whom he has instructed refuse on conscientious grounds to enter the priesthood of this corrupt Church.... The American Missionary Association has resolved to establish a Mission among the Copts".

v. 1896. "[The Copts] must have had some glimpse of the light that illumines the soul and leads up to the throne of God. To help such a people [the Copts] to loosen themselves from the chains of superstition, and to come out of the dungeon of darkness into which their surroundings had imprisoned them, and lead them forth into the light and liberty of the Christian faith, is surely a duty and a Christian privilege".

 (Provided by Fr. Peter Farrington)

“For Jesus knew from the beginning who they were who did not believe, and who would betray Him. And He said, “Therefore I have said to you that no one can come to Me unless it has been given to him by My Father.” From that time many of His disciples went back and walked with Him no more.” (John 6:64-66) 

Some argue that taking this stance, against protestantism being Christian, will only push protestants away from Orthodoxy. I beg to differ. I do not believe it possible to turn someone away from Christ, since anyone that comes to Christ, must have been given to him by God, how can we stop that? What we can prevent is our own from being deceived and confused by protestantism. The idea that we can  prevent someone from coming to Christ, is absurdity. As the verse above shows, God gives this, who are we to take it away? The fact is we cannot, but we should not further delude those who adhere to protestantism by sending them the message that the true church sees them as equals. How can two opposites be equal? The individual may be sincere and honestly seeking Christ, but the protestant belief can never be Christian just as a lie can never become the truth.