Innocence

Last week, I responded to the website, Victims of Christianity, which claims that Christianity causes "overt physical harm" (see Victims of Christianity?).

The second example that the site's author, Mark Smith, provides is of the Rev. Kyle Lake who was electrocuted in a baptismal fount. Smith states that Rev. Lake is one of the people "who would have all been better off, if religion were not in the world." So a tragic accident becomes the fault of religion.

I asked the question: How many people died in car accidents today? I guess they "would have all been better off, if [cars] were not in the world."

Smith provides a response page where he responds those who have challenged him. One person wrote regarding Lake's death that many hundreds of people were affected by the death of this young pastor." (The words in red are highlighted on Smith's site showing Smith's emphasis).

Smith responded:

"Mark Smith here} Why should any Christian that knew him be "affected" by his death??? IF they REALLY believed all the hype about heaven and such, then they SHOULD be overwhelmed with joy at Kyle's "promotion" to a better position. The FACT though, that Christians cry at funerals just as much as anyone else proves Christians, deep down inside, really don't believe their own propoganda. Deep down inside you know the truth, that this life is all there is, and you cry at that
realization."

What Smith misses is that Christianity teaches that we are relational beings. Human beings are in relationship with each other and with God. When someone dies we cry, we mourn the loss.

In fact, Jesus wept at the death of Lazarus ... right before he raised Lazarus from the dead! Just because Rev. Kyle has obtained a "promotion" and is alive, we still mourn the loss. It is a tragedy. But tragedy does not have meaning unless there is value. What gives human beings value? Other human beings? If so, then human beings can also assign non-value those over whom they have power. Suddenly, some human beings are defined as property as per the Dred Scott decision or parasites as per the Nazis regarding those they deemed undesirable.

The atheist has the same problem. Why does the atheist cry at someone's death? Why does Smith believe there is even the concept of an innocent. The concept of innocence is moral language. If human beings are merely the results of evolutionary processes then there is no such thing as innocence. There is only the survival of the fittest. In the whole of the cosmos, human beings would be no different than amoebas.

"The FACT though, that [atheists] cry at funerals just as much as anyone else proves [atheists], deep down inside, really don't believe their own propaganda."

Deep down inside Smith knows the truth, that this life is not all there is. His very objections to Christianity depend on a transcendent moral standard given by a transcendent moral stahdard giver who has stamped each and every human being with transcendent value. And when the transcendent value is violated, deep down we know.

That's why Smith objects. Deep down he knows human beings have value and that value means that human beings must be treated in a way that acknowledges that value.

Smith's atheistic worldview cannot explain that. In objecting, Smith reveals that he really doesn't believe his own propaganda.