BY DOMINIC WIGHTMAN
The salesmen of atheism are quiet at this time of year. How I miss their clever rants. They remind me of a woman I witnessed last summer in Biarritz, stepping into the Atlantic. She had a great tear in the seat of her burkini, unknowingly exposing her pale cheeks to the world.
The atheists’ words are like faith adrenaline, inspiring in their fervour, and should stoke rather than dampen the faith of believers. To sum up the crack in their argument: reality has an identity. This identity is the essence of existence. When they speak of ‘reality,’ they might as well be speaking of ‘God’.
This idea is hardly novel:
- Transcendence hints at the essence of reality, qualities that exceed mere physical forms, much like a divine being beyond the material world.
- Unity reflects a fundamental oneness in all things, like a universal spirit binding existence together.
- The essence of reality offers meaning and purpose, akin to the way God shapes moral foundations, it provides stability in a chaotic universe and connects to moral truths that guide us—much like divine law. Engaging with this essence brings acute questions of existence, mirroring the enquiries we believers make about God, uniting philosophy and spirituality.
The eloquent Stephen Fry stumbles a lot. He talks of the universe as ‘all that is, or ever was, or ever will be’. Fry frequently refers to an underlying existence that resonates with the concept of God which might as well be called ‘God’.
Richard Dawkins vociferously opposes religion, claiming, ‘It teaches us to be satisfied with not understanding the world’. Yet, his acknowledgment of reality’s complexity hints at a deeper identity that, dare I say, echoes divinity and might well be called ‘God’. Science is fundamentally based on value judgements that cannot be scientifically validated. Concepts like the importance of facts and truths, as well as the belief that the universe follows a consistent logic that humans can comprehend, are themselves value judgements that cannot be merely supported by citing scientific facts. As an evolutionary biologist, Dawkins’ leaps of faith are prodigious.
That genius of comedy and theology Ricky Gervais claims, ‘I’m an atheist, but I’m a very open-minded person’. And Gervais’ stated openness regularly induces a broader essence that might resemble and might as well be termed ‘the divine’.
Sam Harris speaks often of his atheism, claiming that ‘the moral landscape is not a set of moral laws, but a map of how humans flourish’. Harris’ perspective also implies a guiding essence akin to a divine force. He also asserts, ‘We are not possessed by our thoughts, but we can choose what to think’. This ability to choose also indicates a deeper relationship with reality, one that resonates with something beyond mere existence.
Do you not now see the rip in our beloved atheists’ burkinis?
The late atheist Carl Sagan reminded us that ‘the cosmos is all that is or ever was or ever will be’, again highlighting a vast reality that suggests an underlying identity, which might as well be called ‘God’.
Albert Einstein (not an atheist, more a pantheist, but quoted by many of today’s atheist proselytisers in secular discourse) once said, ‘Science without religion is lame; religion without science is blind’, highlighting the interconnectedness of understanding existence and reality, again suggesting that there’s a deeper essence, which might as well be interpreted as a divine attribute.
It is easier to sell Scientology than atheism. Believe in that and you’ll believe in anything.
Might we not call the tailor of atheism ‘God’?
Dominic Wightman is the Editor of Country Squire Magazine and the author of Dear Townies, Arcadia and Truth among other books including ‘conservatism’ which published this month.