John Mark Reynolds

John Mark Reynolds

Director of the Torrey Honors Institute, Biola University

Dr. John Mark Reynolds can be found blogging regularly at Scriptoriumdaily.com along with other faculty from the Torrey Honors Institute, a great books program at Biola University for which he is founder and director. He is also Associate Professor of Philosophy for Biola. In 1996 he received his Ph.D. in Philosophy from the University of Rochester. Dr. Reynolds' first book, "Three Views on the Creation and Evolution Debate," was co-edited with J.P. Moreland. His latest book, "Towards a Unified Platonic Human Psychology," is a close examination of Plato's view of the soul as seen in the Timaeus. Several of his technical articles have been published on philosophy of religion as well as popular articles in journals such as The New Oxford Review and Touchstone. Dr. Reynolds lectures frequently on ancient philosophy, philosophy of science, home-schooling and cultural trends. He regularly appears on radio talk shows, including the Hugh Hewitt Show. Close.

John Mark Reynolds

Director of the Torrey Honors Institute, Biola University

Dr. John Mark Reynolds can be found blogging regularly at Scriptoriumdaily.com along with other faculty from the Torrey Honors Institute, a great books program at Biola University for which he is founder and director. He is also Associate Professor of Philosophy for Biola. more »

Main Page | John Mark Reynolds Archives | On Faith Archives


« Previous Post | Next Post »

Room for Humility in All Believers

Pity the atheist.

There are not very many of them and a great many people in the U.S. already don't like them.

That is too bad, since many atheists are decent people who share basic American commitments to justice and the civil order even if they don't share the basic American belief that these rights are an endowment by the Creator.

This isn't just an intellectual mistake, but it means that every time they read most great American documents or visit great American sites, they face ideological offense. It doesn't end with the theism of the Declaration or the way our Constitution was signed (without an ACLU produced qualm) "in the year of our Lord." They must stand in the Lincoln memorial and read his great Bible soaked Second Inaugural Address. American Revolutionaries kept saying things like: "No King, but King Jesus!"

Even their hero, Jefferson, was a deist and not secular at all in the modern sense. They visit Yosemite, hoping to choke the incense of religion, only to find that one of the oldest buildings there is a chapel!

Theism is shot through American life and culture from the start.

To these woes they have recently added the burden of their history.

Most of the great ideas, art, and culture of the world were produced by theists or within cultures sustained by a theist population. Of course, since most people were theists, many of the world's biggest headaches were also caused by people who claimed to believe in God.

This was their great hope. It was at least plausible that there was some way of getting rid of the God idea while keeping the good stuff the God idea had encouraged. If Western theists had (mostly) produced a society they liked couldn't they keep the Western civilization and get rid of the theism?

Sadly, this experiment did not go well at all.

The areas of the world they ran most directly turned out to be horrific. Millions died in the twentieth century at the hands of extremist leaders who mouthed commitments to "reason," "science," and "enlightenment."

It turns out that just as belief in a God of love is no absolute barrier against hateful activity, so too the ideology of atheism is no cure for human evil. Just as Christians must modestly admit that Christians have done great harm in the name of Christ, so secularists must admit that secularists have done great evil in the name of their cause.

Of course, mainstream Christians, the largest group of theists in the USA, have never been Utopians about life this side of Paradise. Our view of reality is compatible with progress (which we have produced), but not perfection in this life for most people. We are on a pilgrimage to a new and better city and this New Jerusalem will not be built by human hands.

In fact, one of the great attractions of early secularism (until history disappointed them) was that it was overwhelmingly Utopian. These men mocked "pie in the sky by and by," and promised perfection, at least to our children's children, if we just gave them power.

Read early science fiction (overwhelmingly secular) if you doubt it. "Science" was going to make us all happy! Watch the classic "Things to Come" to see real statist Utopianism in full bloom . . . in a fight against the humanities and religion.

It is really hard not to laugh until one remembers these books encouraged some very bad governments and ideas.

Of course, many (if not most) American secularists know all of this. They believe secularism is true, but they are modest about it. They know they could be wrong. They try to persuade us they are right, but do so realizing that there good points on the other side.

Such secularism is often attractive and has merit. At the very least, it offers a needed challenge to religious orthodoxy and sharpens our thinking.

What it lacks is the certainty and immodesty that motivates so much of the tiny (but loud) activist secularist base. These are the folk who are constantly wounded by the continued religious nature of American citizens and most people in the world.

They live in an irrational fear of religion which drives out love.

Recently, some of these more extreme atheists have tried to salve the wounds by asserting that they may be small in the USA, but they are smarter than everyone else. They are the "brights" and everyone else is a bit dim by comparison. This would be comforting if it were not more easily explained by recent sociological pressures in some areas of the culture. In parts of the culture, atheism is a lazy assumption in just the same way that being spiritual is a thoughtless assumption in others.

After all, there are plenty of very clever theists, so nobody can claim a monopoly on intelligence.

The Pew Study is important, because it turns out that whenever they grow a bit, many members of the "atheist church" are as subject to strange inconsistencies in their views as any other group.

The Thomist philosophers of the Roman church have long had the joyous burden of mass appeal! It is good to get bigger, but growth brings with it the natural "dilution" of a certain kind of intellectual talent. For theists, with their broader view of reality and knowledge, this is anticipated.

For extreme secularists, rabidly hostile to religion and already reeling under so many burdens, such a situation is pitiable. It turns out that a firm commitment to the tenants of secularism does not even help many followers understand secularism!

What this should do is produce the (traditional Christian) virtue of modesty about being "right" intellectually. Having the right idea is good, but not enough. Good hearted atheists, who are wrong and inconsistent, may make much better neighbors than wicked Christians who are consistent in their true beliefs, but hateful in their practice of them.

Faith, beliefs for which we have evidence but that are uncertain, is necessary for everyone. The uncertainty in all our knowledge should breed modesty in all of us.

Somebody must govern and some ideas (whether religious or secular) will dominate, but this domination should always (the nature of faith teaches) be as open and light handed as possible. Many moderate secularists, chastened by recent history, have learned this lesson. Many traditional religious people, long ago chastened by history, also know this.

The sort of person, religious or secular, who thinks all his foes obviously cads or fools is sad, but dangerous.

Pew reminds us that nobody has a lock on rational thinking.

Please e-mail On Faith if you'd like to receive an email notification when On Faith sends out a new question.

Email Me | Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook

Reader Response

ALL COMMENTS (21)

Post a comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.

Top Local Global

On Faith is an interactive conversation on religion moderated by Newsweek Editor Jon Meacham and Sally Quinn of The Washington Post. It is produced jointly by Newsweek and washingtonpost.com, as is PostGlobal, a conversation on international affairs. Please send your comments, questions and suggestions for On Faith to editor and producer David Waters.