Keaton Halley, creation com, 2024
Early in the 2012 film, Life of Pi, viewers are told that the story they are about to experience is one that could make them believe in God. On the surface, the movie follows the adventures of a shipwrecked Indian boy who survives months of drifting across the ocean on a lifeboat he shares with a tiger. By the end, it becomes clear that the film presents an allegory for an existentialist approach to choosing between God and atheism.
The main character, Pi, gives two competing accounts of his voyage, neither of which can be proven, he says. One story, symbolizing an atheistic outlook, seems perfectly rational and plausible but also turns out to be morally repugnant, dark, and depressing. The other story, supposedly representing a religious and theistic perspective, is fantastic and absurdly implausible, yet simultaneously beautiful, hopeful, and inspiring. Given that neither story can be verified or falsified, Pi asks which story is preferable. He then receives the obvious answer that the fantastic (religious) story is more appealing. Thus, the film advances the idea that, though it is irrational to believe in God, it is better to live as though God were real because atheism cannot be lived out consistently and happily.
Surprisingly, many atheists actually adopt this double-minded approach to life.1 They admit that atheism has dark, nihilistic implications which they cannot face squarely. Instead of attempting to consistently live out their worldview, they candidly admit that they pretend reality is different than they believe it to be. In other words, they live inauthentically, in effect lying to themselves. This masquerade is a clear sign that atheism, not theism, is the irrational position. It ought to prompt atheists to rethink the assumptions that led them to such an absurd conclusion and to seek a more reasonable and satisfying worldview.
Disregard for destiny
A classic example of this phenomenon is found in H.G. Wells’ science fiction novella, The Time Machine. After traveling to various points in the distant future, the Time Traveler discovers, to his horror, that human society has ultimately collapsed and mankind has gone extinct. After his return, he reflects on the futility and meaninglessness of human progress in general, given that it seems doomed to eventually be undone.
[The Time Traveler] thought but cheerlessly of the Advancement of Mankind, and saw in the growing pile of civilization only a foolish heaping that must inevitably fall back upon and destroy its makers in the end.2
In the real world, mankind is also doomed to extinction apart from God’s intervention. The science of thermodynamics tells us that the universe is marching inexorably toward ‘heat death’ and the demise of all life. From an atheistic perspective, with no afterlife and no fixed standard of goodness, it would therefore be apt to describe civilization as a “foolish heaping”. Every goal we achieve individually or collectively would be arbitrary and pointless. Nothing we do would have ultimate significance or value.
What solution might atheists offer to this predicament? The next line of Wells’ novel suggests a way forward. “If that is so, it remains for us to live as though it were not so.”3
But how does lying to ourselves help? If life really is meaningless and purposeless, pretending otherwise doesn’t make the problem go away.
Einstein’s inconsistency
Similarly, the great physicist Albert Einstein rejected the idea of a personal God. He thought of human beings as machines, mechanistically determined by physics, with no room for free will. In a 1932 statement, he declared, “Human beings in their thinking, feeling, and acting, are not free but are as causally bound as the stars in their motions.”4
Yet, Einstein could not live as though he had no real control over his choices, so he went on to admit that he refused to behave in accordance with his own beliefs. “I am compelled to act as if free will existed because if I wish to live in a civilized society I must act responsibly.”5
Sadly, Einstein failed to appreciate that, if his deterministic account of reality were true, he would be unable to choose to act as a free agent. All his actions would be fixed by a chain of prior event-causes, not independently selected by him to achieve his purposeful aims. Thus, on the one hand, Einstein’s mechanistic view of reality led him to deny human freedom, yet on the other hand, he couldn’t help but act as if something else were true. That inconsistency should have alerted him that he made a mistake somewhere in his reasoning process.
Human equality—a game of ‘make believe’?
In his book, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind, atheist author Yuval Harari takes issue with the U.S. Declaration of Independence and its claim that people were created equal. He objects:
According to the science of biology, people were not ‘created’. They have evolved. And they certainly did not evolve to be ‘equal’. The idea of equality is inextricably intertwined with the idea of creation. The Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are ‘equal’?6
Much like Einstein and Wells, a few paragraphs after the above quote, Harari encourages us to pretend. While denying human equality, he says he wants us to act as if we are equal, because this helps to achieve stability in society.
We believe in a particular order not because it is objectively true, but because believing in it enables us to cooperate effectively and forge a better society.7
It apparently never dawns on Harari that, when he treats societal stability and human flourishing as objective goods, this likewise has no foundation within his atheistic system. He consciously steals the idea of equality from the Christian worldview, but unconsciously smuggles in foreign moral values as well. He has not actually presented any compelling reason, from within his atheistic framework, to treat people as equals. Moreover, he readily admits that, when he does treat people as equals, he’s faking it.
The noble lie proposal
Philosopher Loyal D. Rue also recognizes the implications of his own atheistic viewpoint, adamantly insisting there is no objective significance or purpose to life. But he proposes that humanity must avoid the hopeless outlook of nihilism (embracing meaninglessness), and instead deceive ourselves with a “noble lie”:
The option of the noble lie … first agrees with the nihilists that universal myths describing the origins, nature, and destiny of human existence are pretentious lies but then insists, against the nihilists, that without such lies humanity cannot survive.8
Rue’s proposal is that we should trick ourselves into believing a mythology that says life is meaningful, when it really isn’t. This is necessary, Rue says, to avoid the chaos of every man living for himself at one extreme, and totalitarian rule by force on the other.
But other philosophers have explained why the noble lie won’t work either.9 The more convinced we are that atheism is true and thus of the need for a noble lie, the less we are able to believe it. The proposal is unworkable in practice. But even the suggestion that humanity’s best option is to delude ourselves indicates Professor Rue should revisit the drawing board.
Christianity embraces the truth
Contrasting strongly with atheism, the Christian worldview makes sense of reality as we experience it. The God who has revealed himself in Scripture is the foundation for objective meaning, morality, human value, consciousness, reason, free will, and more.10 Christians don’t have to pretend these things exist. They really do exist because God exists and has made the world to be a particular way. Atheists tell us that they live by lies, but Christians are free to be lovers of the truth, serving the God of truth.
Reality is our ally
Not only does Christianity satisfy our emotional longings for meaning, purpose, and hope, it is supported by abundant evidence. Believing in God does not require a leap into the absurd.
CMI exists to share exciting reasons to believe God is real, and that His Word is trustworthy. Through our speaking events, website, videos, social media, and our family magazine, Creation, we share how science supports Genesis and the rest of Scripture. There’s no need to be ashamed of the Bible!
We encourage you to take advantage of CMI’s resources, and share them with others. They change the lives of real people, like G.Z., who recently said:
I will never forget how the Lord used this ministry to break through my confusion about … the truth of His Word, the Bible. Sincere thanks to the many devoted staff and volunteers of CMI.
C.W. also testified:
I found your website … during a dark time in my life, and I can truly say that you were the instrument Jesus used to save my life and soul. I am forever grateful.
Praise God that, unlike atheism, the Christian worldview is both reasonable and satisfying.
I’d say that atheism didn’t come into existence until Christianity came into prominence. Before that, everyone, everyone , had a god they believed in and worshipped, and there were many going far back in time.
This indicates that atheists actually do acknowledge the existence of the Christian God but they choose not to kneel before Him or serve Him but choose instead to serve themselves, which is exactly the same course Lucifer chose for himself. He chose to serve himself and disserve the God of Truth, which meant of course denying Him with lies. The atheists likewise disserve Him by denying His existence and they do it to serve themselves, which correlates to Satan’s action.
It’s somewhat surprising that any atheists, like those above, could actually be honest, frank, rational, and virtuous enough to admit they live by lies since they can easily admit the gamut vices that accompany their lies and censor out the virtues that God ordains that accompany His Truth. Where God is lawful, they are lawless.
But yet, their subliminal admission that God exists can still be enough to save them, provided they choose to cast off their overweening self-serving Pride.
It still comes to “Thy Will Be Done” against their own will be done.