Magazine Religion
By Gordon H. Clark. Ph.D.
In the past little while religion has become a topic for the
popular magazines. No doubt the insecurity of the post-war situation has revealed
the superficiality of modernistic optimism and the hopelessness of out and out naturalism.
To avoid an emotional burden that leads to insanity numbers of men and women are
turning their thoughts to religion. And the magazines recognize the interest value.
What kind of religion do the magazines offer? This is a question
of some importance. A part of the answer is to be found in an article entitled,
Can a Scientist Believe in God?" by Warren Weaver of the Rockefeller Foundation.
This article first was published in Look, and it seemed so excellent to the editors
of the Readers Digest that they not only republished it but are trying to circulate
reprints of it.
For Dr. Weaver the fact that we cannot see God is no more of
a reason for not believing in God than the fact that we cannot see electrons is
a reason for not believing in electrons. Electron is a name for a set of phenomena
that happen with regularity. No one can deny that these phenomena occur, and electron
is their name. Therefore electrons exist. Similarly, argues Dr. Weaver, God is a
name for another set of consistent phenomena. No one can deny that men, when they
are deeply troubled, find comfort in hymns and memories of childhood; no one can
deny that in moral crises men sometimes feel a sense of guidance, a hunch, a conviction
that such and such is the right thing to do. Other similar experiences are also
undeniable. Well, then, God is the name for these phenomena just as electron is
the name of other phenomena. Therefore, concludes the article, a scientist can believe
in God.
We wish to ask, however, whether a scientist who gives a name
to certain phenomena actually believes in God or not. Does the word God mean for
the Christian a set of emotional experiences? Or is God a living personal Creator?
An atheist can believe that these sets of phenomena occur; he would not deny their
reality. But an atheist is honest enough not to call these experiences God. They
are simply our experiences. Between the atheist who uses language and the person
who tries to sound religious by a tricky use of names, there is some advantage
on the side of the atheist.
The important question is not so much. Does God exist? but. What
is God? This question may sound like dry-as-dust theology, but the issues of theology
go to the center of our very being. What is God? is a very important question.
And Presbyterians who have been brought up as Presbyterians know the answer from
childhood. Do you remember your catechism? It does not say, God is a name; it says,
God is a... (Can you finish it?)
No comments:
Post a Comment