On his TBN program last week (mid-August 2018), Mike Huckabee was praising his guest Anthony DeStefano and his book Inside the Atheist Mind. Later, I thought of Søren Kierkegaard (1813–1855), the well-known Christian believer who didn't accept reasoned arguments for his Christianity or the existence of God. He held his Christianity as a "leap of faith". Inside the Mind of many atheists is dismissal similar to Kierkegaard's, but they also do not accept his leap of faith. Neither Huckabee or DeStefano said anything about this in discussing the atheist mind, but here is a five-star review of DeStefano's book at Amazon that supports of DeStefano's position:
Their ignorance of the Bible, Christian beliefs and Christian history is appalling. Actually, if you have read one of their books, you have read them all (I have read a fair share of them, trying to find a logical argument, sigh).Another five-star review:
The book ... points out many of the logical inconsistencies and general hypocrisy of the atheist religion (Yep, I said religion because it is a system based on faith that something comes from nothing, and order comes from chaos, and that the fine tuning of the universe happens without a tuner).
What we have here are believers in Intelligent Design, which goes back as far as hunter-gatherer societies. Hunter-gatherers believed that the benefits they found in nature had been created (designed) for them by a great spirit. It continued into the Middle Ages, including people believing that the sun rose to light their world for the day. And later there was Isaac Newton believing that gravity was a part of God's design.
But after Newton there were skeptics. And among the skeptics were people who didn't claim that they had total knowledge of what nature was about. They just didn't want to assume the validity of the intelligent design theory. There was David Hume, who in 1789 published his "Dialogues Concerning Natural Religion" in which he described characters debating a number of arguments for the existence of God. And there was Immanuel Kant who discussed the teleological argument. In appears that DeStefanodidn't take on Hume or Kant and he failed to differentiate between doubting and believing, thus the description of doubters as religious. (The full title of DeStefano's book is, Inside the Atheist Mind: Unmasking the Religion of Those Who Say There Is No God.)
I wonder, did DeStefano wonder about the possibility of nature governed by internal dynamics? Skeptics have considered this as an alternative to "the unmoved mover", the intelligent god-creator — something they have considered without presuming or proclaiming final or complete knowledge. Some of us believe in something called happenstance and stuff happening only because it can happen, that if it can't happen it won't happen, godly intelligence or no godly intelligence (Allah's will or lack of will). In case DeStefano failed to describe this in explaining the non-theistic or anti-theistic mind, let me eleborate:
Can we entertain the idea of an interplay between chaos and order? Volcanoes have pushed the earth upward, and rain and water (pulled by gravity) has moved earth to lower ground. Lakes have formed surrounded by vegetation growing where it can. Trees have grown where they can, different kinds of trees in different climates, with crooked branches and twigs reaching upward to the light and crooked roots burrowing into the earth. It's a creation by nature itself that non-believers perceive as the beauty of wilderness — without the millennia-old presumption of a Great Spirit.
And we are aware of more happenings governed by nature without assuming an outside intelligence: the earth not crashing into the sun because of a balance between gravitational force and centrifugal force, a balance that produces rotation. It may end someday in the chaos of the sun exploding, suggesting something other than DeStefano's intelligent design.
Did DeStefano discuss any of this in his book on the atheist mind? Was his book what he made it appear to be while a guest on the Huckabee show: a faulty and shallow representation of those who don't share his political and religious views.
Copyright © 2018 by Frank E. Smitha. All rights reserved.