Back in the day when I was a teenager, before I had status and before I had a pager…
Sorry, a little Tribe Called Quest lingo.
Back in the day when I was contributing to Atheism Sucks I had the pleasure of having IrishFarmer as a fellow contributor. When Atheism Sucks was placed in stasis both of us, and a motley crew of others, established Atheism is Dead which I ended up running and which gave eventual birth to True Freethinker. Due to life’s ebbs and flows, such as Irish joining the Air Force and various other circumstances, he eventually had to cease posting here. Yet, in between projects, he had begun another blog which, unfortunately, he eventually also had to abandon as well.
His project was a blog on “Christian Freethough” which, in part, was inspired by an essay that I wrote in which I considered Dan Barker’s definition of “freethought.” As Irish would come to state it,
Atheists like Dan Barker have defined “freethinker” in such a way that Christians (and other theists) can’t be freethinkers, but in so doing have hobbled their thought so much that it can hardly be called free.
I had posted my essay here as Freethought Without Forethought?.
While the blog “Christian Freethough” has been deleted I have access to its contents and thought to give props, as it were, to Irish by reposting some of his material here. Thus, following is IrishFarmer’s post, “Can Christians be Freethinkers?” (with very minor stylistic changes and a succinct addendum):
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Jeffery Jay Lowder apparently thinks so. That article is unusually honest (based on my experience with many atheists), and pretty well thought out. That said, there are some things I disagree with in this article, and so I want to spend a bit of time dissecting it. The article addresses two questions: Can a theist be a freethinker? Are all nontheists freethinkers?Jeffery Jay Lowder answers these questions with a “yes” and a “no” respectively, which is a position I happen to agree with. He also says that nontheists should stop using ‘freethinker’ as an umbrella term to describe the godless. Amen. That said, I do have some problems with the article, and they’re found in the little details.
Can a Theist be a Freethinker?
For example, the Campus Freethought Alliance (CFA), the campus outreach program of the Council for Secular Humanism, states that “Freethought is the application of critical thinking and logic to all areas of human experience, and the rejection of supernatural and authoritarian beliefs.” Thus, on the CFA’s definition of “freethought,” theists by definition cannot be freethinkers.
This is really nothing more than Orwellian doublethink (think Blackwhite). Supposedly, one is supposed to believe that they can think freely by making their mind a slave to naturalism/atheism.
But why should we accept the CFA’s definition of “freethinker”? Consider the case of a person who applies “critical thinking and logic to all areas” of their life, including religion. Imagine a person who reads the Secular Web on a daily basis but one day decides to read Richard Swinburne’s book, The Existence of God.
Suppose this person becomes persuaded by Swinburne’s book that there is a cumulative case for God’s existence which shows that theism is more probable than atheism. This person has clearly applied “critical thinking and logic” to their theistic belief; moreover, they are vigilant in searching the literature for any criticisms of Swinburne’s arguments. Yet, so far, they have not found any reason to doubt Swinburne’s case. Is this person a “freethinker”? It seems just obvious to me that the answer is (and should be) a resounding “yes.”
Couldn’t have said it better myself. Unfortunately, this is where the article takes a turn for the worst.
I am quite aware that the number of theists who fit the above description must be very low. Indeed, I have never met a person who fits the above description.
He is “aware that the number…must be very low?” Firstly, how does he “know” this in the first place? This is where Jeffery Jay Lowder, for all his intellectual honesty in this article, becomes just as bad as the people who think that it is logically impossible for a theist to be a freethinker. What Lowder essentially says in this passage is that there exists, in the nether region of some possible world, theists who are able to think freely. Of course, this hypothetical – logically possible – theist is not to be found in our own world. Jeffery Jay Lowder’s fellow atheists might claim that it is logically impossible for a theist to be a freethinker, and therefore there are no theistic freethinkers. However, Lowder himself claims that it is logically possible for a theist to be a freethinker, but due to the highly unlikely nature of these two somewhat incompatible traits, there aren’t really any theistic freethinkers. In more ways than one, that’s a difference without a distinction.
Jeffery Jay Lowder then goes on to quote Proverbs 3:5 and 2 Corinthians 10:5 to the effect that one cannot literally believe/follow these passages and still be a freethinker. Of course, this sort of begs an interesting question: If God is the greatest conceivable being, then doesn’t our wisdom pale in comparison to His own?
Ken’s addendum:
I wanted to quote the texts and make a comment:
Proverbs 3:5-7 – Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding; in all your ways acknowledge Him, And He shall direct your paths. Do not be wise in your own eyes; fear the LORD and depart from evil.
2 Corinthians 10:4-5 – For the weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ.
Note that the Proverbs text is not mere about some sort of intellectual ascent but to trust, acknowledgment, direction, wisdom and evil. In any regard, this is the human condition; we all lean on someone else’s understanding since we cannot all be experts in every field. Also, note that “Trust in the LORD with all your heart, and lean not on your own understanding” is a concept that the human must filter through the process of thought.
Interestingly, the Corinthians text deals, in part, with debate, “casting down arguments.” This text is calling for what we may term worldview adherence. The interesting thing is that the self-proclaimed true freethinker would state the very same thing but, perhaps, in these terms:
For the weapons of our warfare are carnal and mighty for pulling down “God’s” strongholds, casting down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of materialism, bringing every thought into captivity to the obedience of atheism.
So called freethinker freethought is, in reality, restrictive worldview adherence thought—just like any other.
The bottom line is that Jeffery Jay Lowder—and Dan Barker, who is fond of referencing the Corinthians text to the same effect—do not consider the very many biblical references to seeking and gaining wisdom, engaging in reason, utilizing our minds, etc. Fine then, I posted a parsed essay on this matter with regards to statements made by Bertrand Russell and Dan Barker—at this link.
To turn the tables on the atheist, I can just as well ask if an atheist can really consider his/her thoughts to be free if they’re bound to the constraints -and subject to the weaknesses of – the human mind. If you have no higher source of wisdom than your own mind, and if our minds our nothing more than the outgrowth of natural forces, how free are your thoughts, really? I’m not arguing for a necessary conclusion here, I’m only saying it’s very much a possibility that our wisdom – our thinking – is only really free if God does exist. I hope this point comes through clearly, because I’m trying to be succinct.
To get back to the practical level, I do very much think one can live by the principals in these verses and still be a freethinker. I, for one, try to make my own understanding subject to the wisdom of God, however I do this through (to the best of my ability) the use of logic, reasoning, and critical inquiry. I would elaborate on this, but Jeffery Jay Lowder hasn’t provided much to respond to. He has simply claimed that there is an obvious contradiction, which just happens to not be so obvious to me. If any atheists reads this, and wants to explain this to me, I’d like to hear it.
Freethought is an epistemology, one that is incompatible with an Evangelical worldview.
This statement is incredibly vague, however, I would definitely like to hear Lowder elaborate on this. It seems to me that this simply begs the question of God’s existence, and the truthfulness of Christianity, but I don’t want to read too much into it.
Jeffery Jay Lowder quotes W. L. Craig as saying the following about doubt.
It is unbiblical to think of doubt as a virtue; to the contrary, doubt is always portrayed in the Scriptures as something detrimental to spiritual life. Doubt never builds up; it always destroys.
Unfortunately, I don’t have the book being quoted, so I can’t put it into context. However, I’ll still take a look at what Lowder has to say about this.
Craig then proceeds to argue that Christians should not confuse “thinking about their faith with doubting their faith.” Then, in a passage that I think reveals why it is so difficult for Christian websites to link to opposing websites like the Secular Web, Craig states that Christian teachers who encourage their students to doubt their faith are literally acting as “Satan’s advocate in the classroom!”
Therefore, Craig declares, he “resolved never to present objections to Christianity without also presenting and defending various solutions to those objections.” Given Craig’s worldview, that is exactly what he should do. But that is also why Evangelicals cannot be freethinkers. Unlike Evangelicals, freethinkers do not consider doubt a ‘problem’; on the contrary, freethinkers believe doubt is healthy and should be encouraged.
Yeah. Right. If freethinkers think doubt is healthy and should be encouraged, then I haven’t met a single atheist freethinker in my life. In my experience, atheists are no better than anyone else when it comes to questioning their own beliefs. Whatever, that’s beside the point. Really, this is going to be difficult for me to respond to, because I don’t have the original work being cited by Jeffery Jay Lowder, and I can’t read Craig’s mind. For instance, Craig might have been referring to doubt as the emotional, and intellectual, turmoil one might run into when they encounter something contrary to their beliefs that they aren’t prepared for.
Ken’s addendum:
I too will go off of the William Lane Craig quote as is: it does seems as if Jeffery Jay Lowder is attempting to stretch Craig’s sentiments towards his desired end but in any case: Craig does not condemn doubt in general but is referring to doubting of faith (trust, or conclusion of a syllogism) and he is actually engaging in freethough by presenting objections to Christianity while additionally defending various solutions to those objections—free to express doubt and free to engage upon refutation and defense.
As for “Satan’s advocate in the classroom!” atheists are just as on edge about “God’s advocate in the classroom!” or rather, “Advocate of anything but absolute materialism in the guise of ‘science’ in the classroom!” (find evidence of this here).
By the way, I wonder if Jeffery Jay Lowder would link to True Freethinker.
Regardless, why does one have to doubt his, or her, own beliefs to be a freethinker? I can critically examine my own beliefs without ever coming to doubt my beliefs. Doubt is an end, not a means. Doubt is something you come to by critical thought, not something you force yourself to experience simply for the sake of wanting to be a freethinker. That’s pretty absurd, as far as I’m concerned. If one must doubt all of one’s beliefs, then that rules EVERYONE out as a freethinker. For instance, has Jeffery Jay Lowder ever doubted the assertion that he should doubt everything? I think not. Nor should he, because that would just be stupid.
I’m being a little nitpicky, but the point is that I don’t see how one needs to do any more than think about their beliefs. That thinking may lead to doubt, but simply doubting for the sake of doubting is absurd.
Are all Nontheists Freethinkers?
I pretty much agree with everything after this point, so I’m just going to pull out some of my favorite quotes from the article – because there’s some good stuff here.
Of course, it’s possible that most atheists and agnostics really are freethinkers. But if that is so–and as an empirical claim, it is one which needs to be proven, not assumed–it is not by virtue of their atheism or agnosticism.
Well put. My only question is, where is this skepticism when it comes to his claim that he “knows” most theists don’t fit the bill? Isn’t that just as much of an empirical claim?
Ken’s addendum:
Well put by both Lowder and Irish. I would add to Lowder’s statement that not only is freethinking not not by virtue of their atheism or agnosticism but also critical thinking in general, engagement in reason in general, being philosophically sound in general, being scientifically supported in general, etc.
By equating “freethought” with atheism, agnosticism, or naturalism, nontheists have turned the word “freethinker” into a semantical joke.
Do nontheists who define “freethinker” in this way actually expect theists to be fooled by this distortion of language? Better yet, do any nontheists really believe that only nontheists can “form opinions about religion on the basis of reason, independently of tradition, authority, or established belief”? Do they honestly think that there is not a single theist anywhere in the world who become convinced of the existence of God “on the basis of reason, independently of tradition, authority, or established belief”?
Sir, you might be surprised.
The time has come for freethinkers to think freely about their definition of freethought. If our goal is to be taken seriously by theists–as it should be, since we are in the minority–it is time we stop playing games with words and admit that theists can be freethinkers, too.
Well, despite some minor disagreements in the middle of the article, the article ended on a great note.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page and/or on my Google+ page.