Purpose for Living

Jerry Seinfeld says that for men, super heroes aren't merely comic book figures - they're options.  And as for me, I want to be Batman.  

But that dream is an eternity away since I have the flexibility of a fence post.  However, if I were to wake up one day and find myself miraculously clothed in a black Kevlar suit and endowed with gymnastic skills, I think a guy like Hitchens would be The Joker.

This week I'm teaching a group of high school seniors to compare atheism and Christianity based on each worldview's take on our purpose for living, and this video will be a part of the discussion.  What do you think?

1 comment:

Lowell said...

Rob Bell mentions that people lose their faith due to hearing other truths in other halls other than their own church. The eloquent lectures delivered in the halls of universities, is a stark contrast to those heard at youth group on Wednesday. Bell continues saying that all truths belong to Christ. Whether it’s the valence shells in an atom or the math behind a rocket launch. These truths belong to Christ. You’ve mentioned in past conversations how things often left untouched in the church is crippling to the church. Atheism needs to be introduced by the church first. Better the pastor or parent rather than the professor.

I believe the reason its avoided is largely in part to the grand stature Atheism presents. Your average evangelical Christian, well person actually is not well versed in the hard sciences. Although I can name a few who are, they are rare. Atheism touts around objective, observable sciences. A Christian is left with only seemingly subjective truths. If a Christian travels down the rabbit hole just a little further they’ll find the objective truths that haven’t been addressed.

Onto Hitchens, he’s needs to be respected for his devotion and faith in his naturalistic worldview. Even in the face of a losing battle to cancer he stands firm in his beliefs. If anyone is looking for the true voice of Atheism he’s it. I have much more respect for him than I do someone like Dawkins. Hitchen’s I believe has risked a lot more for his ideals than others in his camp. He’s genuine when he says in the debate you posted that he wants to help others in their struggle for liberty. But my respect ends there. He retorts to childish methods when he debates. He avoids the hard questions posed by his opposition by setting up straw men. These straw men are to make the opposition’s views as silly. He mentions the after life as a “theme park.” The internet calls that trolling. He’s trying to bait his opponent by arousing emotions hopefully sidetracking them. All that aside though, he admits the Achilles tendon of Atheism, which is purpose. Meaning is lost in the core of Atheism. It boils down to advanced apes with delusions of morality. Ravi Zacharias poses the question, “How can an amoral universe through non-moral means come up with a moral framework?” Hitchens says it’s a “slight edge.” His opponent does well in stating the purpose of why Christians care. Its not a matter of control. It’s a matter of a positive outlook on a creation made in God’s own image.

So thanks Mike for bringing this to the kids. May God give you wisdom when answering the questions posed by your students. I think you have the right balance of heart and mind to talk to teenagers. I think the church does a huge disservice by spoon feeding them watered down messages about not doing drugs. They want solid answers and honesty. But also in church culture denies humanity. Atheism on the other hand embraces it. Ravi Zacharias I believe does a great job in addressing that issue. He understands that humanity is a creation, although fallen there are still redeemable parts to it. When answering students at Yale or Oxford he addresses the questioner’s heart without sidestepping the question.

Here he talks about that very issue.


This video I think is very relevant to the situation you’ll find yourself in when talking to the church’s youngest and brightest.