Letter #89: Matter Matters

And No One Has Seen God

“Why are Christians, of all people, so shy about advancing religious arguments?”

I’m glad you asked. Because there’s nothing I like better than ascribing dubious motives to people other than myself. Not only does it make them look bad, but it also reflects well on me. For instance, if an atheist says to a Christian: “You only do good because you’re afraid of going to hell!” it not only sullies the Christian’s faith, but it also implies the atheist does good because righteousness sits on his soul like dappled sunlight on a mountain stream. Or if a socialist says, “You capitalists only care about money!” it simultaneously dismisses any idea capitalists might care about, say, freedom, and suggests that socialists aren’t really plotting to get their blood-red claws on every scrap of power they can accumulate.

I like this game. Let’s play!

Maybe reticent Christians are afraid of advancing religious arguments because it sounds unsophisticated. It makes people think you’re some kind of rube so you don’t get invited to the good parties. Isn’t that the whole point of Christianity? Like when Jesus says, “Come unto me all ye that labor and are heavy laden, and I will sneak you into the Vanity Fair after-Oscars bash.”

Or maybe some Christians are like kids who are still pretending to believe in Santa Claus even after they've stumbled on the Santa costume hidden at the bottom of Dad’s underwear drawer. Why tell the truth and risk missing out on a new Playstation? Likewise, even after you figure out this whole God thing is a scam, pretending you believe drives the trad girls wild.

To be fair, there really is something about matter-based, scientific—even pseudo-scientific—explanations that simply sounds more serious than theology, even when the explanations are completely ridiculous. Freudianism was all the rage when I was a kid, essentially because it translated spirit into flesh. “To me the derivation of religious needs from the helplessness of the child and a longing for its father seems irrefutable.” What was Freud’s irrefutable proof? A few conversations with a handful of Victorian neurotics. Absurd—but it sounded good. You can see your father. God? Not so much.

I read a book once that argued our sense of beauty is an evolved trait. We find the savannah lovely because we were apes there—that was actually one of the arguments. And I thought, yeah, and we find sunrise beautiful because predators roam the night. And sunset is beautiful because, uh, some other reason. I mean, the whole thing was idiotic, and yet still—still, it sounded more realistic somehow than “Maybe we find creation beautiful because it declares the glory of God.” Which is obviously true!

Matter is very there. Spirit is invisible. Maybe that’s what gives material explanations their apparent weight. And yet, the experience of being human continually confirms the mysterious presence at its source. Shouldn’t we, like the stars, declare his glory?

Love, Dad