ANALYZE THIS!
Some skeptics have a
difficult time understanding Divine Rights. Who does God
think He is, anyway? This argument leaves no doubt that
if a Biblical god exists, His declarations of morality
and purpose are objective realities, while human
morality and purpose can only be imaginary in the
absence of a Biblical god. This is the argument to use
when skeptics accuse Christians of having an 'imaginary'
friend. Why? Because it exposes their own life as
an imaginative game of make-believe.
Answers to counter-arguments are given Here.
THE GAME DESIGNER ARGUMENT
LIFE'S PURPOSE AND MEANING
In an
atheistic philosophy, there are certain things that
concern the reality of life that must be accepted as
illusion because, without God, that is the only
thing they can be. We live our lives as if they have
a real and genuine purpose. Most people will say
that their lives have meaning, regardless of their
philosophy. But a life that is created by chance,
and natural selection, can have no inherent or
objective purpose or meaning. Instead, such a life
can only have a self-assigned, subjective meaning. A
non-objective, self-assigned meaning is purely
imaginary! It is a subjective opinion of what can
only be a subjective reality. Conversely, a life
created by design and a designer, such as the one
described in Christianity, is given an objective
purpose; its meaning is genuine and inherent. We may
have different, subjective opinions as to what that
purpose is, but these are subjective
opinions
concerning an objective reality.
As a
demonstration of the imaginary quality of
self-assigned, subjective purpose, examine the
tumultuous life of 'Andy'. When Andy was in school,
he decided that his goal in life was to become a
doctor and help alleviate the pain of his patients.
This was the self-assigned purpose he gave to his
life; without this purpose, his life would have very
little meaning. For 6 years, this self-assigned
purpose motivated him to get up each morning. Then
he became very ill and his hopes of becoming a
doctor vanished. So he married a very handsome woman
and put her on a pedestal. Her love gave his life
meaning. His sole life's purpose was to love this
incredible woman; without her, his life would have
very little meaning. Unfortunately, his wife felt
the same way about another man and, after 5 years of
marriage, she divorced Andy. Andy then decided to
buy a Harley, because he knew that his bike would
never leave him for another man. That bike gave
Andy's life meaning; his purpose was to become one
with the wind. Then he wrecked it...so he turned to
chess...he would become the best chess player in the
world...
The above scenario doesn't allow me to equate
subjective, self-assigned purpose with objective,
inherent designed purpose. I see the above as
latching on to one diversion after another in a
desperate attempt to avoid the reality of a
meaningless life.
What
makes the purpose created by God any less subjective
than the purpose created by man?
I would
think that the designer of any instrument or
creature would be the one to consult in matters of
the design and purpose of his design. If the
designer states that the purpose of his instrument
is to remove and place screws, then he has declared
that purpose as the objective purpose. The opinion
of such a designer, wouldn't qualify as an opinion,
but rather it becomes the objective purpose of the
instrument. There is nothing to stop us from turning
the instrument around and using its handle to pound
in nails (and I am not one to decry the usefulness
of employing a screwdriver in this manner), however,
that usage would not be the objective purpose for
which the instrument was created.
God is,
by definition, the author or designer of life. A
designer designs with intention. Only the designer
is in a position to know his intention; all others
can only speculate concerning his intention. For
example, players, without the set of instructions
for a new board game, can only have opinions as to
how the game is designed to be played. They don't
know, with certainty, the objective intent of its
designer. But when the designer reveals the
objective purpose of the game through written
instructions and rules, he objectively states his
intention. The designer is the authority concerning
his design; he is the objective authority when it
comes to purpose of the design because only he can
know, with certainty, its purpose. He may attempt to
make that purpose known to others, but that attempt
would make it open to interpretation. But to agree
that the designer’s expressed intentions as to how
the game is to be played, are just as subjective as
one’s own interpretation of the game, would be
like saying to another, "We know what you think
you mean, but we disagree that you really mean
it.”
Skeptics may say that Christians deceive
themselves into believing that there is a god, in
order to supply their lives with an objective
purpose. Of course, whether or not this god exists
remains open to debate.
Skeptics, however, reject the concept of a
deity, and, therefore, reject any concept of an
objective purpose to their lives, but emotionally
maintain that their lives have a purpose, a purpose
that can only be imaginary. At least there is the
possibility that our God is real, and we don’t
have to pretend that our lives have meaning.
MORALITY
This same argument can be used to make a case for
God's standard of morality. Just go through and
substitute 'morality' for 'meaning' or 'purpose'.
God's standards of morality are objective, because
He is the designer of Life.
OBJECTIONS
Some may say that they refuse to play the game
that God has designed. The game that He has
designed, however, is the Game of Life. If you
are alive, you are already in the game, like
it or not. It isn't a question, then, of refusing to
play, but if you are going to play to win or play to
lose.
[Return to Ex-Atheist home]
| 
