Theoretical Nihilism
Christian writer and host of the Sacred Podcast, Elizabeth Oldfield, and atheist James Marriott, a literary critic and columnist for the Times, recently joined Justin Brierley on his excellent podcast, Uncommon Ground, to discuss whether it is possible to find meaning in life without God. It was a fascinating conversation well worth listening to.
Rebel Yell
Marriott recounted being raised in a marginally Christian home, then turning into a committed atheist in his teenage years, confessing that “Richard Dawkins was my God when I was fourteen.” He acknowledged, however, that his early attraction to atheism was more of a teenage rebellion than an intellectual revelation, remarking that “to decide when you’re fourteen years old that you are terribly clever for realizing that God doesn’t exist” makes one “feel a little rebellious while not actually being that rebellious at all.” Based on Marriott’s explanation of atheism’s appeal to him as a young man, I wonder whether the New Atheism Dawkins and Hitchens offered could more accurately be described as the rebel yell of adolescent philosophers rather than the measured erudition of thoughtful academics. Thankfully, Marriott, along with fellow young atheists like Alex O’Connor and Joe Folley, grew up and became a welcome wake-up call for a Christianity that is far too often asleep at the wheel.
Theoretical Nihilist
Marriott boldly identifies as a nihilist, whereas many of his atheist peers prefer the more approachable label of secular humanist to brighten their typically bleak worldview and make it more seeker friendly. Oldfield, however, prefers to call her friend a “theoretical nihilist” because, while intellectually on board, he frequently walks the plank and swims in a sea of literary ineffability. I find Oldfield’s label intriguing because it conjures images of an intellectual goth whose dark thoughts can’t suppress a sunny disposition, or of a fan of The Cure who can’t help but occasionally hum a hymn. I think Marriott might more accurately be described as a cautious pessimist, someone who expects the worst but then unexpectedly has the best day ever. Marriott, however, is quite honest about his philosophical stance, admitting that it is easy to be a nihilist when things are going well. The problem is that while his life makes it easy for him to be theoretically nihilistic, many young people today cannot keep it from seeping into their daily lives, leaving them knee-deep in anxiety and depression.
Dwindling demographic
Interestingly, despite his nihilistic pontification, Marriott recognizes that he is likely on the wrong side of religious history. In his article, “Millennials are bending the knee to religion,” he acknowledges that religiosity has always been part of human existence, which he sadly admits leaves him outside the normal statistical distribution of humanity. He isn’t hopeful about the prospects of his secular demographic expanding any time soon, noting that its lack of interest in procreating (not sex, of course!) leaves his tribe at a significant reproductive disadvantage compared to the fertile faithful. It is very difficult to create a demographic resurgence when your tribe is unwilling to pass on its selfish no-God genes to future generations.
“Anybody with a graph can see that, globally, the brute numbers favour religion. Secular liberalism is superb at attracting converts (all those delicious freedoms) but inept at reproducing itself. Religious couples have many more babies than atheists.” (James Marriott – Millennials are bending the knee to religion)
Street Appeal
Atheism not only fails to be fruitful and multiply but also lacks street appeal. In his article, “Full Fat Faith,” Marriott attributes secularism’s failure to win over young people to two factors. The first is its lack of metaphysical depth.
“Among the young Christian converts I speak to, an overwhelming theme is a sense of disaffection with and even contempt for the triviality and banality of secular society.” (James Marriott- Full Fat Faith)
The second is the postmodern need among youth to overthrow any establishment that has grown too big for its britches. Modernity, overconfidently believing it had won the battle, didn’t anticipate that the culture would make a sudden postmodern turn, leaving it a victim of its own success. By elevating its hegemonic status, secularity positioned itself as yet another authoritarian oppressor, and because of all the years it spent belittling religion, Christianity was welcomed into the oppressed intersectional fold.
“The pseudo-rebellious anti-Christian pose once common in the mainstream media makes little sense to younger people. ‘You don’t feel the need to rebel against it because it’s not hegemonic in the first place,’ says Esmé Partridge, 25, a writer and recent convert. If you’re young, the establishment is obviously secular.” (James Marriott- Full Fat Faith)
Disputable data
Marriott also wondered whether the secular optimism fueled by data showing a decline in religiosity obscures what is really going on. While overall church attendance may be declining, spirituality remains the same and may even be increasing. He recognizes that just because people tick the “no Religion” box doesn’t mean they don’t have a spiritual itch they have found creative ways to scratch.
“Many of the beliefs that prosper in anti-institutional, hyper-individualistic modernity are not easily captured by traditional analyses of organised religion. How “secular” are those who believe in burgeoning popular superstitions such as conspiracy theories, astrology and tarot? How secular, indeed, are the young men sitting through a two-hour Peterson lecture on God?” (James Marriott – Millennials are bending the knee to religion)
I have often wondered whether Christopher Hitchens secretly had lucky socks, a supernatural inclination not captured by polls measuring religiosity. Could this renewed interest in “popular superstitions” be the baby bump of a surprising rebirth of belief in God?
Metaphysical Foundation
Marriott noted that when he speaks with people about why religion is important to them, they rarely offer metaphysical reasons; instead, they point to their love of the church community. He sees religion as an excuse to get together for a party rather than as a way of celebrating metaphysical truth. He is, however, confusing religion with a group hug.
While Oldfield is concerned about the over-intellectualization of Christianity, she knows that community is more than a gathering of like-minded individuals; it has metaphysical roots in the loving nature of a relational triune God. Atheists may bond over horizontal like-mindedness, but Christian gatherings share a horizontal bond of image-bearing, tethered to a more powerful vertical affinity with the Image Himself. The atheist community is loosely held together by a shared epistemology, whereas Christian unity is firmly anchored in a shared ontology.
Atheist Church
I’m reminded of an episode Justin hosted for Unbelievable? featuring James Croft, former leader of the Ethical Society of Saint Louis and now a humanist University Chaplain at the University of Sussex. The show focused on the emergence of atheist churches and ethical societies modeled after Christian gatherings, with the goal of creating community without the metaphysical baggage. While an interesting attempt to replace religion in our lives, it is difficult to bring secularists together for two reasons. First, joining groups is a very non-secularist idea. Philip Zuckerman, in his book “Living the Secular Life,” puts it this way:
“At the very heart of being secular is such that it does not lend itself to joining large groups of like-minded people specifically on the basis of their secularity. At the very heart or core of being secular, at least for many people, is a degree of suspicion toward communal dictates, group conformity, or social immersion, particularly when based on religion, nonreligion, or irreligion.” (Philip Zuckerman)
He summarized this secular hesitation by quoting Dr. Frank L. Pasquale, a research associate at the Institute for the Study of Secularism in Society and Culture at Trinity College in Hartford, Connecticut.
“Secularism has a ‘we’ problem. Secularists don’t do ‘we.’”
The second problem is that atheism lacks an organizing story or myth to bring people together. Croft recognized that his atheist community needed a “sufficiently engaging” narrative to unite around but was unsure what that story could be.
“Part of me wants to say the community is the thing we’re centered around, the actual relationships between the people are the central thing, but that doesn’t quite satisfy me because there are lots of different ways to organize a community and I do have to lead them somewhere…whether I express that in sufficiently engaging narrative form, I don’t know.”(James Croft)
The dilemma for the atheist is that their story isn’t very compelling. It begins with “Once upon a time in a warm little pond” and ends not so happily ever after in a hole in the ground, with a lot of nihilistic handwringing in between. In fact, many claim they don’t need to defend their atheism with a story because it is simply disbelief in God, but that reduces an atheist church service to an organized “no King” protest.
Manufactured Meaning
Marriott recounted that Oldfield asked him on her podcast what the meaning of his life was. He replied that it was his love of literature. Oldfield found that interesting, given his nihilist mindset, because literature takes you beyond a reductive propositional way of knowing to an expansive one filled with mystery, myth, and metaphor. Marriott, it seems, enjoys periodically peeking behind the veil but fears that if he sticks his head all the way in, he might witness a divine full Monty. He even admitted that when his literary imagination gets overheated, he needs to take a cold Dawkins shower.
Marriott believes that we don’t need God to have a meaningful life and can create it on our own. However, if our meaning is merely one among seven billion, it is diluted into irrelevance, and we find the meaning we spent so much time and energy creating isn’t so meaningful after all.
Christianity, however, makes a most astonishing claim. It says that, as small as you may feel, you play an important role in the greatest story ever told, and that, without your unique presence, the world would be noticeably emptier.
Testing spirituality
Marriott asked Oldfield a very important question: how does she know her spiritual intuitions are true? How can she possibly test them?
While a good question, Marriott reveals a limited understanding of the scientific method, which, rather than just a materialist endeavor, requires dabbling in the immaterial dark arts. Science observes the natural world, looks for patterns, and then abstracts these patterns into immaterial hypotheses about how the world works. Scientists then test these hypotheses back into the world, generating data that must be verified in the immaterial mathematical realm through statistical formulas. So, in the end, science can say nothing without an immaterial seal of approval.
Our spiritual intuitions are no different because we always test them in the real world to see whether our lives are better, more fulfilled, and more meaningful. The scientific method simply describes testing immaterial ideas in the physical world, which is exactly what we do with our spiritual intuitions. I am a Christian because the spiritual hypothesis Christianity offers makes sense of the world around me.
Oldfield accused science of a metaphysical landgrab, a sentiment shared by psychologist and neuroscientist John Vervaeke, who believes that the “propositional tyranny” of science and philosophy has impoverished our view of the world and contributed to the meaning crisis. Marriott noted that we still need to cede a significant amount of territory to science because it has earned that right through its historical success. The problem is that atheists don’t just cede territory but reduce the land mass of knowing to a world that can be apprehended only scientifically.
Vision of the Future
I appreciated this conversation. Both guests were thoughtful and kind. Marriott, while seemingly set in his ways, is still curious about religion and isn’t afraid to ask important questions. He seems to have adopted a type of cultural Christianity that is a bit kinder and gentler than Dawkins. However, has he pondered what the world would be like if we pulled the Jesus rug out from under Christianity? No more hymns, churches, or Christmas and Easter celebrations. Would he be content to just let Christianity have its fifteen minutes of fame and then fade away? How would he feel if the clock ran out on Christianity and there was no one to culturally wind it back up again?
He doesn’t seem to realize that the Christian culture he enjoys has been sustained not by his secular friends but by those who take Christ seriously. You can try to maintain Christian culture by making laws that are Christian-like, but those will go the way of Hammurabi’s Stele unless they are written on our hearts.
I will leave Marriott with the last word. In his essay “Millennials are bending the knee to religion,” he recounts hearing a loud commotion as he passed a church near his home on a Sunday morning, then entering to witness joyful worship, an experience that led him to reconsider the church’s future.
“I had believed I was contemplating a ghost of the past; perhaps it was a vision of the future.”
God's Screenplay 