I know quite a few atheists, agnostics, or those who just don’t care about what happens next and don’t want to think about it. They are comfortable in their lives, as bleak as this world may be, and don’t want to bother thinking about the life after this, if there is one.

Frankly, I can understand the latter two positions, at least from a logical and biological point of view.

Necessity drives innovation. If we have no necessities that we must strive to obtain, then it’s very easy to become complacent. It’s in our nature. Think about it: how many are stuck in dead-end jobs that they don’t like just because it pays them just enough so that they can come home, sit on the couch, pop open a beer and binge watch a series on Netflix. It’s not a glorious life, but it’s just comfortable enough. Further, we are so preoccupied with our constant notifications and interruptions that we often just don’t feel we even have the time to see if there is something else out there. We just want some downtime without diving into the deepest parts of the soul.

Agnosticism really bleeds into this latter category. It is essentially the mindset that we can’t know the truth and/or we really don’t care enough to look for it. Again, this goes with human nature and I can get it. I’m not saying I agree; I’m saying it’s understandable.

Atheism, on the other hand, is its own creature.

Atheism is an antagonistic view that opposes something that it doesn’t believe exists, which seems contrary to the most basic logic. However, I need not go into that analysis here and will probably address in greater detail in another article. I want my focus to be on the gamble, or illogical forfeit of atheism.

Let’s try a hypothetical.

Let’s say you’re dying. You and I sit down at table, and I offer you a free glass of water and inform you that there’s a 1% chance that the medicine in this water will cure your disease… and you’ll never die. It’s not guaranteed, but there’s a chance. Would you take it? I would. I might ask for 100 more glasses and get chugging. Atheism is basically you slapping aside the possible miracle glass and saying, “let me die.”

Let me explain.

We’re all dying; you, me, everyone on this earth. As my dad used to joke, “there are only two things certain in life, death and taxes.” All our days are numbered; we don’t know how much time we have left. It could be fifty years; it could be fifty minutes. Then, at that point, one of two things will happen: absolutely nothing as an atheist believes, or we enter into the spiritual realm, as a deist believes.

Atheism is so sure of itself that it says there is absolutely zero chance of an afterlife, that the atheist going to actively oppose any mentality to the contrary, and reject any free chance at a life after this.

But here’s the question: Why?

Are you, the atheist, really 100% sure that there is no afterlife? Other than the slight dopamine hit from your sense of superiority, what advantage does your belief system offer you? Even if you’re 99% sure, wouldn’t it be worth it to explore the potential beliefs of others: the beliefs that others hold onto as tightly as your grasp on the non-existence of God?

If a believer dies and it turns out the atheist was right, then the believer is not worse off than him. They’re both dust; the end. But if a believer happened to embrace and follow the Truth, then that believer is in a much, much better position… for eternity. On the other hand, the atheist has willfully rejected the Truth and may have to suffer eternally for it, whereas the believer took the free drink of living water and was given eternal life.
Embracing atheism is like going into a test that you’re not familiar with and, rather than trying to make your best effort, you sit on the floor and say “I refuse! I acknowledge no test!”

Again, maybe you’re right, maybe there isn’t a test; maybe there isn’t an afterlife. But if there is (and there is), even if there is only a slight chance that there is an afterlife, isn’t that something worth at least trying for, rather than embracing nothingness?

It’s a logical thing.

You’re not gambling with atheism, you’re forfeiting.

………

I was going to end this article here, but I feel impressed to discuss something else along these lines. I do not want to offend anyone, and if I do, I’m sorry, but I feel I must continue here.

Have you ever considered your belief system might have faults? This can apply to atheism or any religious system. Or are you so convinced (blinded) by the perceived inerrancy of your belief system that you refuse to even look outside of your own framework? I grew up in a system like that. I grew up in a system that warned against any outside voices. Anything that was contrary to the beliefs I was learning must be shunned, for they were from the devil. “Don’t even listen to them, even if they are coming from our own former leaders.” That’s what I was told and that’s what I believed… for so many years of my life.

Going to law school was good for me. It taught me to think. It taught me how to critically analyze multiple sides of any situation and to weigh the evidence. It taught me that we need to challenge our own beliefs. You think this guy is a liar? Let’s investigate the evidence, let’s see the arguments and weigh it all out. There’s a quote, author unknown, that goes something like this: “Anything that can be destroyed by the truth, most certainly should be.”

Are you so blinded by the lies you grew up with, or subsequently convinced yourself with, that there is no room for weighing evidence, whether new or old? If so, you’re in a cult, and maybe a cult of your own making. One thing every human being with any common sense knows: we, as human beings, know very little about the reality of life and our own universe. Claiming “science” has declared it and that a belief shouldn’t be questioned comes from a cult, not science, and goes against true scientific inquiry. A religion that tells you to ignore that part of the faith and put it on a shelf is not a true religion; it is a false religion afraid of the truth. I am reminded of a quote by Timothy Keller I read many years ago in “The Reason for God” (a really good book if you want a logical argument for the existence of and reason for God), showing how we’re supposed to have doubts and we’re supposed to challenge our beliefs:

A faith without some doubts is like a human body without any antibodies in it. People who blithely go through life too busy or indifferent to ask hard questions about why they believe as they do will find themselves defenseless against either the experience of tragedy or the probing questions of a smart skeptic. A person’s faith can collapse almost overnight if she has failed over the years to listen patiently to her own doubts, which should only be discarded after long reflection.

 

Believers should acknowledge and wrestle with doubts—not only their own but their friends’ and neighbors’. It is no longer sufficient to hold beliefs just because you inherited them. Only if you struggle long and hard with objections to your faith will you be able to provide grounds for your beliefs to skeptics, including yourself, that are plausible rather than ridiculous or offensive. And, just as important for our current situation, such a process will lead you, even after you come to a position of strong faith, to respect and understand those who doubt.

Don’t doubt your doubts. Investigate your doubts; see if they have legs to stand on. If you have no doubts, then you probably haven’t investigated your situation very well; because everyone has doubts. Faith is a virtue; blind faith is not.

I don’t know whose reading this, maybe no one, but there is truth out there… the Truth, and He has living water for you. Just ask Him.

I’m happy to discuss with you as well – anytime. Love you all.