THE FITZGERALD GRIFFIN FOUNDATION E-PACKAGE
At a Distance
February 7, 2008
WHAT ATHEISTS WANT
by Chilton Williamson Jr.
Over Christmas, a kind and generous friend, who is
also an unbeliever, sent me a copy of a book called THE
MIGHT OF THE WEST, described on the dust jacket as "A new
interpretation of Western history -- its development in
medieval times and its decline today."
First published in 1963 by Joseph J. Binns of New
York and Washington, the book is readily available
through Amazon.com. Given its high approval ratings, it
appears to be something of a cult classic, though I am
unable to find matches for the author, Lawrence R. Brown,
on the Internet. Brown, an engineer by profession, was a
learned man, an excellent stylist, and an original and
provocative thinker, whose striking thesis, contrary to
the established reading of Western history, holds that no
real continuity exists between classical and medieval
civilization and that of the West, which Brown argues
began in the 13th century and represents the living
tradition of a people interrelated by blood and culture
from the Carolingian era to that of the French
Revolution.
Brown traces the histories of the six preceding
civilizations -- Egyptian, Babylonian, Chinese, Indian,
Classical, and Levantine -- with particular attention to
the modes of thought typified by each. The flap copy
states the argument clearly. "Mr. Brown is especially
concerned with the Levant, and in a brilliant
reconstruction of the life of Jesus, shows him to be the
product of a civilization fundamentally different from
our own, and not as rationalized into Western thought."
I am not here concerned with Brown's interesting and
partly persuasive views regarding the continuity of the
civilization we call Western, nor with the implications
of his contention that the Jewish civilization from which
Christ arose has little in common with the Christian
civilization of the West that came later. (Who would
think, really, of denying the obvious?) Nor, finally, am
I interested in Mr. Brown himself, an obscure author
whose single work has been entirely without influence
among historians, archaeologists, and the general public.
Rather, my subject is Brown's mode of historical
exposition and the counter-theological assumptions and
expectations that underlie it, all of which appear to be
shared by the more notorious atheists of the present day,
including, especially, Christopher Hitchens, author of the
recently published gOD IS NOT GREAT: HOW RELIGION POISONS
EVERYTHING.
The primary thesis of THE MIGHT OF THE WEST, it is
true, is not that there is no God and that Jesus Christ
is not his son. But Brown does deny that ideas such as
"cause" or "God" -- which for him are merely mechanical
and emotional words for the same thing -- are illusions
that exist within the mind, not beyond it.
Moreover, he expends much intellectual effort in
applying the historicist argument to the Old and New
Testaments to prove (a) that the first was edited by
Jewish priests to construct a historical pedigree for the
Jews who predated the time of Ezra and Nehemiah, about
400 B.C., when Brown claims the historic Jews actually
became a people; and (b) that the second is a composite
work whose individual Gospels were written by different
men with varying doctrinal agendas. Christianity, he
concludes, was actually founded not by "Christians" but
by Hellenic Jews, and developed by them.
Much of this was old hat almost 50 years ago, while
the historicist method of Biblical criticism was a going
operation in the 19th century. Moreover, Brown's
measuredly skeptical argument is a far cry from
Hitchens's adolescent rantings and insults. Yet both
books, like the atheist traditions they represent, do
raise a question, namely: What do atheists really want
from the God controversy? Their answer would be, Nothing
but the empirical truth, since God does not exist. The
true answer, however, would seem to be -- =Everything!=
What they want is for God to prove his existence for them
directly and unambiguously, rather than speaking to them
from behind a veil.
Atheists actually demand =more,= not less, of God
than do believers, the faithful. Indeed, their
fundamental (and fundamentalist) approach to revealed
religion demonstrates as much. The atheist quarrel with
Divine Revelation at bottom is not that Revelation is
nonsense and a fraud. It is that Revelation, such as we
have it, is not direct enough.
Like all men impatient of veils and indirection,
atheists (of the garden variety, at least) have no use
for poetry, which they are quite incapable of
recognizing, let alone understanding. Lawrence Brown has
made a thorough study of the Bible. Alas, he has given it
a literal reading where he ought to have given it a
poetic one. Revelation is nothing if not divine poetry,
but Brown, like the vast majority of his kind, will have
none of it. For him, the Bible is inaccurate and
dishonest history that cannot be verified by modern
historical research. How can it be said to have been
divinely inspired -- he intimates -- when all of its
books can be "shown" to have been edited and re-edited by
priests and others seeking to fabricate a religion? The
notion that the editing, as well as the writing, of the
books of the Bible, might have been inspired by the Holy
Ghost never occurs to him. (Perhaps the notion was too
historicist for Lawrence Brown!)
Of course, the problem with reading the Bible as
faked history is that the most important passages of the
Testaments, Old and New, are not historical at all but
profoundly poetic, moral, and theological. To read the
historical accounts in this context allows the reader to
understand that the story of the Bible is not the literal
narrative of God's historical engagement with mankind,
but the one he wanted us to have, for reasons known only
to himself.
One has to feel sorry for atheists. They can believe
in the Word of God only if the Book that embodies it can
be shown to embody as well the scientific proof of its
Truth. But the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and of
Jesus Christ has, in one respect at least, been very
explicit and direct in telling us that we are saved by
faith alone, and that faith is the belief in things
unseen.
Atheism is not independence, and it is certainly not
freedom. Rather, it is human neediness and dependency in
their most extreme form, a cry for divine aid that, in
the case of such as Lawrence Brown, expresses itself in
pseudo scholarship and, in that of Christopher Hitchens,
assumes the form of a curse. Because the atheist, too, is
a human being, craving God's certainty and his love. He
only pretends to us -- and to him -- that he is not.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Read this column on-line at
"http://www.sobran.com/fgf/williamson/2008/cw080207.shtml".
Copyright (c) 2008 by the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation,
All rights reserved.
Chilton Williamson Jr. is an author, columnist, and
editor. He was history editor for St. Martin's Press and
literary editor for NATIONAL REVIEW magazine. Since 1989
he has been senior editor for books at CHRONICLES
magazine, where he also contributes a monthly column,
"The Hundredth Meridian," recording his life and
adventures in the Rocky Mountain West.
A more detailed biography can be found at
http://www.chiltonwilliamson.com/.
Write the Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation at
FGF@vacoxmail.com to obtain permission to reprint this
article.