Faith and the Infinite

Having grown up in a nation that promoted "scientific atheism," I witnessed an ideology that fundamentally opposed religion. Throughout the Soviet era, the government relentlessly aimed to eliminate religious beliefs from societal life, employing extensive propaganda and punitive measures.

However, despite these efforts, the success of this mission was disappointingly minimal. Following the USSR's dissolution in 1991, Orthodox Christianity experienced a resurgence.

This narrative isn't unique to Russia; countless faith groups have faced persecution worldwide, often with brutal consequences. Currently, Uighur Muslims in China and Christians in Afghanistan are enduring severe oppression. Yet, no regime has successfully extinguished faith from the human spirit without annihilating the people themselves.

So, what compels individuals to hold onto beliefs deemed superstitious by many scholars?

God as a Necessity

I believe this stems from the human mind’s resistance to accepting its own limitations. People struggle to regard themselves as mere coincidences in an infinite cosmos. Instead, they seek comfort in the idea that they are integral to the universe's fabric, existing beyond their temporal lives. This longing leads to the conceptualization of God, who facilitates the eternal existence of the mind or soul.

In this light, God can be seen not as a creation of human imagination but rather as a fundamental discovery — a vital component in the intellectual framework of existence.

The atheistic opposition in the USSR often failed to appreciate this. They engaged in rational debates with believers, claiming the non-existence of God through logic. However, this approach was futile, as individuals do not seek logical explanations for a reality they find unacceptable. When necessary, the mind can easily overlook logical inconsistencies.

Atheistic Belief Systems

Ironically, the self-proclaimed atheist warriors engaged in a crusade against religion possess a belief system akin to those they condemned. Their faith, albeit inverted, remains a conviction in what is unprovable—the absence of God.

Richard Dawkins, a prominent figure in this movement, epitomizes this stance. Born in 1941, this British ethologist and evolutionary biologist is renowned beyond scientific circles for his influential works, including the concepts of the "selfish gene" and "memes."

I first encountered Dawkins' ideas years ago, and I regard him as a brilliant contemporary thinker. His writings reveal an astute and inventive intellect. Initially, his staunch atheism did not concern me, as I was never religious. I assumed that scientists inherently rejected faith, given that their worldview prioritizes verifiable truth.

For a long time, I viewed Dawkins as a significant affirmation of this belief. I watched several of his documentaries aimed at debunking religion, which often echoed Marx’s sentiment that religion is the opiate of the masses.

Dawkins appeared unwavering and courageous in these films, engaging deeply religious individuals and posing challenging questions. His demeanor—an embodiment of British civility—impressed me as he confronted potential conflicts with poise.

However, my perspective began to shift. I realized that the faith underpinning religion sometimes provided individuals with the resilience needed to endure extreme adversity.

Voices of the Faithful

One historical figure exemplifying this is Joan of Arc. In school, I learned about her extraordinary story, but we overlooked a critical detail: she claimed to hear divine voices urging her to save France from invaders.

Her actions, which led to her becoming a national heroine, were later validated by the Catholic Church, which canonized her.

While some might argue that she experienced hallucinations, if she lived today, she might instead be considered neurodivergent. What some deem a disorder, others could see as a unique gift, enabling extraordinary achievements.

The Renaissance of Faith

I recently viewed a compelling documentary by historian Dr. Thomas Asbridge about the Crusades. It recounted the First Crusade's siege of Antioch, where Crusaders found themselves surrounded by a vastly larger Muslim force.

In despair, they contemplated surrender until a peasant named Peter Bartholomew claimed to have dreamt of the location of the Holy Lance—the spear that pierced Christ's side. His fervor inspired the Crusaders to excavate, and when they unearthed the Lance, their spirits were rekindled, leading to a victorious battle against their adversaries.

This narrative may sound more like a parable than strict history, yet it illustrates the power of belief. Despite the challenges, the Crusaders' faith in the Lance motivated them to confront their foes.

Unyielding Faith

The early Christians also displayed remarkable faith during Roman persecution, choosing death over renouncing their beliefs. They viewed the soul as immortal, which fortified their resolve against horrific consequences, while Roman values favored conquest and power.

While Rome regarded Christianity as a mere superstition, the faith gained strength, ultimately becoming the empire's official religion. This phenomenon is not limited to Europe; faith manifests in various forms across the globe.

A modern illustration of this is Martin Luther King Jr., whose civil rights activism was deeply rooted in Christian principles. His commitment to nonviolence and justice epitomized the profound impact of faith on societal change.

Misconceptions of Faith

Unfortunately, "faith" and "religion" are often misunderstood. Genuine faith cultivates virtue, while superstition can ensnare individuals in malevolence. Political elites frequently manipulate religion for control, leading to its ambiguous connotations.

The corruption of faith arises when intermediaries fail to serve society. In a healthy community, religion can unite people, while in a dysfunctional one, it may foster tribalism or oppression.

Pope John Paul II aptly articulated this in his encyclical "Fides et Ratio," reminding us that faith devoid of reason leads to superstition, while reason without faith can result in nihilism.

Back to Dawkins

Returning to Dawkins, is he justified in condemning religion as an absolute evil? It’s essential to clarify that the debate is not about opposing science and religion. Not all scientists share Dawkins' views, and many, like the esteemed Theodosius Dobzhansky, saw no conflict between the two.

Dawkins is aware of the numerous scientists, including Nobel laureates, who profess their faith. This awareness inevitably conflicts with his portrayal of religion as wholly detrimental.

In "The God Delusion," Dawkins dedicates a section to Albert Einstein's religious views. Although he presents Einstein's perspective favorably, it is crucial to recognize the difference between their stances. Dawkins argues against the necessity of religion, while Einstein acknowledged its value.

Einstein regarded religion as a dynamic institution, evolving from fear to morality. He asserted that while science explains "what is," it does not define "what should be," indicating that ultimate goals must come from elsewhere, likely from religious belief.