If There’s a God Why are There Atheists? by R. C. Sproul

The late R. C. Sproul (1939-2017) was a pastor, theologian and seminary professor. The author of more than one hundred books, his writings and recordings have had great influence and effect in the modern Reformed resurgence among Evangelicals in the world. He is perhaps best well-known for (1) his work on the Chicago Statement of Biblical Inerrancy, (2) his understanding and writing of church history and (3) his strong reformed doctrinal position. This book highlights another aspect of Sproul’s ministry, his understanding and articulation of philosophy with theology.

In If There’s a God Why are There Atheists?, Sproul seeks to consider both the theological background of atheism as well as the philosophical arguments behind atheism and how they are being used today. He is quick to show his hand when he states that “the central thesis of my book is this: The Christian God has some ‘attractive’ features that might incline a person to embrace Him as a narcotic to help him face the threatening character of life, but these are overwhelmingly outweighed by the trauma of encountering God” (pg. 10). He goes on to explain that it is understandable how people might come up with an idea of God, but that man “will not instinctively desire a God who is holy, omniscient, and sovereign” (pg. 10).

The book is then split into two distinct parts. The first considers the definitions and differences of belief and unbelief while the second considers the psychology of unbelief. Sproul begins by carefully defining terms such as monotheism, atheism, and agnosticism. Then he begins a historical survey of atheism and some of the major philosophers whose arguments have been so influential for the atheist position. He especially emphasizes the effects of Kant’s critique of rational evidence.

The second chapter begins with a discussion of a subjective-practical question of God’s existence versus the objective-metaphysical question (pg. 29). That is, many choose to believe in a God, but would not necessarily claim the existence of God is objectively true in reality. A few pages are then given to a consideration of reason and logic and their place in this debate between theism and atheism (pgs. 35-45).

The third and fourth chapters speak of the psychology of theism and the sociology of atheism respectively. In these chapters, the arguments of Freud, Feuerbach, Marx, and Nietzsche are briefly stated and considered. Here, Sproul makes an often ignored conclusion: “Freud, Marx, and the others were not attempting to disprove the existence of God.  Their arguments already presupposed the nonexistence of God. . . They were dealing with the question, Since there is no God, why is there religion?” (pg. 58). This indeed is a crucial point. The arguments of these men are often used to argue against the very existence of God, but their arguments merely presuppose the nonexistence of God from the start. Therefore, using them to argue against God’s existence is inherently circular. Sproul then goes on to consider further limitations of these philosophers’ contributions. The lack of a moral objective standard by the new atheists is then considered before he concludes this first section of the book.

Perhaps the most helpful portion of the book comes at the beginning of the second section. For almost thirty pages (pgs. 79-106) Sproul masterfully explains and applies Romans 1:18-32 to the debate. In so doing, he helpfully brings to light the Bible’s own arguments for why there are atheists and others who refuse the Holy God of the Bible. In essence, his conclusion from Romans is that this is a moral problem, not an intellectual problem. He argues that atheism is a willful choice not based on evidence but based on the desire to live the way one wants.

In the sixth chapter Sproul continues some of his threads from Romans 1 by applying the concept of God’s Holiness to the debate. He shows that the majesty and mystery of Holiness for the God of the Bible is something that humankind naturally runs away from. He claims that we are fearful and yet fascinated by the prospect of God’s holiness (pg. 116). As he continues this theme, he considers passages from both the Old and New Testaments concerning the holiness and awe-inspiring grandeur of God’s perfection on humanity.

Perhaps chapter seven is the most unexpectedly helpful chapter. Here Sproul considers the idea of “nakedness” in the Bible and specifically in the garden of Eden. For many, this chapter will be most helpful in explaining a passage of Scripture that often seems a bit odd to modern readers. When mankind considers that God sees him “naked” and completed exposed, then it is little wonder that mankind reacts so quickly and harshly to that penetrating gaze of the Holy One who inhabits eternity.

The final chapter considers mankind’s quest for autonomy. This quest has effected not only atheist philosophers but has also made significant inroads into the evangelical church. Even for many churches who would say God is sovereign and the Bible is the authority, in practice, many only mean that these are guidelines that can be discarded when convenient. Indeed, Western society as a whole seems to be under the opinion that the God of the Bible must bow to popular opinion any time political correctness takes issue with something in the Bible.

As Sproul helpfully points out, “Atheists argue for the nonexistence of God using the premise that such a god cannot be because man is autonomous. But this in turn can be demonstrated only if it is first known that God does not exist” (pg. 180). And God’s reaction to all of this is to be “temporarily amused by this act of collective insanity. But His laughter turns to anger as he mobilizes His own power to vindicate His anointed” (pg. 185).

In the final pages, Sproul explains another reason for writing this book: “to examine the underlying motives that lead some to deny the existence of God” (pg. 192). In this, the book is clearly successful. But for those who have little philosophical or theological background, this book may be a bit of a stretch. Although the explanations given do not necessitate intimate knowledge of any of the philosophers discussed, this book is filled with weighty considerations for which some may not be ready. Nevertheless, in the debate between theism and atheism, more books like this need to be published and considered. Too often the arguments and debates only jump around unhelpfully on the surface and never get back to first principles. This book is a welcome piece engaging in those first principles in a masterful manner.