Book Review: If There is a God, Why Are There Atheists?

In 1974, RC Sproul wrote If There's a God, Why Are There Atheists?  In this book, he set out to address the modernist question of whether modern man has outgrown religion.  He examines the arguments of several thinkers, specifically: Sigmund Freud, Karl Marx, Ludwig Feuerbach, and Friedrich Nietzsche.

Sproul begins by defining terms as any good philosopher would do. He demonstrates that humans are incurably religious, but that during the enlightenment, several intellectual trends tried to kill God. He moves on to discuss "reasons for disagreement about objective truth", which include epistimological errors, formal errors in reasoning, factual errors in empirical reasoning, and psychological prejudice that distorts conclusions. I have argued in the past that one of the failings of the modern academy is a lack of sophistication in logic.  I confess that my own doctoral training was woefully inadequate in this regard.  Unfortunately, this lack of philosophical sophistication is combined with a strong scientism and academic arrogance among many today, leading to faulty conclusions about the way things are.  Therefore, a discussion of these potential errors is welcomed in this book. I think psychological prejudices are particularly worth discussing because so many moderns assume others may be prejudiced in their viewpoints while they remain aloof in their objectivity. 

He then briefly lays out the arguments against religion put forward by Freud, Marx, Feuerbach, and Nietzsche as well as addresses their limitations even more briefly.  All of this provides a grounding for the second part of the book that addresses the psychology of unbelief. This second part of the book is where the reader really begins to understand the "psychology of unbelief".  Sproul first discusses the psychology of Romans 1. He notes, "the New Testament maintains that unbelief is generated not so much by intellectual causes as by moral and psychological ones" (p. 57). Using more Freudian concepts, Sproul demonstrates that it is human nature to engage in repression of God and substitution of God with idols.

According to Sproul, humans are incapable of bearing God's holiness, so our tendency is to flee from his presence.  He shows this through several biblical examples--Peter and Isaiah for example. He also discusses the concept of nakedness and how we seek to avoid revealing ourselves to others and to God.  However, I think the argument regarding the human quest for autonomy was the most compelling. Humans do not want to submit to anyone or anything else, yet they fail to realize that they are always slaves to something.  Nietzsche, who was one the strongest proponents for rejecting the Christian God in favor of complete freedom ended up insane.

On the whole, this is a useful, albeit brief, treatment of the psychology of unbelief.  Sproul demonstrates the human defenses that contribute to our rejection of God.  At the end, he writes, "There is no dispute with Freud, Nietzsche, and Marx on the issue of man's ability to create a god according to his own psychological desire or need. This is precisely what biblical Christianity asserts is the case." Yet, will these creations arrive at the God of Christianity?"