The Argument From Demonology: A Series In Analytical Apologetics (Finale)

Part Five:

In the belief systems of many religions, Soteriology is the study of salvation, namely by which means one can achieve eternal life, or entrance into a Utopian afterlife. In Buddhist belief, "dukkha" (suffering) can be ended by shaking off the burden of "samsara" or continuous rebirth & obtaining "nirvana", which is a state of mindly freedom & neutrality. This is believed to be obtained through daily practices of transcendental meditation & asceticism. Likewise, Taoists believe that "salvation" can be obtained via the process of enlightenment. Thus, what some Judeo-Christians refer to as "original sin" & "depravity", most Buddhists believe to be a result of a grasping at the "maya" or illusions of mindly & fleshly desire & pining.

In Judeo-Christianity, it is believed that only by believing in the life, death & resurrection of Jesus Christ (the Son of God sent as a final atonement for humankind), can one be "justified" (atonement by proxy of Jesus Christ) & become "sanctified" (conformed into the image of Christ & God) through the power of "the Holy Spirit's" work within the heart & mind of the adherent as they strive to maintain their Christian discipleship throughout their life. Obedience & surrender are a requirement to obtain a Heavenly & "new earth" entrance in the afterlife. The orthopraxis of Judeo-Christianity varies from denomination to denomination. Yet a few key beliefs & rituals are shared amongst them. The main being, of course, daily prayer & worship.

In Hinduism, as well as Sikhism, Jainism & Buddhism, what is referred to as "moksha" (also called vimoksha, vimukti & mukti) is a transcendent state of liberation & ultimate "kaivalya" (the term "nirvana" can also be substituted), from "samsara" (rebirth) & suffering. This state is striven for through a study & adherence to the "Vedas", the "Tantras", "Upanishads", "Puranas" & other sacred texts of Hinduism. Hinduists, not unlike Buddhists, also do not believe in human depravity, per se, rather they believe in a world of false illusions & temptations inflicting the psycho-spiritual dissonance within humanity, and that to free oneself from them should be the ultimate goal.

In Sikhism, meditation upon the Naam Japo (their God & his message) is practiced in order to achieve salvation. Further, thoughts & deeds can become "nirmal" (pure) through a practice of detachment from the things of this world & from the goadings of selfish & egoistic pride & the flesh. It is believed that once a human soul has achieved this, they can merge with God. In Islam, the depravity of man is implicitly & explicitly embraced. The only way to achieve salvation for those of the Muslim faith, is through daily & even hourly repentance before God, & strict self-accountability & discipline.

Moreover, in the Shinto & Tenrikyo faiths, one can strive for salvation by doing virtuous deeds & working to resist one's deleterious & nefarious inclinations. In Judaism, much like in Islam (although Muslims believe in an paradisaical afterlife called "Jannah") and Judaists do not, salvation can be sought through legalistic means. They practice a stringent adherence to holy commands & scriptures (the "Torah"), which were given by Moses on Mount Sinai. The Judaist's version of "salvation" differs from that of Christianity. They look at it more as a final "redemption" or resting place from continual earthly exile. These are some of the soteriological beliefs from the major religions of the world.

Next, we shall summarily explore the problem of human depravity & how each branch of Atheism both supports & refutes Theism based upon this premise.

First, we have the "positive atheists." The positive atheists set out to more actively (and even aggressively prove that God does not exist.) The negative atheists are usually indifferent to the issue one way or another, if they have even thought about it at all. They are perhaps, latent Agnostics. When exploring soteriology & the study of evil & sin, etc., the positive atheists & the atheistic & inductive naturalists would most likely defer to the natural world or Science (as well as Scientism) & Sociology, Anthropology & Psychology to explain not only the lack of the need for God's existence or the depravity of humankind, rather than religion or spirituality. This is a fair & reasonable deduction.

However, the main problem with this belief is the question of transcendence. In a word, how, if humanity is so finite & so fragile of a species, do individuals within that taxonomy ever manage to rise above their own depravity? One view is, of course, in line with what most positive atheists would prescribe, that it is quite simple just a matter of will. Humans can, if we will it strongly enough, achieve a sort of self-salvation. But, is this really salvation, considering the readily apparent fact that we continue to be blunder & behave in deplorable ways even afterwards? Thus, perhaps it is more accurate to call it a temporary abatement, rather than transcendence.

Moreover, particularly in the Judeo-Christian faith, human frailty & self-INsufficiency are stressed when dealing with how exactly one can overcome one's depraved nature. Of course, the Atheists would argue that humankind doesn't really NEED to overcome its baser nature in order to live a relatively good life. Yet this does fly in the face of common wisdom. Ancient Greek philosopher Epicurus expounded upon this a little. He proposed that happiness or contentment is found not through wanton indulgence in every possible pleasure but rather, a curated compendium of only those pursuits which are both naturally aligned with long-term euthumia, & which promote the development of higher virtues & self-mastery.

Furthermore, I suppose this does suggest that human free will is often somewhat sufficient in obtaining temporal states of rectitude. Also, there is still the reasonable argument that fear of consequence (possible lethal) is also another way that human beings are able to resist their depravity & destructive impulses. As someone once remarked: "Fear keeps us sane." These are all very valid possibilities in answer to the inquiry of soteriology. I suppose I could make a mere deductive & conceptual argument in opposition to it. Perhaps it is perfectly sound to accept that individual persons can disbelieve in any kind of theistic adherence & still manage life relatively well.

However, even conventional wisdom & even the social sciences would find it more reasonable to live a life of moral & ethical integrity. Even in the absence of any 'religious' assumptions related to loftier reasons for doing so, the mere regulation of one's thymic cycles, self-preservation, thrivance & well-being are perfectly reasonable. And perhaps, once one has begun practicing moral integrity & reaps those rewards, they may find themselves slowly opening to more mystical & maybe even ecclesiastic pursuits. In the end, both Atheism & Theism are both logically reasonable stances to take. I suppose then the question is: Which one is the most OPTIMAL?

In finale, does God exist & if so, how can we 'know' for sure?

Judeo-Christian Scripture states that, should anyone gaze directly upon or come fully into the physical presence of God, they will not live. That's because God is pure energy/Spirit. It would be similar to being irradiated & most probably undergoing some kind of spontaneous evaporation. God exists in such a purified physical & spiritual form, & vibrates at such a high frequency, that no mere mortal could survive being in His full presence.

We will never be able to 'prove' anything spiritual like we can prove that the Legionella bacteria exists. This is not only due to the Heisenbergian Uncertainty Principle when dealing with subatomic phenomena, but also due to lacking the necessary Laws of Physics & tools within our current incarnation & epoch, to measure them with. Thus, the follower of what is called "atheistic noncognitivism" would tout this view. They believe that such an inquiry is futile from an empirical standpoint & thus should not be explored.

Nevertheless, this should not hermetically seal off any areas of the so-called 'Esoteric' & 'immaterial' for continual exploration. After all, perhaps God does exist on some actual 'physical' level. Perhaps we merely do not possess the current physiology and neuro-anatomy with which to fully know Him. Until such day, humanity will have to settle for the abstract & the numinous. And from my experience, that's definitely not such a bad deal. Without a little mystery, life would simply become unbearable.

And even from an atheistic standpoint, life is what we make of it. And there is simply no need to make of it, a living Gehenna beyond what is necessary. While the aim of this series has not been to 'prove' anything beyond the shadow of a doubt, I hope that I have at least touched upon some of the salient features of human existentialia & their relevance regarding the continued search for higher wisdom & Truth. And hopefully, each & every human individual shall someday breach the light of Faith & Reason, at last existing in a state of antinomial synthesis with more & more laser-point precision as one continues towards it. But until then, may our species heed the immortal words of Jack Kerouac: "All is well. Practice kindness. Heaven is nigh."

Thanks for reading & Godspeed.