By: Asif Rashid
The premise: Hamza Tzortzis, the author, first sheds light on the definition, history, and growth of atheism. Linguistically, atheism means “not a theist” or someone who does not believe in a God or gods. However, he emphasizes that relying solely on the literal meaning is insufficient tounderstand its implications.
The disbelief in God or gods raises several questions: Does theatheist have positive arguments in favor of atheism? Does it indicate they are currentlyunconvinced by any theistic argument? Or does it simply mean they do not believe in any gods?
From Hamza’s perspective, many atheists reject the idea of God because they have notencountered compelling arguments in favor of the divine. This perspective also implies that some individuals who label themselves as atheists might actually be closet agnostics. At times such an atheistic stance leads to “Misotheism”—as the hatred of God and the desire for Him not to exist, Tzortzis explains. He cites Associate Professor Bernard Schwizer’s book which suggests that this hatred is often motivated by admirable humanistic impulses.
Hamza Tzortzis, as delving deeper, exposes philosophical naturalism as being similar to atheism. Philosophical naturalism posits that all phenomena within the universe can be explained through physical processes thereby denying the existence of the divine or any supernatural being. As Such physical processes are random & non-rational, hence denies all supernatural claims.
The Historical background of Atheism: The author highlights that atheism was not a significant social and intellectual threat until the emergence of the 8th-century Dahriyya movement. The Dahriyya thinkers were empiricists who believed that all knowledge could be acquired through empirical methods. They held the irrational notion that the cosmos was eternal, arguing that everything had always existed without the need for a creator. In the West, the term was first used by Sir John Cheke in his translation of Plutarch’s work on superstition. Later, during the 19th century, Charles Bradlaugh played a crucial role in making atheism more acceptable through his numerous essays supporting atheistic ideology. Moreover,in the 1920s, the group known as logical positivists, inspired by scientific achievements,asserted that statements could only be meaningful if they were verifiable empirically. Thisapproach rendered questions concerning God, metaphysics, morality, and history asmeaningless. As a result, atheism became (seemingly) the default position since God’s existence could not be verified through physical experiences.
Atheism is unnatural:
The author asserts that most atheists are philosophical naturalists, believing that every phenomenon can be explained through physical processes. Needless to saythat such physical processes are purely accidental & random with no “conscious will” or ” cause ” operating behind them. According to the author, if this is the case, how can we claim that our minds (as a byproduct of a blind assemblage of atoms)have theability to achieve mental insights? Rational insights are a key essential part of reasoning, and this is where naturalism falls short, as it posits that all phenomena are based on random, non-rational physical processes.
Denying God, Denying You
In this book the author shares a poignant story about his father, who once said, “If you rejectGod, you deny yourself.” This profound statement implies that our awareness of who we areand our emotions are evidence of God’s existence. The author refers to theseexperiences as”subjective experiences.” Furthermore the author points out that even though we maycomprehend everything about the physical brain, we will still be unable to fully grasp what it’slike for another person to have a specific experience. Neuroscience largelydeals with
correlations, leaving the question unanswered: Why do subjective experiences arise fromnon-conscious matter? This perplexing issue is often referred to as “The hard problem ofconsciousness”. The author further explores various approaches to this question but many of them fall short in providing satisfactory answers except for the theistic approach which is extensively discussed in this book.
God and objective morality:
The author eloquently discusses the concept of objective morality. As we all understand,”objective” denotes something rooted in evidence and external reality rather than one’s personal opinions or emotions. This implies that it exists independently beyond one’s individual thoughts or feelings much like mathematical truths (e.g. 1+1=2). Interestingly these objective truths owe their existence to ‘something’ beyond the realm of our physical world. Therefore they must be grounded and able to answer questions regarding their origin and nature, requiring a rational foundation which can only be provided by something existing outside our visible universe, in this case, the God.God is believed to embody maximal perfection. Despite certain arguments raised by atheists, all attempts to refute this stance are effectively refuted in the book. The author also points out that if atheists attempt to deny the objectivity of morality, they lose the grounds to objectively criticize religion, especially Islam.
Islam’s response to evil and suffering:
The author also highlights that, according to the Quran, God is Al-Qadeer and Ar-Rahman which implies being both All-powerful and Merciful, thereby emphasizing compassion. However,atheists often misrepresent the comprehensive Islamic conception of God. As we all know God is not only the Merciful and All-powerful but also possesses many other names and attributes,such as Al-Hakeem, meaning The Wise being one among them. Since the very nature of God encompasses wisdom, it follows that when something happens
there must be a specific reason for its occurrence or existence whether we understand it or not; including instances of evil and suffering. This argument is further elaborated upon in the book.
Has science Disproved God?
The author highlights that science solely concentrates on problems that observations can resolve, aiding us in understanding things we can observe and test. However, when it comes tothe concept of God, he is, by definition, considered to exist beyond the physical universe. This implies that any direct observation of Him becomes impossible and irrational. As the philosopher Hugh Gauch rightly concludes, to “insist that science supports Atheism is to receive high marks for enthusiasm but low marks for logic.”
Why do some atheists believe science can deny God?
As we are all aware, science has transformed the entire world and significantly enhanced ourlives. It is continuously providing profound insights into understanding the world. However, thisProgress has also led some atheists to adopt incoherent and erroneous assumptions. For instance some atheists believe that science is the sole path to truth and holds all the answersto every question. Invariably they conclude that no creator is necessary for phenomenathey don’t comprehend. Nevertheless, this assumption is completely false because science hasits limitations and cannot explain everything. The also neglect other valuable sourcesof knowledge, such as “Testimony.”
Secondly, some atheists argue that if science is successful, its conclusions must be true.However, this contradicts the fundamental philosophy of science, as exemplified by the case ofthe “Phlogiston theory,” which was eventually proved wrong.
The oneness of God:
The author shares a story that demonstrates how two kings are considered as one when theirwills align. The story presents several arguments, including “conceptual differentiation.” Thisargument suggests that for multiplicity to exist, there must be concepts that differentiate onething from another. Additionally, there are “The argument from exclusion” and “the argumentfrom definition.” The former asserts that there can only be one divine being while the latter states that there cannot be more than one creator. This is because if there were multiplecreators, the cosmos would lack the harmony it currently exhibits.
Moreover the book presents various other compelling argumentsworth reading, such as TheQuran’s argument for God, the fine-tuning of the universe, the messenger of God, and manymore.
Recommendation:
If you are seeking an intellectual and thought-provoking exploration of theexistence of God, “TheDivine Reality” by Hamza Andreas Tzortzis is a must-read. This book explores the depths of theology, philosophy, and science, skilfully presenting a persuasiveargument for the existence of the divine reality.
The author is pursuing B.A from Bemina degree college.
@theabsentmindedboy@gmail.com
Book Review
Book Name: The Divine Reality: God, Islam and The Mirage of Atheism.
Author: Hamza Andreas Tzortzis
Publisher: Lion Rock Publishing
Genre: Non-Fiction
Pages: 332
Reviewer: Asif Rashid
