Accountable to Whom?

A young gentlemen I went to church with back in my high school years posted a facebook status stating, Atheism is “a poor excuse for not wanting to be accountable for your actions!” I naturally disagree. This young man and I exchanged a few comments.

Here is his and my correspondence:

Parsons: I exceedingly disagree with you. An atheist must bear his actions and the consequence thereof fully, without a scapegoat or one to divert the severity of foresaid actions. Atheists, if compared as a group to others, comprehend responsibility on a more individualistic level and only on that level can one reap as one sows. Nonetheless, religion testifies to the collective state and to its drawing power of anti-individualism in all men. Yet, you stated “to be accountable,” not “to be responsible”; however, accountable to whom? It sounds as if a politician declared this status;--that is, “We need more accountability on Wall Street.” Responsibility, pulling up its collar, divagates the icy streets alone. In this particular case, the government redirects and distracts the public’s attention, so no one stands bearing his responsibility for the actions did in his name; the same holds true, if instead of the government, a deity is placed. If one believes that it is a deity to whom accountability must be given over, one should expect the government to be more readily available than his absentee scapegoat.

Gentleman: My status describes the majority of aetheists. The rest are like yourself... you think way too much. Now, you're probably thinking, “this guy is ignorant and doesn't have an answer. It's not bad to think these things through.” But no one will ever understand God or how He works. Therefore, as Christians, we live by faith. Hebrews 11:6 says, “Without faith it is impossible to please God.” Thinkers like yourself (and I know many more like you) try so hard, but you just can't fathom the thought of there being a God. It just seems impossible and our feeble minds just cannot grasp it. Therefore, many people try to disprove Him or in your case defend your theories and beliefs.

Please, understand I'm not trying to strike back at you either. I've read some of your blogs. I remember you and you're a good guy. You use to come to our church. I'm not sure what happened, but you'll definitely be in my prayers. God bless!

Parsons: Before commencing I doubt not you are a caring and good-hearted individual full of love for your friends and family, as well as bringing positive energy to many a situation, as I remember your parents doing so often. However, you and I discover ourselves at a fundamental, yet preponderant, divide of ideas and on approaches to life.

Firstly, to labor over the points you probably read in my blog posts is not my intension, so thusly such things as, we are all atheists to some opposing theology or what in the scriptures could not have been written by a man of that period and geographical location or the demarcation of faith (in the supernatural) and trust (in the nature) or the three basic claims of spiritual texts which must be examined--physical, historical, and moral--will not be discussed in my subsequent argument.

Secondly, how one can handicap oneself so readily? That is, man’s mental capacity is his only tool of survival, yet I heard many times as a child, “You think too much,” or some variance thereof. Whatever the variegation of such a declaration, however, it ensues still to this day by the members of my own family and fellow friends. I mind you, Christians possess not a monopoly on persecution.

Thirdly, it seems as if a man is fine with benefiting from the mental labors of his fellow, yet does naught to assist. Whilst that would be more fruitful, the man actually publicly obstructs his fellow and many a time limiting the positive correlation between he and his fellow in the advancements of society. Civilization presses forwards by the very few great minds, not by the numerous strong backs. With perspicaciousness, comprehensiveness, and consistency, these great minds with their self-interest and personal curiosities expand for us all the knowledge of the once tribe to the now celestial. These men are the movers of society and the motors of the world. (Not to steal too much from Ayn Randian lexicon.)

Finally, please, I ask in earnest, explain the following, from where does the contempt, if that is what was intended, in this statement come, “thinkers like yourself”? For without thinkers, where would mankind be as a race?

Gentleman: That's the problem. You stated earlier, “Atheists comprehend responsibility on a more individualistic level.” You also asked, “How can one handicap oneself so readily? That is, man's mental capacity is his only tool for survival.” If that was the case we'd all be screwed. The quicker we, as humans, find out we cannot do it alone the better off we'll be. Don't get me wrong, I'm thankful for the intelligent minds in the world. However, no one can handle that much pressure or responsibility. I guess, this is where you would call Jesus my scapegoat, but I thank God for His grace and His mercy. I sin everyday of my life and if I wouldn't KNOW that he still loves me and that he died for my sins I don't know where I would be. Probably dead! No one can live with that guilt. That is why we need a savior.

I have personally experienced God and there is nothing like it! Nothing anyone ever tells me will convince me that there is no God.

But to answer your question, as I stated earlier, I'm thankful for the “thinkers” to a certain extent. However, I have a problem when these brilliant men use the gift that God gave them to try and disprove their maker. To say that they figured the world out and that there is no higher being is arrogance in my opinion. Some people are more intelligent than others but NO ONE will ever figure out life. We can only truly know what God reveals to us. He allows men to make discoveries, but then they twist it and use it to try to disprove him. When I see these discoveries it just confirms how great my God really is that he created the world to work the way it does.


To engage in a point by point argument would take a while and the agreement to do so from both parties, yet I doubt he intended on sparking a corrspondence of this manner and I know I was not thinking of it on the day I replied. So, he and I, I gather, are leaving each in peace. This post turns into a glimpse inwardly of the young, modern Christian and the young, modern Atheist. Also, as I have pointed out before I find religion to be a collective state, same as national socialism. I also used my first reply as a beginning to the philosophical difference I view between accountability and responsibility.