A thought that occurred to me at Starbucks this week:
The atheist can deny the existence of God, and therefore the need for a 'savior' of any kind, and then spend the rest of his (or her) life trying to explain the imperfection and fallibility of his nature and the world he lives in by constructing a framework of psychological and behavioral theories explaining his/our actions.
But if he's honest, he will also wonder at why, in the face of ever increasing 'understanding' of the human animal, it's still so hard for the individual, much less the culture, to really change thoughts, habits and perceptions - particularly the destructive ones. There will never be redemption in this model, so/because the word cannot be allowed to have any deeper meaning in this model. Stated another way, if there is no possibility of redemption (because God, and therefore redemption do not exist), then there cannot be a need for redemption - otherwise, the whole thing falls apart.
In the face of my own imperfection and weakness, however, I choose to embrace the need for a Savior, as it is the only feasible answer I have found that will hold up to the onslaught of so many unanswerable questions about who we are, how we got here, and where we're going. It makes my own inconsistent ability to fully understand or meaningfully change my own thoughts or behaviors - much less the world I live in - secondary to the provision and sovereignty of a God that, admittedly, I cannot fully comprehend. Regardless, in His own incomprehensibility, He has provided the answer that I can not...
