High profile defendants of faith convened at BYU on Friday, for a day of lecture and discussion in response to the “New Atheism.”

Specialists in physics, biology, philosophy, politics and Mormonism shared insights specific to a revamped philosophical movement which values scientific theory and reasoning over faith and religious tradition. 

Professor Karl Giberson of East Nazarene College referred to notable figures such as Richard Dawkins and Carl Sagan as “people of enormous integrity” who champion causes and live consistent with their own ethical codes. This is in contrast with the stereotype that the sole motivation of scientists is liberation from responsibilities imposed by morals.

Other panelists said they saw truth in both perspectives.

“Theirs is a paradox of morality — they want to keep some but get rid of others [morals],” said Dinesh D’Souza, a policy analyst praised by Newsweek and The New York Times as a major player in modern conservative thinking.

The presenters agreed Christianity as a whole is on the defensive. Professor Ed Gant of the BYU department of psychology, however, noted Mormonism seems marginally affected by the war of ideas because the arguments are irrelevant to its doctrine. He clarified the difference between teaching doctrine and how one should live, versus a religious theology.

“Our presiding leaders are not theologians, schoolmen or philosophers; they are ‘merely’ prophets,” Gant said. “The ‘intelligent design’ we care about is a moral design, a purpose or plan at the core of creation that allows us as human beings and offspring of deity to fulfill our purpose in this life, which is to become perfected.”

Professor James Faulconer, the Evans Chair of Christian Understanding at BYU, pointed out atheism can be active unbelief in God or living in such a way that belief in God is irrelevant.

“Though polls show that most don’t consider themselves atheists, many are atheists in a mundane, more pernicious sense,” Faulconer said.

The purpose of the conference, as stated by the organizers, was to address ideas responding to “New Atheism,” a philosophic ideology that depends more on scientific reasoning than on faith.  
“Polls show most people calling themselves Christian in the U.S. believe the world is less than 10,000 years old, and that’s embarrassing,” Giberson said.

D’Souza said both Christians and the New Atheist movement have lost touch with science. Christians have chosen to ignore the facts while scientists have ignored the “gaps” in scientific knowledge. D’Souza said “gaps” in scientific theories used to discredit religion should be focused on, not glossed over.

“Consciousness is a little gap, but to a true scientific mind, it’s a true opportunity to recast scientific theory as a whole,” D’Souza said.

He noted the theory of evolution has no explanation for humans as cognizant beings.
Ultimately, Faulconer said the platform for the new atheism is the “forgetting of the question to which God was the answer.”