Howard Bloom is a beautiful hypocrite. The author of books in as different subjects as Mohammed, scientific theory, and the cultural upheaval of the 1960s, he professes to be a “stone cold atheist.” Yet in spite of that profession, Bloom obviously writes as a Jew; that is, he writes with a moral passion filled with or inspired by the writings of Moses, David, and the prophets. And not just the Old Testament writings—his moral intensity also betrays the influence of Jesus. Thus, he is an atheist Jew, inspired by Moses, David, and the prophets, and partially inebriated by the words and teachings of Jesus!
His two rules for science reveal this:
- The truth at any price including the price of your life.
- Look at things right under your nose as if you’ve never seen them before, then proceed from there.1
Why should a “stone cold atheist” care about truth? Where would Truth with a capital “T” come from? More than anything else, why should he be willing to sacrifice his life for Truth? Finally, from where does the moral obligation to passionately search into things “right under your nose” come?
Bloom is not a faithful atheist! He is a hypocrite. But for an atheist to be hypocritical because he is deeply animated by the biblical vision of truth and honesty means he is a beautiful hypocrite. This emerges by examining the beginning of his first chapter of the The God Problem, particularly his discussion of what he calls a “heresy,” the assertion that A is not A.
From the outset, two things about The God Problem surprised me. First, the book is superlatively praised in the highest terms imaginable by its dust jacket. George Gilder’s name appears under a quote: “An incandescent exploration of the most intractable scientific enigmas, with the most cogent and surprising critique of the second law of thermodynamics since the invention of the steam engine. It shakes out like shining from shook foil and oozes to a greatness.” Bloom is heralded as a genius who introduces a new paradigm, an eye-opening look into the origins of the universe and its evolution to this day, a book that will change your life. It is hard to imagine greater praise for an author or his book. The recommendations leave the reader stunned before he reads the first page of the first chapter.
As I turned to the first chapter, I had to agree that the author’s style is thoroughly engaging. Although the topic—the problem of God—is as huge a matter as anyone can wrestle with, Bloom writes like a master novelist telling a breathtaking story about all things that are or could ever be. His writing is captivating. The detailed description of scientific and philosophical matters that he discusses is combined with such a truly refreshing and imagination-stimulating style of writing, that I can appreciate all the praise and recommendation his work has won. The first surprise was pleasant.
The second thing that surprised me, which was not as pleasant, is how very naive the book is about the matter of presuppositions. This naivety appears, remember, in a book that urges us to “Question assumptions.” Bloom writes ardently about seeking the truth at all cost and questioning things you think you know, but I see no evidence that he questions the big bang, evolution, or an atheist view of the universe. The few anti-God “arguments” he offers are sophomoric at best, and they basically boil down to the problem of evil, which is perhaps the most common argument of the day. Nothing new or exciting in this.
Bloom is so certain that God does not exist and that the big bang theory is truth with a capital “T” that he simply begins with the presupposition that the universe is somehow self-creating. Thus, his question is “how” did the cosmos do it? Bloom’s faith commitment to the non-existence of God and the truth of the big bang is his starting point, just like my own faith in the Triune God who created all things visible and invisible is mine. The difference between us is not a difference between science and faith, or science and religion. It is a difference between faith in science—man’s reason plus experience—and faith in the Triune God. He has his faith and I have mine. When I write about the origin of the universe, I might write polemically or I might just tell the story, but in either case my presupposition that God created all things relatively recently does not change. Bloom, a consummate storyteller, builds upon his big bang faith. He asserts that “THE [emphasis his] question” is: “How does the cosmos create?” In other words, if we assume that God does not exist and that the relatively-recently-formulated Big Bang scientific theory is actually truth with a capital “T,” then we have this huge problem of creativity — the HOW problem. He is writing a book for atheists who face the deep conundrum of the existence of the kind of universe we inhabit. My mind was not blown away by the content of his first chapter, though I must admit the package was superb.
Chapter two is titled, “A Taste of Sin,” but the “sin” spoken of is not the kind of sin we see in the Bible. It is “sin” from the perspective of an atheist, sin against typical atheist assumptions, which is, indeed, fun reading. He lists five sins or heresies. But in this essay I am only concerned with heresy number one: A does not equal A. He asserts:
“A is A” is one of the most important assumptions underlying Western culture. Logic, reason, algebra, calculus, and trigonometry are based on the notion that A is A. Every equation in math has an equal sign. And every equal sign is a statement that one thing is the same as another. Every equal sign is a testament to the ubiquity of A = A.2
He refers to Ayn Rand and her famous book Atlas Shrugged, in which she asserts that “all the disasters that have wrecked. your world, came from your leaders’ attempt to evade the fact that A is A.” But, then, after briefly introducing us to philosophers who doubt or deny the simple formula A = A, he bring the philosophical debate into historical perspective by taking us back to Aristotle: “Aristotle Wrestles Heraclitus.”
As Bloom says, Heraclitus is famous for saying, “You cannot step into the same river twice.” Rivers are constantly moving and changing. The sand or dirt under your feet at the first step have been moved, even if only slightly, before you can take your second step. Of course, the water into which you initially inserted your foot is long gone before you can step in again. The constantly changing river has become a different thing before you can take your second step. Bloom adds, “According to University of Pennsylvania philosopher Charles H. Kahn, ‘Cratylus denied that you could even step in the river once, since you are changing too.’”
The debate between the hard rationalism of Aristotle and the irrationalism of Heraclitus is presented as an extended debate-story that illumines the basic issues in a profound but thoroughly entertaining manner. And his conclusion is right on the mark: “Aristotle and Heraclitus were both right. A equals A. But A does not equal A.”
This conclusion is true in a way that Bloom certainly does not intend. What he is asserting is that the One (the ultimate Aristotle) and the Many (the ultimate Heraclitus) are both finally and basically true: the harmony of the One and the Many!
Parmenides was the most famous representative of the ultimacy of the One. For him all appearance of multiplicity was an illusion. There are no “many.” There is no “change.” Reality is an absolute unchanging One, One only. That is the ultimate truth.
For Heraclitus, Aristotle’s debate partner in Bloom’s book, the ultimate reality is the Many, for there is no “One.” What appears to be oneness is an illusion. As soon as we think we see a unity, the many swallows it up. Neither the river nor the man stepping into it have even a semblance of unity.
When Bloom says that both Aristotle and Heraclitus are right, Bloom himself is right, in a way that goes deeper than he realizes. How so? He is actually saying, without intending to, that the ultimate secret of the universe is the Triune God Himself, the Triune God revealed in the Bible and nowhere else. Outside of the Bible, there is no other God who is equally and ultimately One and Many.
The Biblical God is an absolute One: One eternal, ultimate, unchanging Being. But this absolute One is also a Many — three Persons: Father, Son, and Spirit. The Father is God, the Son is God, and the Spirit is God, but the Father does not equal the Son nor the Spirit. The three are equally the one true God who created our world, but they are each more distinct than any of the many that Heraclitus imagined.
The mystery of the Trinity is the Truth that stands behind the paradoxes and debates between Aristotle and Heraclitus. It is because our world was created by this kind of God that the world bedazzles us with oneness and manyness beyond our ability to digest.
Bloom’s discussion of Aristotle versus Heraclitus repeats what Cornelius Van Til taught for many years about the harmony of the One and the Many in the Triune God. If Van Til had had Bloom’s literary gifts, his impact would have no doubt been overwhelming. But if you want to know what Van Til meant by his various discussions of Parmenides versus Heraclitus, read Bloom and substitute Parmenides for Aristotle. When you come to the conclusion that both Aristotle/Parmenides and Heraclitus are correct, you have been introduced, by a stone cold atheist hypocrite, into the beauty of the mystery of the Trinity: One God who is Three Persons. The One and the Three exist in a perfect and absolute harmony that transcends our imagination, and inspires us to seek Him and His glory.
Ralph Smith is a pastor of Mitaka Evangelical Church.
NOTES