LOL Interwebz: Are You There, Blog? It’s Me, Ryan Bell

Every Thursday in LOL Interwebz, Luke T. Harrington explores the quirks and foibles of Internet culture from a Gospel perspective.

Hey, you! Read my blog!

Okay, so the odds are really, really good that you didn’t click that link above. Even if I told you what my blog was about (“It’s about me trying to be funny”), the odds are you still wouldn’t click it. Even if I got more specific (“It’s a Lutheran blog that’s supposed to be funny”), or, like, really-really specific (“It’s a blog about one guy’s [admittedly short] journey from the Reformed faith to the Lutheran faith, plus there are a lot of fart jokes”), the odds are still pretty good that you wouldn’t click it. Why? Because you’re a jerk. Nah, I’m kidding. Mostly.

No, it’s actually because you’re busy, and my blog is just one among more than 100 million on the Internet, and you absolutely don’t have time to read them all. Even if you’re the sort of person who A Christian living for a year as an atheist is comparable to a marathon runner living for a year as a couch potato or a car driver living for a year without changing his oil.reads religious blogs (and since you’re here, you probably are), you probably already have your schedule crammed full of blogs you want to read, and how could you possibly fit in one more? And even if you could, why would you choose mine over the other 10-million-ish religious hacks writing blogs?

You wouldn’t. Because you’re a jerk.

I mean, because you’re busy. (Sorry. I’m sure you’re not a jerk. Mostly.)

This is why smart people—people who aren’t hacks like I am—tend to come up with “hooks” for their blogs—that is, a concept to grab your attention. And a common one is “The Year of ________.” People write a blog about a year spent reading books from around the world, or using a Crock Pot, or trying every recipe in Julia Child’s cookbook.

And, then there’s the Year of Atheism.

Wait, you missed the Year Without God? Let me summarize it for you: Seventh-Day Adventist pastor Ryan Bell decided that he would try living without God for a year. Last year. In 2014. And surprise! He announced on December 31st that he’s totes going to keep being an atheist! And exactly nobody was surprised!

And I’ll be honest—while I was aware of it, I didn’t check in on the Year Without God more than occasionally. I don’t want to deny the legitimacy of Bell’s doubts—both of religion and of atheism—but the blog itself wasn’t terribly interesting. It was like almost any other atheist’s blog: he laid out the reasons he didn’t believe in God; he attacked Christians while making room for the ones who “did it right”; he debated the definition of the word “atheism.” While Bell was acknowledged in media outlets like The Daily Mail and NPR, I kind of doubt the blog would have gone anywhere without the hook of “I’ll try atheism for a year.”

I‘m not going to go all Matt Walsh on him. I’m not here to insult him or tell him he’s a terrible person for being an atheist. But, at the very least, this proves what I think we all know about life in the era of the Interwebz: success is less about your opinions and more about how you package them.

By now, we’ve all heard the arguments for atheism—and, for that matter, the arguments for theism—a thousand and one times. The sad fact is, none of them are terribly interesting anymore. The arguments against generally amount to “I have no imagination,” and the arguments for tend to amount to “If you can’t explain a thing, it must be because of God!” We’ve been around and around on this merry-go-round.

And let’s be honest with ourselves: the debate, to the extent that it’s a real debate, is at best a stalemate right now. Atheists make their points by presupposing empiricism, which is, of course, begging the question. Religious types make their point by pointing this out. There’s not a whole lot of places for this discussion to go. While it may have been cutting-edge ten years ago, it’s boring now. And yet, people still want to write about it. So they come up with hooks.

But still, was there ever any chance Bell would have gone back to theism? After all, atheism is the default setting on the human heart and mind. Atheists are quick to point this out, and somewhat ironically (or not?), the Bible agrees with them. Even the writers who assert that God is made obvious by creation, like St. Paul, will also tell you that the heart is blinded to the reality of God, despite the apparent contradiction. Since the Fall, humanity has been in rebellion against God, whether that means hating Him or denying Him.

And, if I’m honest about it, I think that’s why I never really found Bell’s blog all that compelling. Whatever else you might say about it, being an atheist for a year isn’t really much of a commitment. While most religions involve some sort of discipline—even evangelicalism, arguably Christianity’s laziest incarnation, tends to involve daily quiet times—atheism is just a matter of not being intellectually convinced of something (as so many atheists are quick to remind us). A Christian living for a year as an atheist is comparable to a marathon runner living for a year as a couch potato or a car driver living for a year without changing his oil. It involves basically no effort, and it asks nothing of the practitioner. It’s essentially the human mind and soul saying, “Eh, I guess I’ll reset back to factory defaults and see how that works for me.” It’s the religious and philosophical equivalent of “trying out” amnesia.

None of that should be interpreted as a screed against Bell. In truth, I wish him the best, and I’m certainly not saying he’s been anything other than 100% honest throughout his spiritual (or unspiritual) journey. You can just consider this piece a bit of mourning over the vast wasteland that is the blogosphere. We’ve run out of things to say; there’s nothing new under the sun; and yet, we all just keep talking.