Why Atheists Shouldn't Talk

Have you ever considered that the fact that you can read this is evidence for God's existence? Let me explain....

You may have heard the famous question: "What came first, the chicken or the egg?" Let me ask a slightly different question. What came first, words or sentences? Perhaps it would be more clear if I rephrase the question: What came first, words or language?

Before we answer too quickly, take a second to think about just how hard of a question this is to answer. You may be tempted to say that words came before language. However, the problem with that answer is that words wouldn't make sense without language. Language is the system by which you understand the meaning of words. Without language our words would be nothing more than random sounds. Perhaps you could hear some sort of emotion but you would have no way of communicating meaning. There is no way you could explain something so complex as "the ball is red." There must be a system by which we can combine these sounds and words before any of them make sense.

However, this doesn't make the other answer any better. We can't really say that language came before words either. Can you even imagine a language with no words? Language is the system by which we assign meaning to the particular words. How could the system exist if there were nothing to provide meaning to?

The problem that we are facing is one of relating the universals, in this case language, to the particulars, in this case words. Particulars never make sense outside of a system of universals. However universals cannot exist without particulars. The problem with understanding the origin of a system like language is that the component parts (in this case words) can't make sense outside of the whole and the whole can't function outside of the component parts. A similar observation was made by Jaques Derrida:

The linguistic system (langua) is necessary for speech events (parole) to be intelligible and produce their effects, but the latter are necessary for the system to establish itself… There is a circle here, for if one distinguishes rigorously langua and parole, code and message, schema and usage, etc. and if one is to do justice to the two principles here enunciated, one does not know where to begin and how something in general can begin, be it langua or parole.   (Jacques Derrida, Positions (1981), quoted in Jonathan Fuller, On Deconstruction:Theory and Criticism after Structuralism (1982))

So why shouldn't atheists talk? It seems that, assuming there was no divine assistance, we should be unable to use words because we have no language and unable to use language because we would have no words. This means, naturally speaking, we should have never been able to develop the ability to speak or write.

On the other hand, the existence of God provides a very logical explanation for our ability to communicate with each other. Genesis 1 depicts God as the master of language. God is the one who first spoke and gave origin, not only the earth, but also to all the systems that govern it, including language. Vern Poythress explains,

So we see in God himself the logical origin for words in language... He has not given words in isolation, but words that are tied to and related to one another in their meanings, their sounds, and their ability to form constructions that communicate rich truths.

I find this explanation both reasonable and likely. Further, it is because I believe in this explanation of the origin of language that I realize that language is wonderful and mysterious. Perhaps the most amazing thing about language is that in it God is revealed.