Atheism: Past, Present, and Future

[Perun]

http://www.crisismagazine.com/december2004/book3.htm

Atheism: Past, Present, and Future
By: John Omicinski

The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World
Alister McGrath, Doubleday,
306 pages, $23.95

In his latest book, The Twilight of Atheism, Alister McGrath contends that atheism is a spent force, discredited by the murderous circuses staged by its ringmasters in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany and, not least of all, a victim of its own elitism, arrogance, and aimlessness. He tells one story of attending a recent, ragtag national convention of about 250 atheists in Boston, where his seatmate spent much time blacking over the word “God” on U.S. currency—an act as effectual as throwing rocks into the sea and hoping to fill it.

McGrath doesn’t seem to realize how devastating an insight he has stumbled upon here, a concrete example of the hatefulness and self-righteousness that gave us the gulags and Auschwitz.

Thank goodness these sorry sons and daughters of Marx, Freud, Lenin, Voltaire, Huxley, Darwin, and Nietzsche—names that once commanded armies of devout intellectuals convinced of their rightness and righteousness—have arrived at a blind canyon, at the other end of an arc launched at the Bastille and the guillotine and ending at a shabby Logan Airport meeting.

Even the scribbling, anti-God protester fits into McGrath’s theory as to why atheism rose—in his view—with the French Revolution of 1789 and fell exactly two centuries later when the Berlin Wall was pushed over in 1989.

“Paradoxically,” he writes, “the historical origins of modern atheism lie primarily in the extended criticism of the power and status of the church, rather than in any asserted attractions of a godless world.”

Atheism fell victim to its own lie: that cashiering religion would usher in an epoch of peace, moral righteousness, and equality. Instead, “The reality of the situation is bloody, messy, and brutal,” writes McGrath. “The eradication of faith tends to involve firing squads and gas chambers.”

He also notes the paradox of atheism: “The greatest intolerance and violence of that [20th] century were practiced by those who believed that religion caused intolerance and violence.”

McGrath traces the heady arc of atheism in an accessible, readable work that will become a standard. Why atheism rose, then fell, as an organized belief system is one of the more intriguing histories of our time.

The rise of science and the European Enlightenments all had something to do with atheism’s progress, and McGrath’s explanations are written clearly enough for any layman. His theory on why atheism didn’t become a part of the American Revolution should make it especially interesting to U.S. readers.

He is particularly good at noting how much various writers—notably the Romantic poets Shelley, Wordsworth, and Keats—contributed to the legitimatization of the atheistic point of view. What makes the book more interesting is that McGrath, a Protestant who teaches historical theology at Oxford, was for many years himself an atheist. But this is not a personal book; perhaps he has left that for another time.

According to McGrath, atheism’s glory days are long gone, and “its future lies increasingly in the private beliefs of individuals rather than in the great public domain.”

But if the book falters, it is at this point. McGrath fails to recognize that, though it lacks organization, atheism’s powerful legacy lives on in millions of unexamined secular lives.

Indeed, atheism—and its intellectual cousin, agnosticism—contributed greatly to what Pope John Paul II calls a “crisis of meaning...a perspective of life which neglects the search for the ultimate goal and meaning of human existence.”

Amorphous and harmless though this spiritual vacuum may appear to be, it is the same sort of atmosphere that proved fertile for the Protestant Reformation and its progeny, the French Revolution, which spun off atheism.

Marx, Feuerbach, Freud, and others in the atheist pantheon have been discredited (Darwin surely is next, for his theory remains unproved as “the origin of the species”). At times, McGrath all but suggests that Christians may drop their guards and laugh off the atheist challenge as dead and gone.

This would not be a good idea. With the devil still running about seeking the ruin of souls, love is not necessarily just around the corner. It may simply be some other enemy of Christianity, clad in a clever new disguise.


John Omicinski, a former national reporter in Gannett New Service’s Washington bureau, contributes frequently to crisis.

[Awar]

[quote=[font=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] John Omicinski ][/font]

In his latest book, The Twilight of Atheism, Alister McGrath contends that atheism is a spent force, discredited by the murderous circuses staged by its ringmasters in the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany

Eh, Hitler was Catholic.

Most of all the author is confusing faith with inner workings of
huge empires such as Nazi Germany and the Sovie Union.

Most of the population of these two countries were religious people,
and there's no telling if the leadership was or wasn't religious,
it were power-hungry leaders like all.

and, not least of all, a victim of its own elitism, arrogance, and aimlessness. He tells one story of attending a recent, ragtag national convention of about 250 atheists in Boston, where his seatmate spent much time blacking over the word “God” on U.S. currency—an act as effectual as throwing rocks into the sea and hoping to fill it.

So, the author's case of hating Atheism is based on his experience
with knowing a neurotic individual.

McGrath doesn’t seem to realize how devastating an insight he has stumbled upon here, a concrete example of the hatefulness and self-righteousness that gave us the gulags and Auschwitz.

The Gulags existed BEFORE there was a Soviet Union. During the time
of the Orthodox Christian monarchy.

Auschwitz, if you believe in the holocaust, was made in an empire
run by a known Catholic, where most of the population was either
Catholic or Protestant.

Thank goodness these sorry sons and daughters of Marx, Freud, Lenin, Voltaire, Huxley, Darwin, and Nietzsche—names that once commanded armies of devout intellectuals convinced of their rightness and righteousness—have arrived at a blind canyon, at the other end of an arc launched at the Bastille and the guillotine and ending at a shabby Logan Airport meeting.

Actually, self-righteousness is a human trait. Appears in ALL people in all times. It's something that had it's role in the great massacres committed by the Catholic inquisition, Muslims, and many other religious sods.

Even the scribbling, anti-God protester fits into McGrath’s theory as to why atheism rose—in his view—with the French Revolution of 1789 and fell exactly two centuries later when the Berlin Wall was pushed over in 1989.

It fell? Really?


I'll continue tearing apart this sorry article a bit later.
Too bad that the PC moron who wrote isn't a member here.

[Perun]

Originally Posted by Awar

The Gulags existed BEFORE there was a Soviet Union. During the time
of the Orthodox Christian monarchy.

No they didnt. Being exiled to Siberia under the Czars came nowhere close to what happened during Soviet times.

[Awar]

People were exiled to Siberia for political reasons. Period.

[Perun]

Originally Posted by Awar

People were exiled to Siberia for political reasons. Period.

Ok and that proves what? How does a few thousand exiled by the Czar compared to the millions that were sent under Communism?

[Awar]

Few thousand?

It proves that people get exiled, killed and tortured for politics, not because someone is
an atheist, or religious, or whatever.

Besides, we're talking about a time after a huge change in the political system.
Similar things would happen in such a large country ( if the government wanted to stay in power ) in any way, whoever took power.

In a huge country of 200 million people, centralizing the power means killing lots of people. In a smaller country, it would take killing less people.

[Arawn]

I love this mentality. When a christian does something bad, he's a bad person, but when an atheist (or merely suspected atheist) person does something bad, then atheism is bad.

Atheism is simply the opposite of theism, namely, not believing in God, thats it. It is not an ideology, or a singular easily described philisophical outlet.
It is a generic bannor that can include anything from punk students who can't get enough of nitzsche, to certain schools of buddhism.

[Cristoforo]

To say that that article is biased, is an understatement.

For God's sake (the irony ), let's make something clear. History witnessed Christian mass murderers (Torquemada) and atheist mass murderers (Stalin - Hitler was a Catholic, please note) so the author's argument is flawed.

Atheism is not so popular for 2 reasons. First of all due to intolerance from Theists. A person who is an atheist risks exposing his views in public because some fundamentalist theists tend to be nasty.. And secondly because Atheists don't live with the illusion that there is someone who is helping them or will give them an eternal life in another world and this makes living as an atheist psychologically tougher.


I never heard of a case where an atheist attacked or killed a theist for his beliefs but I heard a lot of cases where theists killed atheists for their lack of faith so comparing all atheist to a mass murderer psychopath such as Stalin is an insult to all of us (atheists).


Theists need to remember that a lot of scientists that discover a lot of things to make our life better/save our life in case of sickness/accidents etc are in fact atheists so before bashing us, stop & think about it


Ps. Observing what is happening in the world, you will note that whilst public atheism is on decline, secret atheism has drastically increased. It's also convenient to be a public theist and a secret atheist

[trinacria]

I cannot agree more. Reputation for you (Cristoforo), my friend!

[Zyklop]

It is however a shame to pray! Not for all, but for thee, and me, and whoever hath his conscience in his head. For THEE it is a shame to pray!

Thou knowest it well: the faint-hearted devil in thee, which would fain fold its arms, and place its hands in its bosom, and take it easier:--this faint-hearted devil persuadeth thee that "there IS a God!"

Friedrich Nietzsche - Also sprach Zarathustra

[Awar]

I think agnosticism is a better option than either religiousness or atheism

[Zyklop]

Agnosticism only moves the problem outside the realisation.

[Awar]

There is no problem... if the 'higher being' is outside our perceptions and our logic, it's just outside our ability to comprehend 'the problem', if it doesn't exist, then, there is no problem.

So, you see dear Zyklopstein, there is no spoon



...

Well, really, I think religion is a nice tool to control the general population,
while agnosticism is more something that should be a thing for the rulers/government/elite.

[Zyklop]

Originally Posted by Awar

There is no problem... if the 'higher being' is outside our perceptions and our logic, it's just outside our ability to comprehend 'the problem', if it doesn't exist, then, there is no problem.

Don´t worry, be happy!

Well, really, I think religion is a nice tool to control the general population,
while agnosticism is more something that should be a thing for the rulers/government/elite.

Bad Religion - I Want To Conquer The World

hey brother christian with your high and mighty errand
your actions speak so loud I can't hear a word you're saying
hey sister bleeding heart with all of your compassion
your labors soothe the hurt but can't assuage temptation

hey man of science with your perfect rules of measure
can you improve this place with the data that you gather
hey mother mercy can your loins bear fruit forever?
is your fecundity a trammel or a treasure?

I want to conquer the world
give all the idiots a brand new religion
put an end to poverty, uncleanliness and toil
promote equality in all of my decisions
with a quick wink of the eye and a "god you must be joking!"

hey mister diplomat with your worldly aspirations
did you see your children cry when you left them at the station?
hey moral soldier you've got righteous proclamation
and precious tomes to fuel your pulpy conflagrations

I want to conquer the world
expose the culprits and feed them to the children
I'll do away with air pollution
and then I'll save the whales
we'll have peace on earth
and global communion

[Awar]

btw. the problem with the strict belief in science is not in science... it's in the STRICT BELIEF.

[Aeternitas]

I am sorry but this article is full of nonsensical statements. I am starting to think the author is using examples like "Nazi Germany" as a cliche to sensibilize people and gain more credibility in his words. These examples are poor anyway because they do not reflect the truth - NS Germany was not atheist. Voltaire was also not an atheist.

[Ederico]

Originally Posted by Cristoforo

And secondly because Atheists don't live with the illusion that there is someone who is helping them or will give them an eternal life in another world and this makes living as an atheist psychologically tougher.

Try and live like a Catholic and living up to it and you will definitely change your opinion on the "pshycologically tougher" argument. The problem is that one bases an analysis of Catholicism on those that fail living like a Catholic. It is like a lot of