Consider this quote by Alister McGrath:
“Atheism argued that it abolished violence and tyranny by getting rid of what ultimately caused it: faith in God. It was a credible claim in the 19th century precisely because atheism had not yet enjoyed the power and influence once exercised by religion. But all that has changed. Atheism’s innocence has now evaporated. In the 20th century, atheism managed to grasp the power that had hitherto eluded it. But then atheism proved just as fallible, just as corrupt, and just as oppressive as any belief system that had gone before it. Stalin’s death squads seemed just as murderous as their religious antecedents. Those who dreamed of freedom in the new atheist paradise often found themselves counting trees in Siberia or confined to the Gulag—and they were the lucky ones.”[1]
One of the key aspects of the French Revolution was that in France, the church was seen as being on the side of government. As a result of the church being interested in its own power and authority as opposed to being interested in the welfare of the people, atheism began to look sexy. As McGrath points out, “For many in modern Europe, the conclusion was obvious: religion is an oppressor; atheism is a liberator.[2] Clearly though, as the 20th century proves beyond all doubt, atheism leads to an oppressive end.
Fast forward to our post 9/11 world and we see the publication of three books by authors who apparently don’t know history or ignore the atheistic bloodbaths of the 20th century. In response to the 9/11 terrorism, atheistic evangelists Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, and Daniel Dennett published books labeling religion a threat to the well-being of mankind.
Put very simply, they claim religion causes mass murder. But, when one takes an objective view of the facts, we see suicide bombers are motivated by a much more complex set of circumstances.[3] As it turns out, religion is neither a necessary nor sufficient reason for suicide bombers. The common factor found in suicide bombers is the sense of total helplessness in the face of perceived oppression coupled with a lack of conventional military capacity.[4]
We need to forcefully squash these silly assertions made by today’s “new” atheists. This kind of thinking leads me to believe that the new atheists do not have a firm grasp of the implications of their own worldview as it turned out in the 20th century. Learn to recognize these facts and bring them up. These attacks on Christianity by the new atheists need to be soundly and intelligently crushed.
[1] Quoting Alister McGrath in the book by Ravi Zacharias, Beyond Opinion (Nashville: Thomas Nelson, 2007) p. 29
[2] Zacharias, p. 25
[3] See more in the book by Diego Gambetta, Making Sense of Suicide Missions (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005)
[4] Zacharias, p. 28
Logical Faith 