Why I am not an Atheist

When I was a young student at Harvard, one of the most popular books on campus was “Why I am not a Christian” by Bertrand Russell. I devoured this book with glee, gratified by its sophomoric arguments, some of which I had already thought of by myself as a teenager living in rural Christian community. Russell heaped blame onto Christians for many of the world’s misfortunes, from the Crusades to the Spanish Inquisition. Russell’s book has thankfully passed into the obscurity which it deserves, but the argumentation it contained surprisingly still commands the attention of many academics, scientists and journalists.

However, now the target has been expanded beyond Christianity to include devout followers of any religion on the planet, who are all labeled “fundamentalists’. The front cover of Wired one of the technical magazines on the news stands in November 2006 proclaims:

“The New Atheism; No Heaven. No Hell. Just Science."

"Inside the new crusade against religion”.

The article begins “the New Atheists will not let us off of the hook simply because we are not doctrinaire believers. They condemn not just the belief in God but respect for belief in God. Religion is not only wrong; it‘s evil”.

I would not for one minute deny that many crimes have been committed in the name of religion; that is obvious. Whether the religious people so charged were truly following their own scriptures and teachers when they committed these offences is a separate question, too long to address in a short post. It could well be argued that the most devout of any religion do not hate and kill, but rather they feed the poor, care for the sick, and try to rehabilitate those in prison.

Whether religions are sufficiently tolerant is a harder question, and I suspect that often they are not. But then, who else in our world is sufficiently tolerant?

But those who pick up a sword should be prepared to be cut by a similar weapon. I could not begin to list all of the crimes committed in the name of Atheism, Reason and Science. But let me try to suggest their potential scope.

Let’s start with the French Revolution, which is perhaps the first modern example of a government officially pursuing the Rule of Reason. Its inauguration was accompanied by a huge bloodbath which forever immortalized the Guillotine. Whole classes of society were persecuted and exterminated. Vast mobs of unruly citizens attacked any available targets in unbridled class warfare. People starved, looted, and killed, until finally a dictator seized power and restored public order; but he then commenced wars on every front until most of Europe was consumed in a bloodbath. So much for the birth of government devoid of God and ruled by Reason.

But this movement was not squelched by the abject failures of the first attempt. In particular, Karl Marx, Lenin, and Stalin were fervent admirers of the French experiment, so no wonder that their government pursued similar means to reach their objective, using the pernicious slogan “The End Justifies the Means”. However, in Russian and China today you would hardly find anyone who would justify the terrible offenses committed in the name of Socialism, Reason and Atheism.

But the worst monster was likely Adolf Hitler; he was not the avid atheist as were Mao and Stalin, but he had no use for Christians or Jews, whom he exterminated in record numbers. And his Nazi movement extolled Science as never before. Indeed, the diabolical German Scientists in his employ threatened to enslave the planet with his bizarre ideology.

On the more positive side, consider the monumental achievements by believers of the major faiths, like Mother Teresa, Mahatma Gandhi, St. Francis of Assisi, and many other sublime souls. What about the role of innumerable religious leaders in caring for the poor; establishing schools, hospitals, orphanages; and in eliminating human slavery in most nations (which had been a universal curse in every society throughout known history)?

Finally, in response to the claim that religious people are plainly ignorant in their simplistic creationist beliefs, please consider that the greatest Scientist of the last 100 years, Albert Einstein, believed in a Cosmos designed by a Higher Intelligence, based on his own experience and observation. This theory is still a valid hypothesis, not just ignorant superstition.

Atheism is waxing stronger these days, particularly among the better-educated, academics and scientists. I have no issue with those who find religion difficult to comprehend and who wonder about the evils committed in the name of God. These are important discussions we need to pursue. But substituting a new ideology of atheistic intolerance is not progress.