God is not great

Objections to faith

GOD IS NOT GREAT
The case against religion
By Christopher Hitchens
Atlantic Books. 308 pages. £17.99
ISBN 978-1-84354-586-6

Do militant atheists plot and scheme together in dark places? Or are their recent books a spontaneous response to the terrible events of 9/11?

Either way, according to John Humphrys, Christopher Hitchens’s contribution makes the Taliban look tame. Listed among the world’s ‘Top 100 Public Intellectuals’ by both Foreign Policy and Prospect magazines, Hitchens brings to his book wide interests in world affairs. He writes:

‘There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith:
1) it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos
2) it combines maximum servility with the maximum solipsism
3) it is the result and cause of dangerous sexual repression
4) it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking.

‘I do not think it is arrogant of me to claim that I had already discovered these four objections before my boyish voice had broken’ (p.4). So he has had plenty of time to develop his thoughts. He admits, ‘I have been writing this book all my life’ (p.285).
Speaking for himself and his ‘co-thinkers’, he holds the surprising view that their belief is not a belief, their principles are not a faith and that they do not hold their convictions dogmatically.

What are his reasons?

How then does he substantiate these loosely held non-beliefs? He is scathing about Christian belief — ‘My particular atheism is a Protestant atheism’. But this is a book about religion and his icy blasts extend in all directions. ‘Religion teaches people to be extremely self-centred and conceited. It assures them that god cares for them individually and it claims that the cosmos was created with them specifically in mind’ (p.74).

Islam takes the full thrust of his derision, from its origins to its ethics and its threat to world peace. Roman Catholicism is given a great many questions to answer. Mormonism takes a pounding and Eastern Mysticism is mercilessly mocked. He noted a sign outside a Bagwan preaching tent instructing adherents to leave their shoes and their minds outside.

And biblical Christianity? Many readers could guess the moral problems of the Old Testament, circumcision (do rabbis really use their teeth? Ugh!), Abraham’s readiness to sacrifice Isaac, the slaughter of the Canaanites, antipathy towards pork and the practice of blood sacrifices would feature strongly. ‘The ground is forever soaked with the blood of the innocent’ (p.107).

Concerning creation, Hitchens asserts that the idea of a creator only raises the unanswerable question of who created the creator — a fatal objection, he writes, that theologians have never been able to answer (p.71).

Side-stepping why there is something rather than nothing, he then dismisses the argument from design. The fine-tuning of the universe leaves our planet on a climatic knife edge — ‘Some design!’ (p.80). He moves quickly on to mock the foolishness of young earth creationists and ‘intelligent design’, which he sees as an underhand re-branding of the same folly (p.86).

At the first hurdle

Some of his questions fall at first blush. Why weren’t dinosaurs mentioned in Genesis 1? Why wasn’t mankind given dominion over viruses and bacteria (p.90)? Why does the God of Moses never mention compassion and human solidarity (p.100)? Others require a more considered reply. Why is there no commandment in the Decalogue about the protection of children or the condemnation of rape?

However, there is no evidence that Moses ever existed (p.102). His attack on the Old Testament essentially stops there but the next chapter heading leaves the reader in anticipation.

‘The New Testament exceeds the evil of the old one’ (p.109). How does he justify this? The New Testament is a work of crude carpentry (examples are the end of Mark 16 and the start of John 8), hammered together ‘many decades after the crucifixion’ (p.111). The birth narrative contains a huge amount of fabrication and the NT contradictions have never been explained (p.115). The neglected gnostic gospels were of the same period and provenance as the authorised gospels (p.112f).

‘The best argument I know for the highly questionable existence of Jesus is this. His illiterate living disciples left us no record…’ (p.114). Many of the sayings of Jesus are ‘innocuous…unintelligible…primitive…immoral…and gnomic’. The resurrection is unbelievable, having no reliable or consistent witnesses in anything like the time period needed (p.143).

Is that all?

Well, this is really poor stuff and, given that he has been working on it all his adult life, one could have expected something better. Who should read this diatribe? Certainly not those who have failed to think clearly about their faith, and that, unfortunately, is a great many people. However, those who are teachers and preachers should read it! If we are to preach the gospel persuasively to our generation, and equip them to discuss it with others, then we must engage with these ‘defeater arguments’ that undermine everything we try to say. Having lowered yourself into this tank of cold water, I recommend John Humphrys’ new book to help you warm through afterwards!

The case against religion

Objections to faith

What are his reasons?

At the first hurdle

Is that all?

Peter May, UCCF

Main Articles

Other articles