Is God poison?

John Norton stirs it up

Macleans is Canada’s weekly news magazine (similar to Time or Newsweek). It is a bit of an icon in Canada, being in continuous publication in some form for over 100 years. Every so often, as is customary with news magazines, it publishes an article on religion and spirituality. In the April 16, 2007 issue, it ran an article by Brian Bethune entitled “Is God poison?” The article is a review of several contemporary atheist authors who have stated that God is a delusion and that religion is the source of most of the world’s problems, from child abuse to war. Bethune notes that atheists tend to blame almost everything on religion.

You can read the article online by clicking here or

download a pdf of the article by clicking here

theRubicon decided to join the debate started by Macleans in the April 16th cover story,  so we asked long-time reader John Norton to take on the task. John’s observations on atheism’s criticism of religious fundamentalism appear below… and we hope his views will be joined by yours. Let’s get a discussion going - is God poison? And what can we learn from atheists? To be a part of the fray we suggest you read the Macleans piece first.

John Norton asserts:

I believe it is clear from the human experience that we are spiritual beings and that there is something greater than ourselves. Atheism is a failed philosophy because it cannot adequately explain away that which humans value so greatly: love, beauty, selflessness, sacrifice, hope and faith. There is a God who is greater than us.

To be honest with you, sometimes I’m not certain who God is or whether I even like God or not, but at least I believe that there is a God. That rules out atheism for me. At least in my mind, atheism is no solution. But it is a help. Atheism can teach believers many things.

I have learned to appreciate that atheism is not the antithesis of religion. Atheists helpfully object to ignorance, superstition and injustice that have no place in religion, be it Christianity or otherwise. Atheists are often honest thinkers with a real sense of justice. They are not far from the heart of God, or from the words of Jesus as recorded in the Gospels, when they object to the worst in religion. I think it is hypocrisy in religion that has driven many atheists to take the position that there is no God. Atheism is often more of an objection to the God of organized religion than a conviction that there is no God. As strange as this sounds, I am not convinced that most atheists can be counted among the “lost”.

Brian Bethune’s article notes that the atheist authors he reviews “all agree that a class of civilizations is under way, but it’s not between East and West or Muslims and Christians, but between rationality and superstition.” As a Christian, I agree with this. I too, like the atheist authors, am concerned about American fundamentalism (but I am more worried about the Islamic kind; American values are inherently positive and I refuse to fall into the liberal trap of blaming America for all the world’s ills). In fact, I am concerned about fundamentalism in any form (if it means irrationality and superstition).

Non-Christian forms of religious fundamentalism have this past decade resulted in unprecedented violence, from hijacked airplanes being slammed into the Twin Towers to using children as suicide bombers.

Christian fundamentalism might be less violent but arguably no less destructive. Catholic fundamentalism, which is more of the superstitious variety, results from an indefensible exaltation of papal authority. Evangelical fundamentalism, which is more of the irrational variety, results from an indefensible exaltation of biblical authority.

Fundamentalism, for example, is obsessed with sexuality, often with destructive consequences. The Catholic priesthood is male only and restricted from marriage, and judging by recent headlines, the resulting sexual repression appears to make frequent victims of young altar boys. The Catholic church’s attempt to regulate sex by forbidding birth control—i.e. condoms—is having disastrous effects in places like Africa, where unprotected sex is advancing the rampant spread of HIV/AIDS. And evangelical fundamentalism has its own sexual obsessions, focussed these days on gays and lesbians and the right to marry. The overemphasis placed on this latter issue by evangelicals in North America has left more pressing Christian concerns, such as the environmental crisis, to be defined by the popular culture as non-Christian issues

Perhaps the greatest danger of fundamentalism is its emphasis on death and the afterlife. For some Muslims, this is evident in a willingness to die as suicide bombers. But this same overemphasis on the afterlife bears fruit in evangelical fundamentalism’s doctrine of salvation as a ticket to heaven. However, evangelical fundamentalism’s forbearers of the 19th century knew the importance of salvation in this life, evidenced in the work of William Wilberforce or William Booth. But this was nearly forgotten in the 20th century and largely continues to be today.

Today, an extension of this viewpoint can be found in a literal interpretation of the Book of Revelation, motivating Christians in North America to send money to assist Jews to “repatriate” to Israel in order to facilitate the second coming of Christ. Goodwill by Evangelical fundamentalists towards the state of Israel, which is a significant political force in the United States, is motivated by a desire to bring about the end of the world! This is not only derived from a ludicrous and flawed reading of the Bible but has an extremely dangerous impact on world politics.

I have listed here just a few of the irrational thoughts and superstitions alive and well in Christianity. Let us Christians beware.

I understand the allure of fundamentalism. It provides a comprehensive worldview: that God is in control and that we know God and what he wants. This knowledge is assuring. Atheism provides a similar assuring allure. It too provides a comprehensive worldview: that humanity is in control of its own destiny and that we are no longer dependent on the crutch of religion. I believe the truth is much less certain or assuring: that God, made known through Jesus Christ and his Church, is calling us to love and faith and hope but that these are not certain. This is a “still small voice” among the noise of hate, mistrust and emptiness in the world today.

I would like to know if other readers of The Rubicon, being Christians generally and Salvationists by persuasion, agree with me that atheism, although flawed and failed, makes a good point that we need to hear?

Writer: John Norton lives in London, Ontario, Canada with his wife and two children and they can usually be found on Sunday mornings at their local Anglican church. John works as a lawyer and previously worked as a Salvation Army officer in Russia.

5 Comments to Is God poison?

1. John, I agree that we need to listen to the voice of atheism. This need is based on the fact that should be understanding of viewpoints other than our own. But I your penultimate paragraph suggests that atheism is the opposite of religious fundamentalism. This is simply something I can’t accept.

   For me the problem is that the likes of Dawkins, Harris and Hitchens are going exactly the same thing as the religious fundamentalists that they so passionately disparage. They are taking their own views and insisting that these are the absolute truth, the curse of modernity. In doing so they have become equally as blinkered and intolerant as those they seek to bring down.

   This intolerance is then fuelled by a media obsessed with pitting one extreme against another.

   The reality is that these extremist atheists are being portrayed as speaking for all atheists. Few, if any, atheists I know are bothered by the religious views of those they interact with, unless those same people are trying to impose their own views onto them.

   In a world that is changing so rapidly it is the quiet unheard voices of all religions and none that are the real peacemakers. The rhetoric that comes from the extremes of Christians, Jews, Muslims, Atheists and the adherents of many other ‘isms’ is the real threat. How long will it be before we see atheist fundamentalists setting out to destroy the worship places of those who do not agree with them?
Graeme on April 13th, 2007

2. My first reaction after reading your article and question, John, was to agree with you. After a quick nap, however, I got to wondering. I wonder if we’re giving these atheist authors too much credit. Yes, the critique they are making against a certain group is needed but they are far from the only ones making it and it seems to me that the main reason they (when I say ‘they’ I’m actually talking about Dawkins as he is the only one I’ve read a lot of that was featured in the Macleans’ article) are making the points at all is to gain converts. Underlying each argument Dawkins’ makes is a voice saying “c’mon, be intellectually honest and join us.” Dawkins’ relies so heavily on extreme, straw man cases, of Christian behavior to improve his arguments (most likely because his philosophical arguments are so obviously not from a philosopher) that I do have to question his motives.

   Maybe that is just my cynical nature, maybe Dawkins and others are genuinely concerned for humanity. Either way, though, they are not the only ones making these critiques; they just do so really loudly. Not passionately, just loudly, there are many people who passionately point of the crisis that some evangelical fundamentalists are causing but these atheist authors include harsh language in their critiques. More people notice what you’re saying when saying it along with stuff like “get rid of God” and “if you believe in God you’re an idiot.”

   All of this being said, Richard Dawkins on Evolutionary Biology… amazing.
Dave on April 14th, 2007

3. Thanks for posting this. I find Hitchens very compelling on stuff that I of course know something about. I don’t know much about the others.

   Anyway - faithfully reading.
Paul on April 14th, 2007

4. John, thanks for your thoughtful and honest article.

   I think, in a strange way, atheism’s insistent focus on the flaws of Christians can call us back to a true preaching of the gospel.

   The fact that Christians (both now and down through the ages) have done and continue to do a lot of terrible things should force us to stop commending ourselves and preach Christ crucified. The fact that Christians are terrible sinners is a confirmation of our conviction that all have sinned, and that no human acheivement has eternal merit. If Paul can say it, so should we - “Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners - of whom I am the worst.” If we are commending ourselves to the world, our witness is foolishness. However, if we are preaching Christ as our righteousness, then our hypocrisy in a sad way confirms our message.

   The fact that Christians are sinners is not a problem for the God of the gospel; but it is a problem for the god of the philosophers, whose existence is “proven” by human reason. We need to put our hope in the God who came to save sinners, who chose to freely disclose himself in the foolishness of the cross.

   Not that we should be complacent about our failings, of course. Hopefully, they will cause us to be more humble, seek true repentance, and possibly, as you suggest, lead us to place less confidence in our own correctness (and more confidence in the blood of Christ).
James Pedlar on April 17th, 2007

5. John, thanks for an interesting and thought provoking article - whilst I find Dawkins (whom I have read most) quite ridiculous in his, as Bethune calls them ’schoolboy’ jibes, I think you are right, that we should be listening carefully to what such atheists are saying, for there are painful truths here that we need to take note of, when religion loses sight of love.

   Added to your convincing list of irrational practices, as a Salvationist one of my deep concerns at present is that we have enunciated a passionate concern to stand and speak on issues of International social justice and human rights, before we have begun to address the deep issues of injustce within our own movement, where power is abused and unaccountable and autocratic decisions are made that adversely affect human lives and ministries. Power in particular, followed closely by money and sex, is the aphrodisiac that religion flirts with most destructively and violently, having for so mnay centuries lost sight of the reality that God is not so much monarchian and authoritarian Father, as self sacrificing, interdependent and loving Trinity.
David on April 20th, 2007

Leave a comment