Atheist Christian Apologists
Since well known atheists like Richard Dawkins and others have been vocal in their criticism of religion there has been a backlash by a few other atheists like Greg Epstein. Some atheists have been inspired by the “four horsemen” while other have decided to take a different approach. That’s fine, not all atheists have to agree but for some reason some atheists have actually taken the position of defending Christianity.
I understand that some atheists think we can work with liberal Christians against the religious right. But when atheists go out if their way to defend Christianity and act as Christian apologists, that just seems perverse. Currently, the most famous of these atheist Christian Apologists is S.E. Cupp. Most people suspect that she is probably religious right tactic rather than someone who personally doesn’t believe in a deity. On the other hand, I have talked to a (small) number of atheists just like S.E. Cupp, but without the beauty and the book deals.
Part of this type of anti-atheist atheism comes from a resentment of Dawkins and/or a resentment of the growing atheist/humanist community. These apologists see any atheist who is critical of religion as a “Dawkins clone” and yet many of us have been critical of religion long before “The God Delusion” was published.
Christianity preaches that people ought to believe in certain facts about the world on insufficient reasoning. Faith is the virtue and (poor) reasoning is a mere justification for those who aren’t virtuous enough to believe on faith alone. It boggles my mind that any atheist would defend such a world view. What is more mind boggling is that these atheists admit that the Christian world view is wrong and yet they will defend that view rather than promoting critical thinking and a legitimate search for real testable answers to life’s questions.
This should not be confused as supporting and defending someone’s right to believe in wrong and even unreasonable positions. That is not what I am talking about here. I am talking about the ideas themselves.
It is like defending the proposition that 1 + 1 = 3 and then saying that you really know that it is 2, but that the previous proposition shouldn’t be marked wrong just because it actually is wrong.
Filed under: Religion, anti-intellectualism, atheism, culture war
I think it comes down to whether or not someone believes in an historical Jesus, that is whether or not an atheist believes that some man named Jesus lived on earth 2000 years ago, but just don’t believe that Jesus was divine, but rather just a man… a moral teacher.
I believe some atheists defend Christianity because even if they don’t believe in any god they still believe in an historical Jesus.
I’ve debated atheists on whether or Jesus ever existed so I know there are plenty out there who in fact believe Jesus was an actual historic figure.
Personally I don’t believe in an historic Jesus, myself and I’m an antitheistic atheist who finds religion to be delusional and harmful to society. I wouldn’t say I’ve come to this conclusion because it’s what Dawkins believes, but him and other atheists of similar beliefs may have been influential in shaping my own personal views.
I do believe that everyone has the right to believe whatever they want to believe, but I despise those who feel the need to use their beliefs to shape the laws everyone else is required to follow. Or expect that only like-minded people are suitable for public office.
In every successful movement, there have been those who advocate caution and even silence. “Don’t rock the boat,” they say. Again and again, they’ve been on the wrong side of history.
[...] Atheist Christian Apologists (dangeroustalk.net) [...]