The “New Atheism”…wow…what’s that?
According to Wikipedia, the New Atheism refers to a 21st century movement in atheism. The term, which first appeared in the November 2006 edition of Wired magazine. It is sometimes pejoratively meant, to a series of six best-selling books by five authors that appeared in the period 2004–2008 (Sam Harris, Daniel C. Dennett, Richard Dawkins, Victor J. Stenger and Christopher Hitchens)
They and other supporters of the New Atheism movement are hard-line critics of religion. They state that atheism, backed by recent scientific advancement, has reached the point where it is time to take a far less accommodating attitude toward religion, superstition, and religion-based fanaticism than had been extended by moderate atheists, secularists, and some secular scientists.
According to CNN, “What the New Atheists share is a belief that religion should not simply be tolerated but should be countered, criticized and exposed by rational argument wherever its influence arises.”
Christian apologist Robert Morey wrote on his book “The New Atheism and the Erosion of Freedom” said, “The atheists of the old school took a rather relaxed, passive attitude toward God and the Bible. They felt that if people were foolish enough to believe in religion, that was their problem. These atheists did not feel the need to read through the Bible, desperately seeking contradictions or errors. They did not sit up night after night feverishly trying to formulate attacks against religion. They simply ignored religion. Thus modern atheists deny God’s existence because they actually hate God. They hate Him because this God demands they serve Him and fulfill the destiny He has decreed for them. This God gives man a revealed law which dictates what is right and wrong. God thus robs man of the freedom of being and choosing whatever he wants. God is viewed as the enemy that must be destroyed in order for man to reach his full potential. Instead of God being the measure of all things, man must be the measure of all things.”
So…what’s new then?
For centuries atheists, materialists and libertines have been critical with every religious claims and have been exposing errors and other ridiculous avers of certain religious doctrines.
In ancient Greece for example, the poet Diagoras of Melos broke a statue of Hercules and used it as firewood to cook turnips. The Carvaka in the 6th century BCE and Purana Kassapa attacked the Hindu doctrine of Karma. There were also Xun Zi (298-238 BCE) who questioned the uses of prayers and divinations.
Before Harris, Hitchens, Dawkins and Dennett, there were those who have already criticized the Christian religion and its holy book, the Bible.
In 200 CE the pagan philosopher, Celsus challenged the belief on Neoplatonic Christianity. In his treaties “The True World”, Celsus pointed out that Christianity took most of its concepts from pagan sources and plagiarized some of its stories from early Greek ideas. Christianity, according to him was a collection of borrowed and intellectual bankrupt ideas.
In the early part of 11th century, Ibn Najjah hinted the possibility of atheism and Ibn Tufayl showed awareness in evolution.
It was quite ironic that true atheism arguments started with two Roman Catholic priests: Cristovao Ferreira and Jean Meisler. Fr. Ferreira was a former Jesuit who after being tortured by the Japanese in 1614 recanted his faith. In 1636, Ferreira wrote a small book “The Deception Revealed” which he asserted that God did not created the universe. He also stated that religion like Christianity is just an invention of men to hold powers over their fellow men.
Jean Meisler (1664-1729), once the parish priest of Etrepiquy in the Ardennes, secretly wrote volumes of testaments against God, religion, the Bible and Christianity. These testaments were published after his death in 1729 and were titled as “Common Sense”.
According to Meisler, theology is but ignorance of natural causes reduced to a system and it is an insult to human reason. He also believed that faith is irreconcilable with reason and we must prefer reason to it.
Before the coming of the renaissance period, we already have people like Anthony Collins who questioned the prophecies of the Old Testament. Peter Ammet who argued that the resurrection story was a fabrication and Charles Blount who said that heaven, hell and the concept of original sin were just invented by priests to hold over the terror-stricken masses.
Critical examinations of biblical claims were not new. William Winston (1667-1752) and Jean Astruc started it in the early part of 16th century. Astruc established the Documentary Hypothesis that gives us the explanation why Moses did not wrote the first five books of the Bible.
There were books that show Bible errors in the early part of 17th century. Thomas Paine (1737-1809) wrote “the Age of Reason” which he analyzed the Christian belief in God and the Bible. It did not stop there. Abner Kneeland, Kelsey Graves and DeLobique Montimer Bennett wrote books that criticized Christian beliefs.
Abner Kneeland was indicted on three counts of blasphemy in 1834 for publishing that the whole story of Jesus Christ was just a fable and the Bible as a pack of lies created by hypocrites. Kelsey Graves wrote books like The Bible of Bibles, The Biography of Satan and The World’s Sixteen Crucified Saviors. D.M.Bennett (1818-1882) was the editor of the paper Truth Seeker. He wrote a criticism about Jesus entitled “An Open Letter to Jesus Christ”. He was arrested and imprisoned in 1877.
The American Atheists have already published a book about Bible errors before the term “New Atheism” was coined by Gary Wolf. Dennis McKinsey published the magazine Biblical Errancy in 1983 while in 1990 Farrell Till edited The Skeptical Review. Now we have more in-depth issues and scholarly works in exposing Bible errors – thanks to Mr. John W. Luftus, Dr. Hector Avalos, Shmuel Golding, Gerd Ludermann and John Allegro.
Criticism to the Bible, Christianity, Jesus and God already started somewhere in 200 CE, so…what’s new with the so-called “new atheists?”
@grazzrotz: Oo nga naman dude. An Atheist cannot be a Satanist, because believing in Satan requires believing in god or in the case of catholics, gods. And oh by the way just to remind you, Christianity is not equal to God. I don't think this "Holy" Roman Catholic church is exactly what Jesus Christ had in mind.
and the score is…
twin skies – 1
grazzrotz – 0
reynor santiago – 0
reason, rationality and logic still pwned all of you xD
Obvious troll is…quite obvious 🙁
Still, for the benefit of those reading grazzrotz's rambling, riddle me this:
If the very definition of being an atheist is one who does not believe in God(s), how can an Atheist be treated as satanist, given that the latter requires a belief in a god?
New Atheism..same and old satanic strategies..no matter what you call it…it is the same God versus satan thing..no matter what you think…coz atheist hates God…if only you you people dont hate God its a different thing…but you hate God especially Christians..why? coz New and Old Atheist are the same satanic cults!!!
Faith, accdg. to hebrews11:1, is " the assurance of things hoped for, the conviction of things not seen. "Faith, is what credulity becomes when it finally achieves escape velocity from the constraints of terrestrial discourse-constraints like reasonableness, internal coherence, civility, and candor" this is accdg. to Sam Harris author of The End of Faith: Religion, Terror, and the Future of Reason.
exactly.
Exactly what? that we believe religious tolerance has gone on too long and too much? That we should just shut about whenever we hear about rapes, murders, mutilations being done in the name of The Faith (and I'm not talking about vile things done a long long time ago. I'm talking about what's happening now)?
It was a coincidence that Horsemen and other prominent atheist published their works one after the other in such a short time, that it did look like a "new atheist movement". But as it was pointed out, atheism has been ongiong way back, and not because these "old atheists" were god-haters, but because they've studied on it and rationally came to their conclusions.
"That we should just shut about whenever we hear about rapes, murders, mutilations being done in the name of The Faith (and I'm not talking about vile things done a long long time ago. I'm talking about what's happening now)?" -sliver of silver
which "The Faith" are you referring to?
"so…what’s new with the so-called “new atheists?”"
the lack of respect and tolerance for other people whose beliefs are different from their own.
But Christians have been doing that before the word "New Atheist" was coined @ Reynor…that's not new.
You mean they finally got tired of listening to self-righteous pricks, and decided to give them a piece of their mind.
@Reynor
Irony FAIL.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-11332515
Then we have this other colorful quote from the Pope:
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23…
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/ar…
Your own church has spent decades demonizing anybody who does not agree with them – excommunications and the inquisition among other examples – and then you have the gall to tell us WE nontheists are being dirsrespectful and intolerant because we are being vocal about our disagreements?
You don't have a fucking clue.
@reynor
or would you prefer that everybody who disagrees with the church and is willing to call out its hypocrisy simply shut up and pretend that nothing's wrong
Such as Cardinal Godfried Danneels, perhaps? http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/world/europe/30…
I can go on all day about the number of times the RCC has attempted to silence its critics and victims, while invoking the Waaaahmbulance.
Of course we're being disrespectful and intolerant – anybody else would be to rapists and molesters.
"the lack of respect and tolerance for other people whose beliefs are different from their own"
>> Can you again tell me the reasons why Catholics went to war against Muslims in the old days?
To ensure the safety of Christian pilgrims flocking to Jerusalem often attacked by the muslims and deliverance of the Holy Places from Mohammedan tyranny.