15 page printout
Reproducible Electronic Publishing can defeat censorship.
The value of this 360K disk is $7.00. This disk, its printout,
or copies of either are to be copied and given away, but NOT sold.
Bank of Wisdom, Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
**** ****
Little Blue Book No. 1597
Haldeman-Julius Company
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
by E. Haldeman-Julius
Atheism is accurately defined as the denial of the assumptions
of theism. The theist affirms that there is a God running the
universe; he declares that the idea of such a God is necessary to
an understanding of life; he offers various arguments or, as he
rather presumptuously calls them, evidences for his God Idea.
What is the position, logically, of the atheist? He will not
say in a mild, uncertain fashion that he doesn't know whether the
idea is true or that it is an open question. He has studied
carefully the case for and against theism. He finds that case
utterly insupportable, lacking any real or positive evidence,
defended by arguments which are easily discovered to be casuistic
and fallacious, and linking itself with other supplementary ideas
which are incredible.
The atheist perceives that history, in every branch of
science, in the plainly observable realities of life and in the
processes of common sense there is no place for the picture of a
God; the idea doesn't fit in with a calmly reasoned' and realistic
view of life. The atheist, therefore dentes the assumptions of
theism because they are mere assumptions and are not proved;
whereas the contrary evidences, against the idea of theism, are
overwhelming. He takes a clear-cut position. To proclaim himself an
agnostic, while to some if might appear more respectable and
cautious, would be to say in effect that he hadn't decided what to
believe.
We can understand, of course, why many prefer to call
themselves agnostics. They don't wish to appear bigoted. Or they
are honestly in doubt and feel that the idea of God may or may not
be true; yet with scarcely an exception the attitude of the
agnostic is the same as that of the atheist -- he denies the
assumptions of theism -- his disbelief in God, as an agnostic, is
quite as strong really as the atheist's disbelief.
But atheism is not in the least bigoted. It is a conclusion
reached by the most reasonable methods and one which is not
asserted dogmatically but is explained in its every feature by the
light of reason. The atheist does not boast of knowing in a
vainglorious, empty sense. He understands by knowledge the most
reasonable and clear and sound position one can take on the basis
of all the evidence at hand. This evidence convinces him that
theism is not true, and his logical position, then, is that of
atheism.
We repeat that the atheist is one who denies the assumptions
of theism. he asserts, in other words, that he doesn't believe in
a God because he has no good reason for believing in a God. That's
atheism -- and that's good sense.
1
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
ATHEISM IS THE REALISTIC ANSWER TO THE GOD IDEA
We are not fanatics on the subject of religion. If it were
merely a matter of abstract argument, we should not be so
interested. Ideas, if they could be quite separated from actual
influence in living issues, might be regarded with an air of
detachment. They might in such case be discussed mildly and
dismissively, One might be indifferent to such ideas or only amused
by them.
But religion has always asserted and it does yet assert a very
direct and commanding interest in the conduct of men. It is true
that, fortunately, there are old terrors and powers that religion
no longer can exercise so effectively as it did only a few score
years ago. But the atmosphere and the attitude of bigotry remain.
If religion cannot ordinarily invoke the armed force of law to
punish heretics, It still plays upon the psychology of fear and
predominantly its influence is to frighten men and distort their
views and poison every process of their reasoning.
The remnant of religion that is cherished by a few educated
and urbane men -- the philosophical or poetic religion that one
observes here and there -- does not concern us so acutely. Such a
provisional or partial belief in religion is baseless logically and
it is confusing; but we may grant that it is relatively harmless;
we can point out its fallacy and continue cheerfully on our way
about other things. But this philosophical or poet religion is not,
after all, the religion of the masses.
There are many cultured people who do not realize that among
the masses -- among millions of honest but deluded people -- the
most extravagant, fanatical and obviously dangerous notions about
religion are prevalent. One of the malign emotional and prejudicial
influences that helped to lend menacing strength to the late Ku
Klux Klan, for example, was the spirit of religious prejudice. We
all know how that vicious organization was strengthened by a
Protestant tone of creedal fanaticism. On the other hand, the
Catholics have their own extreme tone of fanaticism; and they still
assert, moreover, that the Catholic religion should be and
rightfully is supreme in belief and power -- Catholicism, that is
to say, is definitely opposed to the modern principles of political
liberty and intellectual freedom.
Protestantism is not, in its definite official statements, so
brazenly intolerant. Probably this is because Protestantism
includes so many creeds -- and these religious people feel that
they must be protected against one another. They are not so kindly
toward atheists.
In a number of American states atheists cannot testify in a
court of law. Blasphemy laws are still on the statute books; and
occasionally they are enforced. Our laws regarding marriage and sex
are sadly distorted by religious prejudice; and a few of these
distortions and absurdities are ably summarized by Anthony M.
Turano. Bible reading (which means Bible-teaching) in the public
schools is compulsory in Pennsylvania, Arkansas and other states.
in Tennessee and Mississippi a medieval law bans the teaching of
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
2
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
evolution -- the teaching, in a word, of the most serious principle
of truth in modern science -- in the, public schools. The
circulation of a responsible, scholarly, important sex
questionnaire at the University of Missouri was followed by a
ridiculous campaign of prejudice in which the chief element,
plainly enough, was a religious attitude of obscurantism on sex
question.
Our laws and customs are still deplorably handicapped and
corrupted by the ideas of religion. These ideas are no longer of
valid currency in the intellectual world. They are centuries behind
the times. They are not insisted upon with such vicious and
perilous persistency as was the case a few centuries ago. But they
remain -- these terribly wrong and menacing ideas -- and it is the
part of a civilized program of enlightenment to combat these ideas
with all the force Possible.
We, of course, believe in the force of reason and argument and
persuasion; yes, and the force of ridicule and denunciation, all
legitimate and free weapons which we can employ against religion;
in short, we believe in the clarifying conflict of ideas, and as
region cannot be defended intelligently we know that in the long
run it must he conquered. It remains yet, however, as a serious and
major issue in the thoughts and actions of men. Granting, we
naturally do, the fullest right of every man to believe in any
theory of religion or politics or social conduct which is preferred
by him, we do not forget that we have an equal right to promote our
own ideas and to attack, relentlessly and clearly, ideas which we
recognize as vicious in theory and inevitably vicious also in
practice.
We are well aware that religion is not as bad an influence as
it was a short time ago, as history is counted. But it is a
sufficiently bad influence even in modern times; and its reduced
viciousness (in practice) is due plainly enough to its reduced
power. We want to reduce that power to an absolute nullity. We want
religion to be entirely outgrown by the advancing intelligence of
mankind. Universal education is our ideal; and this means, in our
convinced opinion, that the philosophy of atheism (which is also
the philosophy of realism) wall displace with complete sanity and
wholesomeness the dark and morbid and unintelligently fanciful
ideas of religion.
We advocate the atheistic philosophy because it is the only
clear, consistent position which seems possible to us. As atheists,
we simply deny the assumptions of theism; we declare that the God
idea, in all its features, is unreasonable and unprovable; we add,
more vitally, that the God idea is an interference with the
interests of human happiness and progress. We oppose religion not
merely as a set of theological ideas; but we must also oppose
religion as a political, social and moral influence detrimental to
the welfare of humanity.
We attack religion because religion is not true -- because
religion is an obstacle (or a set of obstacles) in the way of
progress -- because religion foments strife and prejudice --
because religion is the breeding ground of intolerance -- because,
in short, religion is essentially hostile to mankind.
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
3
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
Religion glorifies the dogma of a despotic, mythical God.
Atheism ennobles the interests of free and progressive Man.
Religion is superstition. Atheism is sanity. Religion is medieval.
Atheism is modern.
PREACHER URGES THE ESTABLISHMENT OF
RELIGIOUS DESPOTISM
That religious fanaticism is a modern menaCe and not merely a
medieval memory, that steady propaganda on behalf of freedom of
thought is a most serious necessity, we have proved again for our
warning in the sermon of Rev. W.D. Lewis, pastor of the Second
Presbyterian church of Wheeling, W. Va. This preacher, who occupies
the pulpit of an important city church, declares that religious
liberty must be ended in America and that a system of compulsory
religion must be established. "I shall never be in full sympathy
with our system of compulsory education," he said, "until there is
set up side by side with it a system of compulsory religion."
In suggesting a course of despotic religious procedure for
modern times, Rev. Lewis goes away back to the days of ancient
Israel. He turns to the Bible and its Old Testament code of
theocratic laws. Modern Americans, he says, must be compelled to
acknowledge the sovereignty of a personal, autocratic, all-ruling
God. even as did the ancient Israelites -- and, according to the
scheme of this preacher, this God of Bunk must be worshipped by all
and no argument permitted.
"The whole scheme of things In Israel," says Rev. Lewis,
"revolved around the idea of a personal God. The first leaders of
the Jews saw that it would never do to attempt to create a national
solidarity without the establishment of a fixed authority ... So,
those first leaders of Israel did the wisest thing eyer done by any
group of men aspiring to bring forth a nation: They invested all
authority in God. They took neither responsibility nor credit for
themselves.... They were simply his mouthpieces and his agents."
That the priests and rulers of Israel "took neither
responsibility nor credit for themselves" is of course a ridiculous
bit of sophistry. They had a very imposing prestige and very
profitable revenues in their role as the "mouthpieces and agents"
of their mythical God, Clearly it was a great stroke of clever
exploitation (clever enough to deceive primitive tribes and clever
enough to fool many moderns who nevertheless do not live
intellectually in the modern age) for the priests to put over the
faction that a big, strong, mysterious and fearsome God was behind
their words and actions; that piece of fiction made the priests
seem far greater than mere men, greater than merely human rulers,
and they have fought and schemed jealously through the centuries to
retain that advantage.
It is the prestige and power of clericalism that Rev. Lewis is
eager to have restored fully in America. This is clear in what he
says about the specific command to worship (i.e., to patronize the
clerical shops of superstition). "One day in seven, the Sabbath,"
he says, "was made holy unto God and set aside solely for his
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
4
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
worship (in ancient Israel). There was no choice about It. In those
first days there was no such thing as religious liberty in Israel.
A man had to go to worship whether he liked It or not. The fact
that he didn't like the priests didn't matter... The excuse that he
was intellectually superior to the congregation of Israel didn't
work... Religious liberty was given no thought in Israel. I
sometimes wonder if it isn't given too much thought in our own
America."
We might indeed remind Rev. Lewis that in modern America we
have many features of life which were unknown in ancient Israel. We
have not only religious liberty but also political liberty, and the
two are inseparable. The Old Testament Jews, that primitive and
superstitious tribe, had no conception of modern democracy. They
had no glimmering of the materials of modern education. For
instance, those old Jews whom Rev. Lewis would have us follow in
their system of religious despotism had the most ridiculous notions
of life -- they believed in creation by a God and in all the
farrago of legends which are sprawlingly conspicuous in the Old
Testament. They believed that the earth was the center of a very
small universe (they had really no conception of a universe) and
that the sun, moon and stars were merely conveniences to illuminate
the earth. They had the most absurd, strangely twisted, cruelly
barbaric and superstitious ideas of morality -- the conception of
moral law as social law, while it was necessarily followed by them
to some extent, was not fully understood by them. Crude indeed were
the ideas prevalent in ancient Israel about religion and about
government and about morality and about the earth and man. If we
were really compelled to follow the ways of ancient Israel, as this
West Virginia preacher insists we should, we have should have to
scrap our system of education and embrace the system of despotic
religion in its stead.
It may be doubted if Rev. Lewis has much concern for
education, save as it can be used spuriously as a support for
religion. His fixed idea seems to be the importance of compulsory
religion. "I shall never be in full sympathy with our system of
irreligious education. Why should we be compelled to attend and
support our schools if there is nothing that can be done to compel
us to attend and support our churches? ... If education is
absolutely necessary for our community life so is religion. Or yet
why should we be compelled to support the idea of government if we
are at liberty to treat the idea of God with contempt? ... You will
never make a full success of a compulsory government or a
compulsory education until you give the same dignity to religion
and make it compulsory; at any rate compulsory enough to make it
respected throughout the land. The nation that plays fast and loose
with its idea of God will soon or late play fast and loose with its
idea of education and its idea of government. ... If God doesn't
matter, then nothing else matters, and all the compulsions of life
might just as well be set aside."
What Rev. Lewis does not understand (and presumably does not
care about) is the truth, well illustrated in history, that no
system of education can survive as educationally free and genuine
if it is loaded with the chains of a compulsory religion. A
religious despotism is utterly incompatible with the freedom and
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
5
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
dignity and progressive achievements of social life. As a matter of
fact, religion is an eccentric revival from ignorant earlier
periods in the life of mankind. It is not in sympathy with
modernism (of course not) and it cannot be reconciled with
modernism. The right to believe in religion and practice its forms
of worship as an individual affair is one that, on modern
principles, we must grant. Religion however, must be kept in its
place as a private matter. It is too dangerous when it goes beyond
that and presumes to command or threaten the state. Rev. Lewis is
an exponent, bold yet typical, of a sentiment of religious bigotry
which we cannot afford lightly to dismiss nor to ignore. We must
expose these bigots and fight them with a sternness that is
uncompromising and a sweep of propaganda that is resistible.
THE PROBLEM OF EVIL
The problem of evil has always been a mischievous, difficult
trap, of tormented logic for theologians. They have affirmed
dogmatically the existence of an all-powerful and omniscient and
benevolent God -- but in explaining the evil things in the world
they have been not at all deft but rather desperate.
We have been told that God created only the good and not the
evil -- but that doesn't jibe with the theory of a God who has
complete power. If he can't prevent evil, then he is a limited God
with a grave element of weakness.
Others have argued that God permitted the evil for purposes of
his own, which were really good purposes but beyond man's finite
comprehension. But that is a harassed recourse of a man who is in
a corner and can think of nothing better to say. It is an argument
that admits of no demonstration. It assumes something that can't be
proved. It isn't satisfactory.
Again, we are told that there is no evil in the world -- that
when we regard certain phenomena as evil it is only because we have
a distorted view -- that all things are good if we could only
understand them truly. And that again is wild assertion without
even the appearance of logic.
Yes, the problem of evil is too much for theologians. It can't
be reconciled with the God Idea. It is understandable only in a
naturalistic, atheistic view of things.
_______________
After all, the principle objection which a thinking man has to
religion is that religion is not true -- and is not even sane.
_______________
The fear of gods and devils is never anything but a pitiable
degradation of the human mind,
_______________
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
6
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
CAN GOD LIE?
This question is put to Christians who believe that the Bible
unerringly describes God and reports the commands and the
characteristics of God. If there is a God, it is natural that we
should wish to be quite correct in our understanding of that God's
nature. So, we ask: Can and does God lie?
Looking this point up in the mazes of Holy Writ, we discover
confusion. In Numbers xxiii, 19, we are told: "God is not a man,
that he should lie." This is put even mere strongly in Hebrews vi,
18, where we read: "It was impossible for God to lie."
But do these citations settle the matter? Ah, no, we are upset
in, our calculations the moment we turn to 2 Thessalonians ii, 11,
where we read: "For this cause God shall send them strong
delusions, that they should believe a lie." And in I Kings xxii,
23, God is thus reported: "Now, therefore, behold, the Lord hath
put a lying spirit in the mouth of all these thy prophets, and the
Lord hath spoken evil concerning thee."
Can God lie? Can the Bible lie? Anyway, there is a mistake
somewhere. The big mistake is in entertaining the idea of a God.
_______________
When we read that some minor scientist (usually a skilled
technical worker but not a thinker in science) has "found God"
somewhere, we are not excited. We know this is only a form of
words, meaning only that the scientific worker, turning away from
science, has rediscovered the stale old assumption of theology,
"There is a God." We find invariably (as we should expect) that
there is no satisfactory definition or description or
identification or location or proof of a God. "God" is merely a
word, whether it is used by a preacher or a mystic in a laboratory.
_______________
The fact that millions of people still believe in a hell of
eternal punishment for sinners and unbelievers is a drastic
reminder of the need for persistent, progressive education of the
masses. We have as yet only begun to realize the possibilities of
progress. But science, rationalism and humanism have pointed the
way, they have taken the first great steps, and we must keep right
ahead on the highway of modernism.
_______________
Don't take our word for it. Read the Bible itself. Read the
statements of preachers. And you will understand that God is the
most desperate character, the worst villain in all fiction
_______________
Commonly, those who have professed the strongest motives of
love of a God have demonstrated the deepest hatred toward human joy
and liberty.
_______________
Theism tells men that they are the slaves of a God. Atheism
assures men that they are the investigators and users of nature.
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
7
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
_______________
Belief in gods and belief in ghosts is identical. God is taken
as a more respectable word than ghost, but it means no more.
______________
Religion, throughout the greater part of its history, has been
a form of "holy" terrorism. It still aims its terrors at men, but
modern realism and the spread of popular enlightenment has
progressively robbed those terrors of their old-fashioned
effectiveness. Wherever men take religion very seriously --
wherever there is devout belief -- there is also the inseparable
feeling of fear.
_______________
Christian theology has taught men that they should submit with
unintelligent resignation to the worst real evils of life and waste
their time in consideration of imaginary evils in "the life to
come."
_______________
Priests and preachers have tricked, terrified and exploited
mankind. They have lied for glory of God." They have collected
immense financial tribute for "the glory of God." Whatever may be
said about the character of individuals among the clergy, the
character of the profession as a whole has been distinctly and
drastically anti-human. And of course the most sincere among the
clergy have been the most dangerous, for they have been willing to
go to the most extreme lengths of intolerance for "the glory of
God."
_______________
Perhaps religion might be dismissed as unimportant if it were
merely theoretical. If it were merely theoretical. It is difficult,
however, if not impossible to separate theory and practice.
Religion, to be sure, is full of inconsistencies between theory and
practice; but there is and has always been sternly and largely a
disposition of religion to enforce its theory in the conduct of
life; religion has meant not simply dogmatism in abstract thinking
but intolerance in legal and social action. Religion interferes
with life and, being false, it necessarily interferes very much to
the detriment of the sound human interests of life.
_______________
For centuries men have fought in the most unusual and devious
ways to prove the existence of a God. But evidently a God, if there
were a God, has been hiding out. He has never been discovered or
proved. One would think a God, if any, should have revealed himself
unmistakably. Isn't this non-appearance of a God (the non-
appearance of a God in the shape of a single bit of evidence for
his existence) a pretty, strong, sufficient proof of non-existence?
_______________
A God of love, a God of wrath, a God of jealousy, a God of
bigotry, a God of vulgar tirades, a God of cheating and lying --
yes, the Christian God is given all of these characteristics, and
isn't it a wretched mess to be offered to men in this twentieth
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
8
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
century? The beginning of wisdom, the beginning of humanism, the
beginning of progress is the rejection of this absurd,
extravagantly impossible myth of a God.
_______________
HIDDEN GODS
Look at the God idea from any angle, and it is foolish, it
doesn't make sense, but extravagantly proposes more mysteries than
it assumes to explain. For instance, is it sensible that a real God
would leave mankind in such confusion and debate about his
character and his laws?
There have been many alleged revelations of God. There have,
indeed, been many Gods as there have been many Bibles. And in
different ages and different lands an endless game of guessing and
disputing has gone on. Men have argued blindly about God. They
still argue -- just as blindly.
And if there is a God, we must conclude that he has willfully
left men in the dark. He has not wanted men to know about him.
Assuming his existence, then it would follow that he would have
perfect ability to give a complete and universal explanation of
himself, so that all men could see and know without further
uncertainty. A real God could exhibit himself clearly to all men
and have all men following his will to the last letter without a
doubt or a slip.
But when we examine even cursorily the many contradictory
revelations of God, the many theories and arguments, the many and
diverse principles of piety, we perceive that all this talk about
God his been merely the natural floundering of human ignorance.
There has been no reality in the God idea which men could
discover and agree upon. The spectacle has been exactly what we
should expect when men deal with theories of something which does
not exist.
Hidden Gods -- no Gods -- all we see is mans poor guesswork.
TAKE YOUR CHOICE
If the Bible, which Christians believe is the word of God, is
inspired and infallible, why does it have two distinctly opposite
versions of many things? God's nature and God's opinions and God's
wishes are contradictorily reported in Holy Writ.
It is stated, for example, in Genesis i, 31, as follows: "And
God saw everything that he had made, and behold it was very good."
But in Genesis vi, 6, it is stated: "And it repented the Lord that
he had made man on the earth, and it grieved him at his heart."
Does the good Christian believe both statements?
In Chronicles vii, 12, 16, we read: And the Lord appeared to
Solomon by night, and said unto him: I have heard thy prayer, and
have chosen this place to myself for a house of sacrifice... For
now have I chosen and sanctified this house that my name may be
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
9
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
there forever; and mine eyes and my heart shall be there
perpetually." Then in Acts vii 48, we read: "Howbeit the Most High
dwelleth not in temples made with hands."
Whether God preferred the darkness or the light seemed to be
uncertain to the Hebrew prophets of the Most High; but if the Bible
were thoroughly inspired there should have been perfect agreement.
But in I Timothy vi, 16, God is referred to in this manner:
"Dwelling in the light which no man can approach." On the other
hand, in I Kings viii, 12 this reference is contradictorily made:
"The Lord said that he would dwell in the thick darkness." And in
Psalm xviii we are told about God: He made darkness his secret
place." And in Psalm xcvii, 2 we are told: "Clouds and darkness are
round about him."
Such contradictions are common in the Bible. Naturally this
happened, as the Bible was a collection of books written at
different times by different men -- a strange mixture of diverse
human documents -- and a tissue of irreconcilable notions.
Inspired? The Bible is not even intelligent. It is not even good
craftsmanship, but is full of absurdities and contradictions.
"GOD'S WILL"
Thoughtful men have always observed that "God's will," as that
amusing expression has been employed by theologians and by lay
Commentators, has been nothing more nor less than a reflection of
human impulses and desires and fears and whimsicalities. Whoever
interprets this so-called will of God always presents a picture of
his own, the interpreter's, way of looking at things.
A sober, devout man will interpret "God's will" soberly and
devoutly. A fanatic, with bloodshot mind, will interpret "God's
will" fanatically. Men of extreme, illogical views will interpret
"God's will" in eccentric fashion. Kindly, charitable, generous men
will interpret "God's will" according to their character.
And of course this means that whatever happens in life and in
the world of nature, entirely independent of the will of any
supposed God, such happenings (of the most immensely variant and
complex kind) are ascribed to the will of Gad -- a blanket phrase,
and a bombastic one too, which explains absolutely nothing. Back of
the phrase "God's will" -- and back of the idea, such as it is,
which is reflected by this phrase -- there is the old, sound, and
really (to the thinking man) obvious truth that gods and all that
appertains to them are fashioned by, man in his own image or, that
is to say, by men in the images cast by their fancies and fears.
Whit we have under observation, always, are human impulses and
schemes of action: to say that "God's will" is behind them, is to
say exactly nothing.
INCREDIBLE INSTANCES
As the Bible is regarded as a holy and inspired book by
practically all Christians, a book absolutely without errors by
many Christians, and the most important proof (through alleged.
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
10
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
revelation) of the existence of a God by many Christians, it is
very important to point out incredible instances recorded in the
Bible which no man can sensibly believe.
Colonel Robert G. Ingersoll did a very useful. work in
exposing the folly of believing that the Bible was inspired. "One
can scarcely be blamed," he said, "for hesitating to believe that
God met Moses at a hotel and tried to kill him [Exodus iv, 24];
that afterward he made, this Moses a god to Pharaoh, and gave him
his brother Aaron for a prophet [Exodus vii, 1]; that he turned all
the ponds and pools and streams and all the rivers into blood
[Exodus vii, 19] and all the water in vessels of wood and stone;
that the rivers thereupon brought forth frogs [Exodus viii, 3];
that the frogs covered the whole land of Egypt; that he changed
dust into lice, so that all the men, women, children and animals
were covered with them [Exodus viii, 16, 17]; that he sent swarms
of flies upon the Egyptians [Exodus viii, 21]; that he destroyed
the innocent cattle with painful diseases; that he covered man and
beast with blains and boils [Exodus ix, 9]; that he so covered the
magicians of Egypt with boils that they could not stand before
Moses for the purpose of performing the same feat [Exodus ix, 11];
that he destroyed every beast and every man that was in the fields,
and every herb, and broke every tree with storm of hail and fire
[Exodus ix, 25]; that he sent locusts that devoured every herb that
escaped the hall, and devoured every tree that grew [Exodus x, 15];
that he caused thick darkness over the land and put lights in the
houses of the Jews [Exodus x, 22, 23]; that he destroyed all of the
firstborn of Egypt, from the firstborn of Pharaoh upon the throne
to the firstborn of the maidservant that sat behind the mill
[Exodus xi, 5], together with the firstborn of all beasts, so that
there was not a house in which the dead were not [Exodus xii, 29,
30]."
Do these marvels read like inspiration? Or do they read like
superstition? Remember that millions of Christians still base their
belief in a God upon the words of the Bible, which is a collection
of the most flabbergasting fictions ever imagined -- by men, too,
who had lawless but very poor and crude imagination. Ingersoll and
numerous other critics have shot the Christian holy book full of
holes. It is worthless and proves nothing concerning the existence
of a God. The idea of a God is worthless and unprovable.
BLIND ALLEYS
Myself when young did eagerly frequent
Doctor and Saint and heard great argument
About it and about evermore
came out by the door as in I went.
This well-known stanza by Omar, the agnostic Persian poet,
expresses the simple truth that he learned nothing from all the
arguments about God -- nothing, that is to say, except that the
arguments were aimless and meaningless. The doctors and the saints
were floundering amid unrealistic abstractions. God was merely a
name. It had scarcely the solid dignity and comprehensibility of an
idea -- even a false idea.
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
11
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
This argumentation which taught nothing to Omar -- which left
him with as little evidence for a God as before he heard a word of
the argumentation -- was a vain, wordy repetition of fears,
fancies, assumptions, dogmas and whimsically elaborated nonsense.
And so it has always been. The efforts of theism, intellectually
speaking, have been a chasing up blind alleys. They have arrived
nowhere -- but on the contrary the more argument there has been
about the idea of God, the more steadily have men grown in the
conviction that the idea is obviously untrue and unrealistic.
Talk of God leads by a direct road to the conclusion of
atheism. The only sensible attitude is to dismiss the idea of God
-- to get it out of the way of more important ideas. The wide
dissemination of this intelligent atheistic attitude is one of the
leading features of any program of popular education which is
completely worthy of the name.
_______________
With its fears and superstitions and prejudices, religion
poisons the mind of any one who believes in it -- and even the best
man, under the influence of religion, cannot reason wholesomely.
Atheism, on the contrary, opens the mind to the clean winds of
truth and establishes a fresh-air sanity.
_______________
Nobody has ever taken notable pains to locate the legendary
heaven; but probably that is because nobody ever thought seriously
of going to a heaven.
_______________
IS GOD A JOKER?
A few weeks ago a hurricane struck the little religious
community of Bethany, Okla. A number of pious citizens of the
little town were killed. Houses were destroyed -- homes in which
prayer and devotion reigned. A church was demolished.
Only a few miles away is the large, wicked city of Oklahoma
City -- at least we Can certainly assume that, from the religious
viewpoint, many sinners live in Oklahoma City. Assuming also (which
is a great deal riskier ;assumption) that there is a God, why
should he perpetrate this grim and sardonic joke? The sinners in
the big city were left untouched. The godly folk in the little
nearby village were punished by the evidences of God's wrath. How
do the religious people interpret this calamity? Often and often
they explain such calamities as flood, fire and storm by saying
that God is angry at the sinful people and is warning them or
destroying them for their sins. Was the hurricane in Bethany a sign
of the love of God for his faithful worshipers?
And God missed an even better chance, if there were a God who
wished to punish rebels against his majesty and inscrutability.
Just a few hundred miles north and east of Bethany, Okla., is
Girard -- the home of The American Freeman: and The Debunker and
The Joseph McCabe Magazine and the Little Blue Books -- the center
of American free thought where an enormous stream of atheistic
literature and. godless modern knowledge pours forth to enlighten
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
12
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
the masses. If there were a God directing hurricanes and he wanted
to really "get" an uncompromising foe, whom he has no chance of
persuading in the ordinary way, it would have been a devastating
stroke for him to send his howling Punitive blasts through the town
of Girard. It would be a more remarkable suggestion of the avenging
act of a God if only the Haldeman-Julius plant were destroyed and
the rest of the town left unhurt -- and, as good neighbors, we
shouldn't wish the Christian and respectable, people of Girard nor
those Who are respectable and not so Christian nor those who are
Christian and not exactly respectable to suffer from our proximity
and our propaganda of atheism.
Is God a joker? No -- let us whisper it -- the joke is that
there is no God. Hurricanes come upon the just and the unjust, the
pious and the impious.
_______________
To be true to the mythical conception of a God is to be false
to the interests of mankind.
GOD AS A GAMBLE
One of the most amusing arguments, frequently offered in
defense of belief in the idea of a God, is that such a belief is a
way of Playing safe. It is said that even though a man is not sure
of the existence of a God and a future life beyond the grave, it is
the part of caution for him to believe; then, as the argument goes,
the man believing is safe "Whether there is or is not a God and a
future existence; if there is no God, the believer will be no more
dead than the unbeliever; while if there is a God, the believer
will have preferential treatment in the judgments of the celestial
tribunal.
This queer, argument makes the matter of belief in a God an
intellectual gamble. It is of course an utter denial of
intellectual Integrity. Proceeding on this basis, the appeal to
belief is not made on the score of truth. One is urged to consider
the God idea not from the standpoint of its reasonableness; but
rather, from the standpoint of blind faith and a chance bet on an
idea.
Doesn't the religious person who uses this appealing to a
particularly low form of intellectual cowardice? What men need is
courage in their thinking. They need to be trained in facing facts
frankly. They need to learn that all ideas should be judged with
strict regard for the evidence. Instead religion harps on the
emotion of fear and tells men that they should treat ideas merely
as gambling chances and that it is safer (not intellectually the
better but the more craven part) to believe in a God.
This argument has other fallacious aspects. it assumes, for
instance, that the evidence for and against the idea of a God is
equal; whereas the vast preponderance of evidence is against the
idea, there being in fact no genuine evidence for the idea. It is
overlooked, too, that belief is genuine or it is not; and that a
belief which is frankly grounded on a gamble -- a belief affirmed
for safety's sake -- cannot be a real belief. One believes or one
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
13
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
does not; real belief, can only assert the truth of an idea. In
short, the man who bases his belief on such a principle is
bordering close to hypocrisy and is certainly revealing a striking
lack of mental integrity.
Such weak arguments exemplify the decline of religion and show
its utter intellectual bankruptcy. It has all the air of a
desperate and last plea for a set of ideas which, ordinarily and
reasonably, cannot be defended. It is, after all, a virtual
admission of the charge of the atheist that the idea of a God is
merely an assumption and has no ground of truth upon which firmly
to plant itself.
CREDULITY -- A CRIME
Credulity is not a crime for the individual -- but it is
clearly a crime as regards the race. Just look at the actual
consequences of credulity. For years men believed in the foul
superstition of witchcraft and many poor people suffered for this
foolish belief. There was a general belief in angels and demons,
flying familiarly, yet skittishly through the air, and that belief
caused untold distress and pain and tragedy. The most holy Catholic
church (and, after it, the various Protestant sects) enforced the
dogma that heresy was terribly sinful and punishable by death.
Imagine -- but all you need do is to recount -- the suffering
entailed by that belief.
When one surveys the causes and consequences of credulity, it
is apparent that this easy believer in the impossible, this
readiness toward false and fanatical notions, has been indeed a
most serious and major crime against humanity. The social life in
any age, It may be said, is about what its extent of credulity
guarantees. In an extremely credulous age, social life will be
cruel and dark and treacherous. in a skeptical age, social life
will be more humane. We assert that the philosophy of humanity --
that the best interests of the human race -- demand a strong
statement and a repeated, enlightening statement of atheism.
"SPIRITUAL REALITIES"
When preachers talk about "spiritual realities," what do they
mean? They do not mean the emotions of men. At least they do not
mean these emotions as realistically observed and interpreted human
emotions. Love, hate, fear, greed, malice, envy, ambition, dreams
and desires -- these are human emotions which the rational,
scientific mind takes as themes for analysis, They are understood,
not in any "spiritual" sense, but in terms of heredity and
environment and constitutional (physical and mental) makeup. Their
causes and their expressions are, so far as science has been able
to trace them, essentially material.
All of mankind's art, mankind, mankind's morality, mankind's
experiments with and yearning for beauty, can be and are explained
in terms of human cause and effect and are placed in the
evolutionary pattern worked out by science. They are not mysterious
BANK of WISDOM
Box 926, Louisville, KY 40201
14
THE MEANING OF ATHEISM
in the theistic sense; they are not, that is to say, mystic, An
emotion in human nature is as realistic a fact as an object in
nature: and science deals with both emotions and objects
materialisticly, experimentally, analytically.
"Spiritual realities" mean nothing to science. This is the special
and unrealistic lingo of the clerical bunk-shooters, who depend
upon sweeping (but empty) phrases and pious dogmas and a large
spooky and spoofy atmosphere of aimless mystery for the maintenance
of their prestige. That their belief is often sincere does not
affect the case.
By "spiritual realities," If you probe the phrase, you will
discover that the preachers mean some mystic working of the mind of
a God in the minds and motives of men. They intend us to believe
that human emotions are something more than human -- that back of
them is the shadowed and obscure and awesomely immense loom on
which is woven a divine pattern.
"Spiritual realities," according to the preachers, are the
reflections of the most unreal of all myths, namely, the myth of a
God. These so-called "realities," said to be the highest
conceivable, are seen to be the most unreal and the most
inconceivable.
IS GOD FAIR?
That's a funny question. But still we ask it: Is God fair? The
Christians say that God damns forever anyone who is skeptical about
truth of bunkistic religion as revealed unto the holy haranguers.
What this means is that a God, if any, punishes a man for using his
reason.
If there is a God in existence, reasons should be available
for his existence. Assuming that such a precious thing as a man's
eternal future depends on his belief in a God, then the materials
for that belief should be overwhelming and not at all doubtful.
Yet here is a man whose reason makes it impossible for him to
believe in a God. He sees no evidence of such an entity. He finds
all the arguments weak and worthless. He doubts and he denies.
Then is a God fair in visiting upon such a skeptic the penalty
for his inevitable intellectual attitude? The intelligent man
refuses to believe fairy tales. Can a God blame him? If so, than a
God is not as fair as an ordinarily decent man. And fairness, we
think, is more important than piety.
**** ****
"Faith," said St. Paul, "is the evidence of things not seen."
We should elaborate this definition by adding that faith is the
assertion of things for which there is not a particle of evidence
and of things which are incredible.
