What do you think?
Rate this book
The Twilight Of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World
Atheism is one of the most important movements in modern Western culture. For the last two hundred years, it seemed to be on the verge of eliminating religion as an outmoded and dangerous superstition. Recent years, however, have witnessed the decline of disbelief and a rise in religious/spiritual devotion throughout the world. In this highly readable book, the distinguished historian and theologian, Alister McGrath examines what went wrong with the atheist dream and explains why religion and faith are destined to play a central role in the twenty-first century.
A former atheist who is now one of Christianity's foremost scholars, McGrath traces the history of atheism from its emergence in eighteenth-century Europe as a revolutionary worldview that offered liberation from the rigidity of traditional Christianity and the oppression of tyrannical monarchs, to its golden age in the first half of the twentieth century. Blending thoughtful, authoritative historical analysis with incisive portraits of such leading and influential atheists as Sigmund Freud, Marx and Richard Dawkins, McGrath exposes the flaws at the heart of atheism and argues that the renewal of faith is a natural, inevitable and necessary response to its failures.
322 pages, Kindle Edition
First published January 1, 2004
44 people are currently reading
855 people want to read
About the author
Alister E. McGrath
451 books498 followersAlister Edgar McGrath is a Northern Irish theologian, priest, intellectual historian, scientist, and Christian apologist. He currently holds the Andreas Idreos Professorship in Science and Religion in the Faculty of Theology and Religion at the University of Oxford, and is Professor of Divinity at Gresham College. He was previously Professor of Theology, Ministry, and Education at King's College London and Head of the Centre for Theology, Religion and Culture, Professor of Historical Theology at the University of Oxford, and was principal of Wycliffe Hall, Oxford, until 2005. He is an Anglican priest and is ordained within the Church of England.
Aside from being a faculty member at Oxford, McGrath has also taught at Cambridge University and is a Teaching Fellow at Regent College. McGrath holds three doctorates from the University of Oxford, a DPhil in Molecular Biophysics, a Doctor of Divinity in Theology and a Doctor of Letters in Intellectual History.
McGrath is noted for his work in historical theology, systematic theology, and the relationship between science and religion, as well as his writings on apologetics. He is also known for his opposition to New Atheism and antireligionism and his advocacy of theological critical realism. Among his best-known books are The Twilight of Atheism, The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life, and A Scientific Theology. He is also the author of a number of popular textbooks on theology.
Aside from being a faculty member at Oxford, McGrath has also taught at Cambridge University and is a Teaching Fellow at Regent College. McGrath holds three doctorates from the University of Oxford, a DPhil in Molecular Biophysics, a Doctor of Divinity in Theology and a Doctor of Letters in Intellectual History.
McGrath is noted for his work in historical theology, systematic theology, and the relationship between science and religion, as well as his writings on apologetics. He is also known for his opposition to New Atheism and antireligionism and his advocacy of theological critical realism. Among his best-known books are The Twilight of Atheism, The Dawkins Delusion?: Atheist Fundamentalism and the Denial of the Divine, Dawkins' God: Genes, Memes, and the Meaning of Life, and A Scientific Theology. He is also the author of a number of popular textbooks on theology.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews
March 9, 2011
In the Twilight of Atheism, Alister McGrath gives readers a historical overview of atheism that includes its strengths and its flaws. His analysis is both insightful and honest without disrespect to the many great minds that believe in a godless universe. McGrath, as a Reformation scholar, even suggests, by drawing together a number of scholarly studies on the origins and development of Protestantism, that there is a significant link between the Reformation and the emergence of atheism.
He reminds atheists, who seem to forget, that “The belief that there is no God is just as much a matter of faith as the belief there is a God. If ‘faith’ is defined as ‘belief lying beyond proof,’ both Christianity and atheism are faiths. While this suggestion may seem astonishing to some atheists, it is not only philosophically correct but also illuminating in shedding light on the changed fortunes of atheism in recent years.”
For those who think one cannot be a legitimate scientist and still have a belief in God, McGrath cites a major survey of the religious beliefs of scientists carried out at the beginning and end of the 20th Century. The original survey taken in 1916 showed that 40 percent of scientists had some form of personal religious beliefs while 40 percent had none and 20 percent were agnostic. In 1996 the survey was repeated and the amazing results were exactly the same. One noted scientist, Albert Einstein, denied being an atheist.
Walter Isaacson in his biography of Albert Einstein writes this about the great scientist beliefs, “Throughout his life, he (Einstein) was consistent in deflecting the charge that he was an atheist. ‘There are people who say there is no God,’ he told a friend. ‘But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views.’” Isaacson also writes of an interview Einstein gave to George Sylvester Viereck shortly after his fiftieth birthday. Viereck asked Einstein if he believed in God and Einstein said, “I’m not an atheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written these books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.”
The reality is that there are no definitive answers on either side of the debate, so it comes down to a person making a choice as to what they believe. My problem is with the name calling that has recently been evident in the atheist camp. This new tactic takes the position that if you can’t prove something empirically then you need to verbally bludgeon the opposition by name calling such as: simple-minded, stupid, imbecilic, and other deprecatory rhetoric. This has become one of Richard Dawkins weapons against theistic belief.
George Orwell in his novel Down and Out in Paris and London describes the character of Bozo in this way, ‘He was an embittered atheist (the sort of atheist who does not so much disbelieve in God as personally dislike Him). This seems to describe Dawkins’s recent diatribes against religion
McGrath, at the end of the book, takes a more reasonable stand. He says this about the attitude believers need to have, “Atheism stands in permanent judgment over arrogant, complacent , and superficial Christian churches and leaders. It needs to be heard. In the closing pages of this work, its concerns will be taken seriously and to heart.”
The debate, I’m sure, will continue with no definitive answers ever achieved, so perhaps it is more civil to have each side simply respect the others beliefs and let the condescending name calling finally end.
He reminds atheists, who seem to forget, that “The belief that there is no God is just as much a matter of faith as the belief there is a God. If ‘faith’ is defined as ‘belief lying beyond proof,’ both Christianity and atheism are faiths. While this suggestion may seem astonishing to some atheists, it is not only philosophically correct but also illuminating in shedding light on the changed fortunes of atheism in recent years.”
For those who think one cannot be a legitimate scientist and still have a belief in God, McGrath cites a major survey of the religious beliefs of scientists carried out at the beginning and end of the 20th Century. The original survey taken in 1916 showed that 40 percent of scientists had some form of personal religious beliefs while 40 percent had none and 20 percent were agnostic. In 1996 the survey was repeated and the amazing results were exactly the same. One noted scientist, Albert Einstein, denied being an atheist.
Walter Isaacson in his biography of Albert Einstein writes this about the great scientist beliefs, “Throughout his life, he (Einstein) was consistent in deflecting the charge that he was an atheist. ‘There are people who say there is no God,’ he told a friend. ‘But what makes me really angry is that they quote me for support of such views.’” Isaacson also writes of an interview Einstein gave to George Sylvester Viereck shortly after his fiftieth birthday. Viereck asked Einstein if he believed in God and Einstein said, “I’m not an atheist. The problem involved is too vast for our limited minds. We are in the position of a little child entering a huge library filled with books in many languages. The child knows someone must have written these books. It does not know how. It does not understand the languages in which they are written. The child suspects a mysterious order in the arrangement of the books but doesn’t know what it is. That, it seems to me, is the attitude of the most intelligent human being toward God. We see the universe marvelously arranged and obeying certain laws but only dimly understand these laws.”
The reality is that there are no definitive answers on either side of the debate, so it comes down to a person making a choice as to what they believe. My problem is with the name calling that has recently been evident in the atheist camp. This new tactic takes the position that if you can’t prove something empirically then you need to verbally bludgeon the opposition by name calling such as: simple-minded, stupid, imbecilic, and other deprecatory rhetoric. This has become one of Richard Dawkins weapons against theistic belief.
George Orwell in his novel Down and Out in Paris and London describes the character of Bozo in this way, ‘He was an embittered atheist (the sort of atheist who does not so much disbelieve in God as personally dislike Him). This seems to describe Dawkins’s recent diatribes against religion
McGrath, at the end of the book, takes a more reasonable stand. He says this about the attitude believers need to have, “Atheism stands in permanent judgment over arrogant, complacent , and superficial Christian churches and leaders. It needs to be heard. In the closing pages of this work, its concerns will be taken seriously and to heart.”
The debate, I’m sure, will continue with no definitive answers ever achieved, so perhaps it is more civil to have each side simply respect the others beliefs and let the condescending name calling finally end.
September 13, 2014
Very detailed. A bit dry. Still excellent scholarship.
This topic is considered from the perspective of a highly educated upper-class British intellectual, and while there's some mention of France, Germany, and American movements, there always seems to be a British point of view present. The language is quite elevated at times, and there's lots of scrutinization and even reporting of dry facts. McGrath's dry humor leaks into the prose as well, a welcome addition to the detached academic tone. Yet I still absolutely love McGrath's voice, no matter what the topic.
Sometimes it feels like he's getting a little off topic from the chapter title, winding his way freely through names and dates and works. But eventually he comes back to the point. He has practically enough subtitles to guide any confounded reader through Mino's maze -- I felt like he was micromanaging the discussion a bit. But is that such a bad thing, considering the seriousness of the topic? Maybe not. But I found myself wanting a more casual conversation rather than the dry, detailed, detached lecture from a professor.
Then again, that's exactly what this book set out to be: expansions on previous lectures from a British professor. I did enjoy expanding my knowledge of the wave of atheism in Western culture. For instance, I liked learning more about how the Victorians drastically changed in their religious beliefs and specifically how science and religion were drawn up to be seen as incompatible opposites. There are certain paragraphs with very poignant prose and sound points that I wish more people could understand. I would recommend this to someone who could appreciate this point of view.
I don't see that Atheism has died quite as much as McGrath would seem to believe, but still a good work.
This topic is considered from the perspective of a highly educated upper-class British intellectual, and while there's some mention of France, Germany, and American movements, there always seems to be a British point of view present. The language is quite elevated at times, and there's lots of scrutinization and even reporting of dry facts. McGrath's dry humor leaks into the prose as well, a welcome addition to the detached academic tone. Yet I still absolutely love McGrath's voice, no matter what the topic.
Sometimes it feels like he's getting a little off topic from the chapter title, winding his way freely through names and dates and works. But eventually he comes back to the point. He has practically enough subtitles to guide any confounded reader through Mino's maze -- I felt like he was micromanaging the discussion a bit. But is that such a bad thing, considering the seriousness of the topic? Maybe not. But I found myself wanting a more casual conversation rather than the dry, detailed, detached lecture from a professor.
Then again, that's exactly what this book set out to be: expansions on previous lectures from a British professor. I did enjoy expanding my knowledge of the wave of atheism in Western culture. For instance, I liked learning more about how the Victorians drastically changed in their religious beliefs and specifically how science and religion were drawn up to be seen as incompatible opposites. There are certain paragraphs with very poignant prose and sound points that I wish more people could understand. I would recommend this to someone who could appreciate this point of view.
I don't see that Atheism has died quite as much as McGrath would seem to believe, but still a good work.
September 14, 2016
As a person of faith, I acknowledge my bias but I nevertheless found this to be overall quite fair-minded and even generous in several places concerning its portrayal of atheism. It was a relief to read an intellectual engagement that truly appeared to understand the 'other side' rather than a more typical evangelical 'pop culture' approach that simply says 'Atheist bad, Christian good, everyone else mistaken'. McGrath seemed to be saying 'Come on, atheists, you can do better than this. You've got something good to offer the world, including Christians' (read the last chapter especially).
As for the 'twilight' concept, I don't think he was wise to use the word in the title or the concept in the structure of his book. He acknowledges in the last chapter that atheism, like theism and religion in general, will continue to be a cultural reality in the West for the foreseeable future. The sun is not setting on either one.
Still, it was a fair, informative, respectful, and intellectually engaging (without being intellectually intimidating) read and I do highly recommend it.
As for the 'twilight' concept, I don't think he was wise to use the word in the title or the concept in the structure of his book. He acknowledges in the last chapter that atheism, like theism and religion in general, will continue to be a cultural reality in the West for the foreseeable future. The sun is not setting on either one.
Still, it was a fair, informative, respectful, and intellectually engaging (without being intellectually intimidating) read and I do highly recommend it.
March 4, 2016
Sinänsä paljon hyvää faktaa mutta kaikki kirjailijan käyttämät viittaukset jäävät puoliksi kuin sumun peittoon + huono suomennos? koska onhan 'His Dark Materials' käännetty suomeksikin (en tajunnut miten viimeisen osan otsikko on taivaallinen tasavalta?) Sinänsä mielenkiintoista historiaa mutta mielenkiintoista miten kirjailija kirjoittaa ateismista samalla myöntäen olevansa teisti.
Read
May 9, 2012Allister McGrath is a well respected Oxford Theologian and as such his material deserves to be taken seriously. Twilight of Atheism is a book that chronicles the history of atheism with the ultimate goal of proving its demise. McGrath compares atheism to Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee in June 1897, in that it was the pinnacle for the British Empire, and the only direction thereafter was down. Twilight is not a rant against atheism, neither is it particularly apologetic in its tone. When reading through the book, the author is firm but respectful of those that hold the opposing view (one obvious way that he does this is in the title that seems to be a play on Nietzsche's "Twilight of the Idols.")
Overall Twilight of Athesim was an excellent book to read. McGrath is an engaging writer who demystified atheism by placing it in its context like any other movement, and gave credence to those of us who uphold a theistic view of the world.
Overall Twilight of Athesim was an excellent book to read. McGrath is an engaging writer who demystified atheism by placing it in its context like any other movement, and gave credence to those of us who uphold a theistic view of the world.
May 5, 2023
The first time reading McGrath leaves me the same impression that listening to him gave me. For some authors, this is certainly a first class catastrophe, whereas for others, including McGrath, a prize of great achievement. He was somehow able to furnish this work such that it demonstrates an outstanding scholarly rigour and a highly entertaining reading experience at the same time. The creativity shown by the subject is also commendable. He mimics the style of the history of a certain religious faith in his address of the timeline of Atheism, which is, as he argues in this book, actually no less a creed-framed faith than its religious counterparts. Perhaps the only flaw of this book is its limited scope: it documents only the rise and fall of classical Western atheism which is inherently antithetical to any religion, but for many from the global East like myself, there seems to be no contradiction in a deeply religious 'atheist', using the crude sense of the word.
May 8, 2014
Pretty uneven --I enjoyed reading it, and learned a lot, but I don't think McGrath is successful it tracing a coherent history of atheism in the first place, and he seems to give 20th century atheist and secular movements and culture very little consideration -- focusing on Madelyn Murray and the American Atheists to the near-exclusion of either other organized atheist and secular movements or the large body of Americans and Europeans who identify as non-believers but are not involved in atheist organizations. I was disappointed that McGrath seemed as willing to oversimplify atheism as Dawkins, Harris, etc, are to oversimplify religion -- especially since McGrath pays lip service to respecting atheist thought.
I think the biggest failing of the book's structure is that McGrath adds so many caveats to his analysis of eighteen and ninetieth atheistic writing and culture that, while he refers to these centuries as its heyday, the book doesn't bear this out. In that sense, he's not really telling the story of the rise and fall of atheism at all. He reads everyone, from Voltaire to Paine to George Eliot, as critics of organized religion rather than actual disbelievers in God. This may have been the case -- if nothing else, I now have a fat reading list of primary and secondary sources -- and his ideas about "atheism" as a cultural phenomenon during these periods are interesting, but it also means that the book never really addresses "real" atheists or arguments for the nonexistence of God. I think this needs to be either addressed separately from arguments about the role of religion in society (which ultimately is the concern of most of the book), or, if rational argument about whether or not God exists is pointless -- which he suggests, and which I believe -- I think he needs to frame this entire project differently.
He also has almost no data to back up his claim that atheism is on the decline -- his points that Pentacostalism is growing worldwide and that American culture has become more religious over the past decades are not the same thing as demonstrating that fewer people adhere to atheism. I enjoyed what I read and I don't think any of it was irrelevant, other than a bizarre segueway into Star Trek plot lines from the 1960s through the 1990s, but it didn't really accomplish what he set out to do. I think a more useful project would seriously consider arguments for the nonexistence of God, even if it meant giving a platform to ideas that can't be argued against. If you really believe that the impossibility of a rational argument for God's existence is compatible with your belief in God -- a view that I think McGrath does explain successfully here -- I think you can afford to be more candid and thorough in treating atheism as it stands today. I suspect, though, that that might destroy McGrath's premise (that atheism is on its way out) entirely.
I think the biggest failing of the book's structure is that McGrath adds so many caveats to his analysis of eighteen and ninetieth atheistic writing and culture that, while he refers to these centuries as its heyday, the book doesn't bear this out. In that sense, he's not really telling the story of the rise and fall of atheism at all. He reads everyone, from Voltaire to Paine to George Eliot, as critics of organized religion rather than actual disbelievers in God. This may have been the case -- if nothing else, I now have a fat reading list of primary and secondary sources -- and his ideas about "atheism" as a cultural phenomenon during these periods are interesting, but it also means that the book never really addresses "real" atheists or arguments for the nonexistence of God. I think this needs to be either addressed separately from arguments about the role of religion in society (which ultimately is the concern of most of the book), or, if rational argument about whether or not God exists is pointless -- which he suggests, and which I believe -- I think he needs to frame this entire project differently.
He also has almost no data to back up his claim that atheism is on the decline -- his points that Pentacostalism is growing worldwide and that American culture has become more religious over the past decades are not the same thing as demonstrating that fewer people adhere to atheism. I enjoyed what I read and I don't think any of it was irrelevant, other than a bizarre segueway into Star Trek plot lines from the 1960s through the 1990s, but it didn't really accomplish what he set out to do. I think a more useful project would seriously consider arguments for the nonexistence of God, even if it meant giving a platform to ideas that can't be argued against. If you really believe that the impossibility of a rational argument for God's existence is compatible with your belief in God -- a view that I think McGrath does explain successfully here -- I think you can afford to be more candid and thorough in treating atheism as it stands today. I suspect, though, that that might destroy McGrath's premise (that atheism is on its way out) entirely.
October 21, 2010
McGrath traces the rise of atheism as a major cultural force in the West in the first half of this book. Atheism rose to prominence in part through the French Revolution and its significant critique of the failings of the French Church, the intellectual ideas of Feuerbach, Marx and Freud who all critique belief in God as a flaw in humanity, and the rise of natural science (specifically evolution). Also contributing was the failure of religious imagination; atheism was simply more interesting and invigorating to people. This led to the dream of a godless culture, which some yearned for but others were more uncertain about.
The second part of the book examines the resurgence of religion. McGrath gives many reasons for this. One is the emergence of Pentecostalism, a form of Christianity that is seemingly immune to some previous atheist attacks. Here McGrath advances the thesis that atheism rose in part as a culturally conditioned critique of Protestantism. While aspects of Protestantism set the stage for the atheist critique, as Christianity changes and evolves, such critiques no longer hold water. Also, when the godless cultures that many atheists previously yearned for did arrive, such as in communist Russia, they proved to be just as oppressive, intolerant and violent as the worst that any religious culture ever was. The decline of modernity and the rise of postmodernism played a part in the critique of atheism too. Finally, atheism failed to capture the imagination of people.
McGrath brings even-handedness and sanity to a debate often dominated by loud rhetorical flourish. He argues that the truth of God's existence cannot be proven nor disproven, it lies outside the realm of proof and certainty. Just as the arguments for God by the likes of Aquinas and Augustine presupposed God and then explained reality with God in mind, so Freud and Marx presupposed no God and went on to explain reality from an atheist perspective. McGrath is no arrogant theist saying all signs point to God, but he does show that rejection of God is not the default for any person with a brain.
This book came out prior to the onslaught of attacks on religion by the "new atheists". With so many bestsellers, perhaps some see McGrath's thesis of atheism in its twilight as proven false. Yet McGrath is somewhat prophetic as the newer atheists come across, even to many other atheists, as fundamentalists who as culture turns against them feel the need to draw hard battle lines, yell the loudest and win the argument by sheer force of rhetoric. It gets attention in the media, but on closer examination lacks depth of substance.
The second part of the book examines the resurgence of religion. McGrath gives many reasons for this. One is the emergence of Pentecostalism, a form of Christianity that is seemingly immune to some previous atheist attacks. Here McGrath advances the thesis that atheism rose in part as a culturally conditioned critique of Protestantism. While aspects of Protestantism set the stage for the atheist critique, as Christianity changes and evolves, such critiques no longer hold water. Also, when the godless cultures that many atheists previously yearned for did arrive, such as in communist Russia, they proved to be just as oppressive, intolerant and violent as the worst that any religious culture ever was. The decline of modernity and the rise of postmodernism played a part in the critique of atheism too. Finally, atheism failed to capture the imagination of people.
McGrath brings even-handedness and sanity to a debate often dominated by loud rhetorical flourish. He argues that the truth of God's existence cannot be proven nor disproven, it lies outside the realm of proof and certainty. Just as the arguments for God by the likes of Aquinas and Augustine presupposed God and then explained reality with God in mind, so Freud and Marx presupposed no God and went on to explain reality from an atheist perspective. McGrath is no arrogant theist saying all signs point to God, but he does show that rejection of God is not the default for any person with a brain.
This book came out prior to the onslaught of attacks on religion by the "new atheists". With so many bestsellers, perhaps some see McGrath's thesis of atheism in its twilight as proven false. Yet McGrath is somewhat prophetic as the newer atheists come across, even to many other atheists, as fundamentalists who as culture turns against them feel the need to draw hard battle lines, yell the loudest and win the argument by sheer force of rhetoric. It gets attention in the media, but on closer examination lacks depth of substance.
April 13, 2024
1 THE DAWN OF THE GOLDEN AGE OF ATHEISM
The Critics of the Gods: Classical Greek Atheism
The Transition to the Modern Era
An Age of Revolution: The Eighteenth Century
PART 1: THE HIGH NOON OF ATHEISM
2 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Voltaire: Critic of a Corrupt Church
Voltaire's writings are a powerful testimony to the way in which institutional criticism of the church could easily be transposed to criticism of the ideas of the Christian faith—in other words, to atheism.
The American Revolution: Radical Reform without Atheism
The Rise of French Atheism
The Failed Philosophical Attempts to Defend God
The Marquis de Sade and the Origins of Erotic Atheism
The Critique of Christianity: The First Phase
Institutional Atheism? The Program of Dechristianization
The French Revolution and Atheism: An Assessment
3 THE INTELLECTUAL FOUNDATIONS: FEUERBACH, MARX, AND FREUD
A Secular Priesthood: The Rise of the Intellectual
Ideas originally limited to a small elite gradually percolated downward and outward into society as a whole. Eventually, they became so accepted and familiar that it was difficult to imagine that it was ever otherwise. Popular culture was led by intellectuals, who increasingly became the shapers and movers of Western thought. As clerical power began to decline in the eighteenth century, Western society began to look to others for moral vision and intellectual inspiration. It found such leaders in the growing community of intellectuals. The emergence of the intellectual as a recognized social type is one of the most remarkable developments of recent centuries. Intellectuals became a secular priesthood, unfettered by the dogmas of the religious past, addressing a growing audience who were becoming increasingly impatient with the moral failures and cultural unsophistication of their clergy. At some point, perhaps one that can never be determined with historical accuracy, Western society came to believe that it should look elsewhere than to its clergy for guidance.
God as an Invention: Ludwig Feuerbach
God as an Opiate: Karl Marx
God as Illusion: Sigmund Freud
4 WARFARE: THE NATURAL SCIENCES AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF ATHEISM
The Origins of the Warfare of Science and Religion
Atheism as a Science: The Demand for Religious Proof
The Blind Watchmaker: Darwin and a Godless Universe
5 A FAILURE OF THE RELIGIOUS IMAGINATION: THE VICTORIAN CRISIS OF FAITH
The Birth of Intentional Atheism in Britain
Nature: Affirming the Transcendent without God
Shelley and the Necessity of Atheism
The Unconvert: George Eliot
A. C. Swinburne: The Imaginative Appeal of the Profane
The Life of Jesus Movement
A Culture in Crisis: The Loss of Faith
6 THE DEATH OF GOD: THE DREAM OF A GODLESS CULTURE
Dostoyevsky and the Revolt against God
Nietzsche and the Death of God
As Albert Camus pointed out, Nietzsche "did not form a project to kill God" but instead "found him dead in the soul of his contemporaries." The primary emphasis of Nietzsche's mature writings is that "belief in the Christian God has become unbelievable" —a statement that represents a cultural observation rather than a philosophical argument. "What is now decisive against Christianity is our taste, no longer our reasons." Western culture has not ceased to believe in God on account of unassailable philosophical reasons, but because of its shifted mood. … And what, he rightly wonders, might the implications of this be?
Camus and the Absurd Silence of God
The confident, optimistic atheistic faith that we find in the writings of Claude-Adrien Helvétius and Ludwig Feuerbach gave way to the darker, more uncertain questioning of Camus and many other writers, such as Franz Kakfa. The early atheist belief that a brave new world would result from the elimination of God and the deification of humanity gave way to a more somber estimation. Humanity may have revolted against God and declared itself to be autonomous; yet the outcome is a world ridden with anxiety, despair, and alienation—a far cry from the secular paradise envisioned by the dreamers of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
The Death of God Theology
The Suicide of Liberal Christianity
The Execution of God: The Atheist State
PART 2: TWILIGHT
7 THE UNEXPECTED RESURGENCE OF RELIGION
A Loss of Faith: A Personal Narrative
The Stalled Intellectual Case against God
The Suffering of the World and Atheism
The Imaginative Failure of Atheism
The Rebirth of Interest in the Spiritual
The Remarkable Case of Pentecostalism
8 DISCONNECTION FROM THE SACRED: PROTESTANTISM AND ATHEISM
The Divorce of the Sacred and the Secular
The Imaginative Failure of Protestantism
The Atheist Challenge and the Future of Protestantism
9 POSTMODERNITY: ATHEISM AND RADICAL CULTURAL CHANGE
…modernity—a confident, ebullient movement, convinced of the supreme ability of human reason to understand the world and hence to master and control it. There was no longer any need for a God to confirm or underwrite a settled and stable order of moral values, social relations, or rules of thought. All could be established with certainty and universality through human reason. Atheism was the religious belief of choice for this movement, in that it resonated profoundly with its presuppositions and goals. It is no accident that the rise of atheism in the West is so closely tied to that of modernity; they are as two sides of the same coin.
The Birth of Modernity
By the end of the Second World War, the social, moral, and intellectual failings of modernity were all too obvious. Modernity’s tendency toward the enforcement of universalization and uniformity had led to the catastrophes of Nazism and Stalinism. Paradise had not been achieved.
The Postmodern Respect for Diversity
Postmodernism rejected …modernism's quest for objective, essentially knowable truth and beauty… Postmodernity has reacted against such notions, for two major reasons: first, that it was untenable philosophically, and second, that it encouraged the rise of intolerance and lack of respect for the Other.
Atheism and the Challenge of Postmodernity
Postmodernism is a cultural mood that celebrates diversity and seeks to undermine those who offer rigid, restrictive, and oppressive views of the world. Modernism… tried to reduce everything to a uniform set of ideas…
The Embarrassing Intolerance of Atheism
10 THE ATHEIST'S REVOLT: MADALYN MURRAY D'HAIR AND OTHERS
Father and Son: Edmund Gosse
Daughters and Sons: Ivy Compton-Burnett
Mother and Son: Madalyn Murray O'Hair
11 END OF EMPIRE: THE FADING APPEAL OF ATHEISM
Liberators and Oppressors: On Atheist Role Reversal
Religion and the Creation of Community
Institutional Atheism: A Failure of Vision
The Permanent Significance of Atheism
The Critics of the Gods: Classical Greek Atheism
The Transition to the Modern Era
An Age of Revolution: The Eighteenth Century
PART 1: THE HIGH NOON OF ATHEISM
2 THE FRENCH REVOLUTION
Voltaire: Critic of a Corrupt Church
Voltaire's writings are a powerful testimony to the way in which institutional criticism of the church could easily be transposed to criticism of the ideas of the Christian faith—in other words, to atheism.
The American Revolution: Radical Reform without Atheism
The Rise of French Atheism
The Failed Philosophical Attempts to Defend God
The Marquis de Sade and the Origins of Erotic Atheism
The Critique of Christianity: The First Phase
Institutional Atheism? The Program of Dechristianization
The French Revolution and Atheism: An Assessment
3 THE INTELLECTUAL FOUNDATIONS: FEUERBACH, MARX, AND FREUD
A Secular Priesthood: The Rise of the Intellectual
Ideas originally limited to a small elite gradually percolated downward and outward into society as a whole. Eventually, they became so accepted and familiar that it was difficult to imagine that it was ever otherwise. Popular culture was led by intellectuals, who increasingly became the shapers and movers of Western thought. As clerical power began to decline in the eighteenth century, Western society began to look to others for moral vision and intellectual inspiration. It found such leaders in the growing community of intellectuals. The emergence of the intellectual as a recognized social type is one of the most remarkable developments of recent centuries. Intellectuals became a secular priesthood, unfettered by the dogmas of the religious past, addressing a growing audience who were becoming increasingly impatient with the moral failures and cultural unsophistication of their clergy. At some point, perhaps one that can never be determined with historical accuracy, Western society came to believe that it should look elsewhere than to its clergy for guidance.
God as an Invention: Ludwig Feuerbach
God as an Opiate: Karl Marx
God as Illusion: Sigmund Freud
4 WARFARE: THE NATURAL SCIENCES AND THE ADVANCEMENT OF ATHEISM
The Origins of the Warfare of Science and Religion
Atheism as a Science: The Demand for Religious Proof
The Blind Watchmaker: Darwin and a Godless Universe
5 A FAILURE OF THE RELIGIOUS IMAGINATION: THE VICTORIAN CRISIS OF FAITH
The Birth of Intentional Atheism in Britain
Nature: Affirming the Transcendent without God
Shelley and the Necessity of Atheism
The Unconvert: George Eliot
A. C. Swinburne: The Imaginative Appeal of the Profane
The Life of Jesus Movement
A Culture in Crisis: The Loss of Faith
6 THE DEATH OF GOD: THE DREAM OF A GODLESS CULTURE
Dostoyevsky and the Revolt against God
Nietzsche and the Death of God
As Albert Camus pointed out, Nietzsche "did not form a project to kill God" but instead "found him dead in the soul of his contemporaries." The primary emphasis of Nietzsche's mature writings is that "belief in the Christian God has become unbelievable" —a statement that represents a cultural observation rather than a philosophical argument. "What is now decisive against Christianity is our taste, no longer our reasons." Western culture has not ceased to believe in God on account of unassailable philosophical reasons, but because of its shifted mood. … And what, he rightly wonders, might the implications of this be?
Camus and the Absurd Silence of God
The confident, optimistic atheistic faith that we find in the writings of Claude-Adrien Helvétius and Ludwig Feuerbach gave way to the darker, more uncertain questioning of Camus and many other writers, such as Franz Kakfa. The early atheist belief that a brave new world would result from the elimination of God and the deification of humanity gave way to a more somber estimation. Humanity may have revolted against God and declared itself to be autonomous; yet the outcome is a world ridden with anxiety, despair, and alienation—a far cry from the secular paradise envisioned by the dreamers of the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries.
The Death of God Theology
The Suicide of Liberal Christianity
The Execution of God: The Atheist State
PART 2: TWILIGHT
7 THE UNEXPECTED RESURGENCE OF RELIGION
A Loss of Faith: A Personal Narrative
The Stalled Intellectual Case against God
The Suffering of the World and Atheism
The Imaginative Failure of Atheism
The Rebirth of Interest in the Spiritual
The Remarkable Case of Pentecostalism
8 DISCONNECTION FROM THE SACRED: PROTESTANTISM AND ATHEISM
The Divorce of the Sacred and the Secular
The Imaginative Failure of Protestantism
The Atheist Challenge and the Future of Protestantism
9 POSTMODERNITY: ATHEISM AND RADICAL CULTURAL CHANGE
…modernity—a confident, ebullient movement, convinced of the supreme ability of human reason to understand the world and hence to master and control it. There was no longer any need for a God to confirm or underwrite a settled and stable order of moral values, social relations, or rules of thought. All could be established with certainty and universality through human reason. Atheism was the religious belief of choice for this movement, in that it resonated profoundly with its presuppositions and goals. It is no accident that the rise of atheism in the West is so closely tied to that of modernity; they are as two sides of the same coin.
The Birth of Modernity
By the end of the Second World War, the social, moral, and intellectual failings of modernity were all too obvious. Modernity’s tendency toward the enforcement of universalization and uniformity had led to the catastrophes of Nazism and Stalinism. Paradise had not been achieved.
The Postmodern Respect for Diversity
Postmodernism rejected …modernism's quest for objective, essentially knowable truth and beauty… Postmodernity has reacted against such notions, for two major reasons: first, that it was untenable philosophically, and second, that it encouraged the rise of intolerance and lack of respect for the Other.
Atheism and the Challenge of Postmodernity
Postmodernism is a cultural mood that celebrates diversity and seeks to undermine those who offer rigid, restrictive, and oppressive views of the world. Modernism… tried to reduce everything to a uniform set of ideas…
The Embarrassing Intolerance of Atheism
10 THE ATHEIST'S REVOLT: MADALYN MURRAY D'HAIR AND OTHERS
Father and Son: Edmund Gosse
Daughters and Sons: Ivy Compton-Burnett
Mother and Son: Madalyn Murray O'Hair
11 END OF EMPIRE: THE FADING APPEAL OF ATHEISM
Liberators and Oppressors: On Atheist Role Reversal
Religion and the Creation of Community
Institutional Atheism: A Failure of Vision
The Permanent Significance of Atheism
August 19, 2019
“The Twilight of Atheism” by Alister McGrath certainly does live up to its title. In this book, McGrath comprehensively outlines the relatively short history of atheism in order to show how and why atheism is on a decline. However, that seems to be the extent of McGrath’s thesis, which, at best, can be interpreted as an advocacy for agnosticism - even though it isn’t. Not quite. This is because McGrath, in this particular book, doesn’t seem interested in explicating atheism’s scientific or moral failings; neither does he seem interested in arguing religion as the superior alternative - an aspect that surprised me the most while reading this book. In fact, as far as intellect goes, McGrath finds that both atheism and theism are outside its boundaries, claiming that “there is simply no logically watertight means of arguing from observation of the world to the existence or nonexistence of God.” And, true to this statement, McGrath doesn’t try to do anything of the sort. Instead, the strongest empirical evidence he offers for his thesis on the decline of atheism seems to be strictly historical: political, cultural, sociological. The other surprising thing about this book is that it does not argue atheism as objectively invalid - it simply relates how a godless vision for the world lost the appeal it had in the late 18th century, and why there is a resurgence of religion in the Western populace, and throughout the world.
I was honestly disappointed that McGrath didn’t try to specifically explain the scientific failings of atheism. The idea that atheism is backed up by science McGrath grandly states as a false “caricature,” a myth that no one takes seriously anymore, an outmoded way of thinking of late. This didn’t seem very realistic to me, since the majority of arguments I hear against the Bible are science-based. In any case, McGrath unfortunately doesn’t dive in (at all) to why atheism is not backed up by science, merely stating that it isn’t. I suppose it doesn’t really matter, after all, in the grand scheme of his thesis, which is primarily that atheism is losing its appeal, losing its grasp on the imagination of western culture. As far as this goes, the book was incredibly interesting, which is why I gave it a ⅘ stars. I cannot, after all, rate a book based on what I wanted it to say before I even turned the first page. But I can rate it on how well it expressed the idea it was trying to express in the first place. In this case, this book did not argue for or against atheism or religion. The closest McGrath comes to this, is in his historical outlook, which concludes that religion has outlasted atheism through the test of time.
However, McGrath does argue that certain atheistic movements are morally inept, and socially destructive, such as the Victorian optimism of Algernon Charles Swinburne, who celebrated mankind’s divinity (much like this present-day New Age movement): “There are many today fwho affirm a belief in humanity in preference to a belief in God. Yet this humanity has been responsible for a series of moral, social, and political catastrophes, some inspired by a belief in God, others by a belief that God must be eliminated, by all means, and at all costs. The common denominator here is humanity, not divinity. Again, this is an attack only on a specific movement of atheism, which perceived humanity as divine. The purpose of this highlight was part of McGrath’s amazing overarching argument that atheism is seen as a liberator only when its antithesis - religion - is seen as an oppressor; thus, McGrath concludes, atheism is at its strongest when the religious institution in society becomes corrupted, gains power, and inevitably begins to abuse that power. It is in these dark times when atheism becomes most appealing. McGrath explains, “IT is not of the essence of atheism to be a liberator, nor of religion to be an oppressor. These roles are determined by the contingencies of history.” This is the epitome of this book’s thesis, laying the groundwork for why atheism began as it did, and why it is on decline: the “contingencies of history.” Atheism sprouted vibrantly during the French Revolution, McGrath points out in the very beginning of the book. This was a time when the church was corrupt, abusing their power, becoming the main authority, integrating into the government. Many Christians saw this as the opportunity for reform, but atheistic advocates perceived this as the need to do away with religion in order to establish peace and equality for all. However, the Atheist Empire experiment, under the name of Marxism, became Nazism and Stalinism, which failed drastically, serving as a disturbing legacy for atheism: a body-count in the tens of millions - casualties far exceeding any war in the history of man. This serves to show how atheism is just as prone to corruption as religion, and either can be seen as a liberator, depending on the historical and cultural situation. During the French Revolution, atheism was a perceived liberator. During Stalin’s time, atheism was seen as an oppressor of man. This cultural fluctuation is precisely why atheism is dying out - Christianity in the West can adapt to the culture, and atheism cannot, as it is by nature a fixed theory. Atheism is only as strong as religion is weak, and since Christianity shows no signs of diminishing, atheism cannot show signs of near-future revival, and in fact is in decline. This is, in a nutshell, what McGrath argues in the Twilight of Atheism. Although I would much like to tell you all the captivating aspects of this book, the best thing I can do (besides the arduous task of writing them all down), is to advise you to read it. The perspective of the author, especially as a fellow Protestant Christian, will no doubt be very enlightening to any reader.
I was honestly disappointed that McGrath didn’t try to specifically explain the scientific failings of atheism. The idea that atheism is backed up by science McGrath grandly states as a false “caricature,” a myth that no one takes seriously anymore, an outmoded way of thinking of late. This didn’t seem very realistic to me, since the majority of arguments I hear against the Bible are science-based. In any case, McGrath unfortunately doesn’t dive in (at all) to why atheism is not backed up by science, merely stating that it isn’t. I suppose it doesn’t really matter, after all, in the grand scheme of his thesis, which is primarily that atheism is losing its appeal, losing its grasp on the imagination of western culture. As far as this goes, the book was incredibly interesting, which is why I gave it a ⅘ stars. I cannot, after all, rate a book based on what I wanted it to say before I even turned the first page. But I can rate it on how well it expressed the idea it was trying to express in the first place. In this case, this book did not argue for or against atheism or religion. The closest McGrath comes to this, is in his historical outlook, which concludes that religion has outlasted atheism through the test of time.
However, McGrath does argue that certain atheistic movements are morally inept, and socially destructive, such as the Victorian optimism of Algernon Charles Swinburne, who celebrated mankind’s divinity (much like this present-day New Age movement): “There are many today fwho affirm a belief in humanity in preference to a belief in God. Yet this humanity has been responsible for a series of moral, social, and political catastrophes, some inspired by a belief in God, others by a belief that God must be eliminated, by all means, and at all costs. The common denominator here is humanity, not divinity. Again, this is an attack only on a specific movement of atheism, which perceived humanity as divine. The purpose of this highlight was part of McGrath’s amazing overarching argument that atheism is seen as a liberator only when its antithesis - religion - is seen as an oppressor; thus, McGrath concludes, atheism is at its strongest when the religious institution in society becomes corrupted, gains power, and inevitably begins to abuse that power. It is in these dark times when atheism becomes most appealing. McGrath explains, “IT is not of the essence of atheism to be a liberator, nor of religion to be an oppressor. These roles are determined by the contingencies of history.” This is the epitome of this book’s thesis, laying the groundwork for why atheism began as it did, and why it is on decline: the “contingencies of history.” Atheism sprouted vibrantly during the French Revolution, McGrath points out in the very beginning of the book. This was a time when the church was corrupt, abusing their power, becoming the main authority, integrating into the government. Many Christians saw this as the opportunity for reform, but atheistic advocates perceived this as the need to do away with religion in order to establish peace and equality for all. However, the Atheist Empire experiment, under the name of Marxism, became Nazism and Stalinism, which failed drastically, serving as a disturbing legacy for atheism: a body-count in the tens of millions - casualties far exceeding any war in the history of man. This serves to show how atheism is just as prone to corruption as religion, and either can be seen as a liberator, depending on the historical and cultural situation. During the French Revolution, atheism was a perceived liberator. During Stalin’s time, atheism was seen as an oppressor of man. This cultural fluctuation is precisely why atheism is dying out - Christianity in the West can adapt to the culture, and atheism cannot, as it is by nature a fixed theory. Atheism is only as strong as religion is weak, and since Christianity shows no signs of diminishing, atheism cannot show signs of near-future revival, and in fact is in decline. This is, in a nutshell, what McGrath argues in the Twilight of Atheism. Although I would much like to tell you all the captivating aspects of this book, the best thing I can do (besides the arduous task of writing them all down), is to advise you to read it. The perspective of the author, especially as a fellow Protestant Christian, will no doubt be very enlightening to any reader.
July 5, 2012
Though published in 2004, this book reads as if it came out in 1990. A second edition would be helpful, since it feels as if it has missed the recent upsurge in people abandoning traditional faiths. Good history, interesting take on atheism as a faith, but almost too populist in some of its interpretations. McGrath is a good writer, but I felt I needed more penetrating commentary.
August 11, 2007
For whatever reason, I just couldn't get into this book. I found the history interesting, but perhaps I was hoping for more of the theology...
December 21, 2009
A truly pathetic book in many ways.
September 4, 2020
Interesting insights but doesn't really get beyond the 'people act badly under atheist regimes too!' phase and also possess no structure once it gets beyond the 19th century history of atheism.
May 5, 2015
Religion is composed of our core beliefs. Just like every house must begin with a foundation, these core beliefs, hence religion, are not optional—everyone has them. Atheism, which means no gods[1], is a particularly curious religion because it is defined by what it is not. In this sense, it is parasitic drawing its strength from its host [2]. Because the line of argumentation in atheism is much longer than for traditional religions, atheism requires more intellectual energy to maintain. Nevertheless, atheism is popular because it makes fewer practical demands of its followers than traditional religions[3]. For that reason new flavors of atheism keep popping up like ticks on a dog.
Alister McGrath begins his book, Twilight of Atheism, with a citation from Winston Churchill: “The empires of the future will be empires of the mind.” Atheism is one of these empires which he defines as: “rejection of any divinities, supernatural powers, or transcendent realities limiting the development and achievements of humanity.” (xi)[4].
McGrath states his purpose in writing as:
“To tell something of the story of the rise and fall of a great empire of the mind and what can be learned from it. What brought it into existence? What gave it such credibility and attractiveness for so long? And why does it seem to have lost so much of its potency in recent years?” (vii).
McGrath has in view, not every form of atheism, but rather official state atheism that began its ascent with the fall of the Bastille in 1789 and crashed with the Berlin Wall in 1989. McGrath goes on to write:
“The fall of the Bastille became a symbol of the viability and creativity of a godless world, just as the fall of the Berlin Wall later symbolized a growing recognition of the uninhabilitability of such a place.” (1)
Dr. Alister McGrath is the Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford and, most recently, the new Gresham Professor of Divinity[5]. The Twilight of Atheism is an expansion of a speech given at Oxford Union in February 2002 (xiii). He writes in 11 chapters divided into two parts—The High Noon of Atheism (chapters 2-6 and Twilight (chapters 7-11). The chapters are:
The Dawn of the Golden Age of Atheism,
The French Revolution,
The Intellectual Foundations: Feuerbach, Marx, and Freud,
Warfare: The Natural Sciences and the Advancement of Atheism,
A Failure of the Religious Imagination: The Victorian Crisis of Faith,
The Death of God: The Dream of a Godless Culture,
The Unexpected Resurgence of Religion,
Disconnection from the Sacred: Protestantism and Atheism,
Postmodernity: Atheism and Radical Cultural Change,
The Atheist’s Revolt: Madalyn Murray O’Hair and Others, and
End of Empire: The Fading Appeal of Atheism (v-vii).
These chapters are preceded by an introduction and followed by a list of references and an index.
Like another other religion, atheism has its priests. McGrath writes:
“Intellectuals became a secular priesthood, unfettered by the dogmas of the religious past, addressing a growing audience who were becoming increasingly impatient with the moral failures and cultural unsophistication of their clergy. At some point, perhaps one that can never be determined with historical accuracy, Western society came to believe that it should look elsewhere than to its clergy for guidance. Instead, they turned to the intellectuals, who were able to portray their clerical opponents as lazy fools who could do no more than unthinkingly repeat the slogans and nostrums of an increasingly distant past.” (49)
Ouch! My guess is that the Scopes Trial in 1925[6] was probably a tipping point for American characterization of clergy as unsophisticated.
The idea in my mind that atheism was a real religion was planted by McGrath’s discussion here . McGrath writes:
"the philosophical argument about the existence of God has ground to a halt. The matter lies beyond rational proof, and is ultimately a matter of faith, in the sense of judgments made in the absence of sufficient evidence...The belief that there is no God is just as much a matter of faith as the belief that there is a God."(179-180)
In other words, atheism is a religion. The reason why we care about this characterization is that religions dressed up as something other than what they really are has important implications for other atheistic religions that followed and transformed postmodern culture. For example, a non-religion, religion can be taught in public schools while a formal religion cannot be taught. Unmasking the priests of an informal religion is a critical point in responding to their claims.
Alister McGrath’s book, Twilight of Atheism, is an erudite but accessible and fascinating read. It is refreshing to see such clear and logical writing.
This is the first of a three-part review which will be posted on T2Pneuma.net beginning on May 18 and running through May 25, 2015. In part 2 I will focus on McGrath's High Noon of atheism in terms of 3 key personalities—Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche. Then, in part 3, I will turn to McGrath's view of the Twilight of Atheism.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
[2] McGrath writes: “Voltaire’s insight is of fundamental importance to our study of the emergence of atheism. His argument is simple: the attractiveness of atheism is directly dependent upon the corruption of Christian institutions. Reform those institutions and the plausibility of atheism is dramatically reduced.” (27)
[3] This is unlike Christianity, for example, which requires that believers model their lives after Christ. Following a review of the sadistic and salacious work of the Marquis de Sade (1740-1814), McGrath notes that “Atheism made sexual experimentation legitimate and interesting.” (35) In other words, rather than making demands of its followers, atheism offers them a kinky sort of freedom.
[4] Limiting is the key word here because a brief survey of any television guide will leave one in awe of the number of supernatural illusions referenced. However, like other pagan gods before them, zombies, ghosts, witches, wizards, werewolves, and vampires make no particular demands on those that believe in them and model their lives after them. Instead, they offer the illusion of eternal life and supernatural power without accountability.
[5] http://alistermcgrath.weebly.com
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_T...
Alister McGrath begins his book, Twilight of Atheism, with a citation from Winston Churchill: “The empires of the future will be empires of the mind.” Atheism is one of these empires which he defines as: “rejection of any divinities, supernatural powers, or transcendent realities limiting the development and achievements of humanity.” (xi)[4].
McGrath states his purpose in writing as:
“To tell something of the story of the rise and fall of a great empire of the mind and what can be learned from it. What brought it into existence? What gave it such credibility and attractiveness for so long? And why does it seem to have lost so much of its potency in recent years?” (vii).
McGrath has in view, not every form of atheism, but rather official state atheism that began its ascent with the fall of the Bastille in 1789 and crashed with the Berlin Wall in 1989. McGrath goes on to write:
“The fall of the Bastille became a symbol of the viability and creativity of a godless world, just as the fall of the Berlin Wall later symbolized a growing recognition of the uninhabilitability of such a place.” (1)
Dr. Alister McGrath is the Andreas Idreos Professor of Science and Religion at the University of Oxford and, most recently, the new Gresham Professor of Divinity[5]. The Twilight of Atheism is an expansion of a speech given at Oxford Union in February 2002 (xiii). He writes in 11 chapters divided into two parts—The High Noon of Atheism (chapters 2-6 and Twilight (chapters 7-11). The chapters are:
The Dawn of the Golden Age of Atheism,
The French Revolution,
The Intellectual Foundations: Feuerbach, Marx, and Freud,
Warfare: The Natural Sciences and the Advancement of Atheism,
A Failure of the Religious Imagination: The Victorian Crisis of Faith,
The Death of God: The Dream of a Godless Culture,
The Unexpected Resurgence of Religion,
Disconnection from the Sacred: Protestantism and Atheism,
Postmodernity: Atheism and Radical Cultural Change,
The Atheist’s Revolt: Madalyn Murray O’Hair and Others, and
End of Empire: The Fading Appeal of Atheism (v-vii).
These chapters are preceded by an introduction and followed by a list of references and an index.
Like another other religion, atheism has its priests. McGrath writes:
“Intellectuals became a secular priesthood, unfettered by the dogmas of the religious past, addressing a growing audience who were becoming increasingly impatient with the moral failures and cultural unsophistication of their clergy. At some point, perhaps one that can never be determined with historical accuracy, Western society came to believe that it should look elsewhere than to its clergy for guidance. Instead, they turned to the intellectuals, who were able to portray their clerical opponents as lazy fools who could do no more than unthinkingly repeat the slogans and nostrums of an increasingly distant past.” (49)
Ouch! My guess is that the Scopes Trial in 1925[6] was probably a tipping point for American characterization of clergy as unsophisticated.
The idea in my mind that atheism was a real religion was planted by McGrath’s discussion here . McGrath writes:
"the philosophical argument about the existence of God has ground to a halt. The matter lies beyond rational proof, and is ultimately a matter of faith, in the sense of judgments made in the absence of sufficient evidence...The belief that there is no God is just as much a matter of faith as the belief that there is a God."(179-180)
In other words, atheism is a religion. The reason why we care about this characterization is that religions dressed up as something other than what they really are has important implications for other atheistic religions that followed and transformed postmodern culture. For example, a non-religion, religion can be taught in public schools while a formal religion cannot be taught. Unmasking the priests of an informal religion is a critical point in responding to their claims.
Alister McGrath’s book, Twilight of Atheism, is an erudite but accessible and fascinating read. It is refreshing to see such clear and logical writing.
This is the first of a three-part review which will be posted on T2Pneuma.net beginning on May 18 and running through May 25, 2015. In part 2 I will focus on McGrath's High Noon of atheism in terms of 3 key personalities—Marx, Freud, and Nietzsche. Then, in part 3, I will turn to McGrath's view of the Twilight of Atheism.
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
[2] McGrath writes: “Voltaire’s insight is of fundamental importance to our study of the emergence of atheism. His argument is simple: the attractiveness of atheism is directly dependent upon the corruption of Christian institutions. Reform those institutions and the plausibility of atheism is dramatically reduced.” (27)
[3] This is unlike Christianity, for example, which requires that believers model their lives after Christ. Following a review of the sadistic and salacious work of the Marquis de Sade (1740-1814), McGrath notes that “Atheism made sexual experimentation legitimate and interesting.” (35) In other words, rather than making demands of its followers, atheism offers them a kinky sort of freedom.
[4] Limiting is the key word here because a brief survey of any television guide will leave one in awe of the number of supernatural illusions referenced. However, like other pagan gods before them, zombies, ghosts, witches, wizards, werewolves, and vampires make no particular demands on those that believe in them and model their lives after them. Instead, they offer the illusion of eternal life and supernatural power without accountability.
[5] http://alistermcgrath.weebly.com
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scopes_T...
February 20, 2025
A very interesting, and easy read. But McGrath is usually an easy-going read.
But, it’s too hard for me to put into words, what this book is all about, as McGrath attempts to narrate the history of Atheism in the Modern Era, and the problems it has caused in Modern society. Since, people like Karl Marx and Richard Dawkins,
But he also described how the failures of Atheism, will lead to its defeat. Since, it can never complete with Christianity and all it brings to society. Something, I can see happening now, as this book came out in 2004, twenty years ago. At the peak of the Atheism ideology.
However, being Catholic, I would have placed some Catholic Theology, like what the Popes have written, and other literature, we have on this issue. But don’t want to condemn a man, who indeed wrote a good book, that in the future will be useful, to see how Modern Man, wanted to create society, around the weak ideology of Atheism, hacking away out the Judo- Christian traditions behind, to form something better.
But it couldn’t be done, as Atheism doesn’t have anything useful for Man to hold onto, as its only a dream and idea, that sounds wonderful. But, in the end, it collapses, and I am loving watching it, as even Dawkins has woken up, saying Christianity might be far better than Atheism for society.
But, it’s too hard for me to put into words, what this book is all about, as McGrath attempts to narrate the history of Atheism in the Modern Era, and the problems it has caused in Modern society. Since, people like Karl Marx and Richard Dawkins,
But he also described how the failures of Atheism, will lead to its defeat. Since, it can never complete with Christianity and all it brings to society. Something, I can see happening now, as this book came out in 2004, twenty years ago. At the peak of the Atheism ideology.
However, being Catholic, I would have placed some Catholic Theology, like what the Popes have written, and other literature, we have on this issue. But don’t want to condemn a man, who indeed wrote a good book, that in the future will be useful, to see how Modern Man, wanted to create society, around the weak ideology of Atheism, hacking away out the Judo- Christian traditions behind, to form something better.
But it couldn’t be done, as Atheism doesn’t have anything useful for Man to hold onto, as its only a dream and idea, that sounds wonderful. But, in the end, it collapses, and I am loving watching it, as even Dawkins has woken up, saying Christianity might be far better than Atheism for society.
January 22, 2023
McGrath's history of atheism highlights how atheistic beliefs have been contingent on historical developments, especially concerning modernism. He likewise shows how the atheist regimes of the 20th century ironically embodied the worst of the criticisms leveled against religious beliefs. In the move to the postmodern era, McGrath posits that because atheism has hitherto been so contingent on modernist beliefs, a decline in atheism is likely. The golden years of atheism, according to McGrath, are in the past. In its place, the modern world has witnessed a resurgence in 'spirituality.' Indeed, McGrath points to the marked growth of Pentecostalism as an example of a way forward for today's Church, and evidence that the Church itself is not in a twilight, but a new dawn.
March 14, 2020
Interesting to read a history of atheism and the reasons why atheism could not completely eradicate religion. The book is however biased towards Christianity, despite the author's opinion that Protestantism helped atheism grow. There are only a cursory glance at other religions and no mention of how other religions helped in keeping atheism from taking over the Western world except for the mention of immigrants. Despite this bias I've enjoyed reading the book
August 9, 2017
Read this with my reading partner - his choice - but I am glad to have read it. Feel more informed about the history of atheism - how it evolved, grew and why now in decline. IF you do not have a dynamic personal relationship with God, then of course your religion does not do much for you! Glad to have an intimate relationship with God through Christ, knowing in my depth that i am loved.
February 23, 2019
I love everything Alistair McGrath writes. He always does extensive research and includes pages of references, explains more than one viewpoint, and gives a thorough explanation of his. I come away every time with more understanding and a greater appreciation of the Bible and of God. Thank you, Dr. McGrath.
May 28, 2022
This helped better understand Atheism
I like the historical overview of Atheism, and how the author makes it clear of its essential relationship to Theism. The author has a Christian perspective, though seems to be objective about the historical reasons for
I like the historical overview of Atheism, and how the author makes it clear of its essential relationship to Theism. The author has a Christian perspective, though seems to be objective about the historical reasons for
June 6, 2019
Read only about half of this. Can't remember why I didn't finish it.
March 2, 2024
Pretty good, fairly engaging.
October 13, 2023
Alister McGrath’s The Twilight of Atheism can be broken up into two distinct parts. The first and lengthier of the two could aptly be entitled ‘The History of Western Atheism’, while the second, something along the lines of ‘Speculations about the Future of Atheism’. Divided along these lines, the first section of the book stands out as a terrific run-through of atheism’s recent intellectual and political history, while the second section leaves much to be desired.
Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University, (at least at the time of this book’s publication) is a worthy tour guide on such a complex historical journey and he does a wonderful job at tying together various strands of thought, while at the same time making sure never to go too far over the reader’s head. The political motivation of French atheism in the 18th century, the ideological motivation of German atheism in the 19th century, and the sociological motivation of Russian atheism in the 20th century are all adequately and succinctly explained (for a book of this size), and this is where the book really shines. Any reader new to the subject will have no problem following this vivid history, as well as understanding the theories of thinkers such as Feuerbach, Marx and Freud. This is something McGrath should definitely be commended for.
It is only when the book begins to look at the future of atheism does it begin to lose steam. McGrath’s proposal is that atheism is on the decline (hence the title) and that it is losing the battle of the hearts and minds of people on three different fronts: 1) Lack of organization and leadership, 2) Pentecostalism, and 3) Postmodernism. Sadly, this three pronged attack fails to convince that the ‘twilight of atheism’ is upon us.
Lack of atheist leadership and organization is perhaps the greatest thing going against the current atheist movement. McGrath uses Madalyn Murray-O’Hair as the proof text for this point, and although this is perhaps a tad too anecdotal, his point is still heard. While millions of Christians meet every single week for moral reinforcement, encouragement and fellowship, atheism can only offer a handful of books here and there, normally written by people who come off as more pious and arrogant than even the worst televangelist. Hardly anything one can organize a successful group around.
The other two arguments against the popularity of atheism (Pentecostalism and Postmodernism) are more than a little lacking. Although it cannot be denied that Pentecostalism, with over half a billion adherents worldwide, has certainly made a tremendous impact, McGrath gives no evidence whatsoever that these growing numbers of Pentecostals are having an inverse affect on atheist numbers. To the contrary, Pentecostals usually gain followers from people who already consider themselves to be ‘religious’.
Finally, McGrath sites the fall of modernism and the rise of postmodernism as another reason that atheism is doomed to failure. Here is where the book falls flat on its face. To claim that atheism is negatively affected by the rise of postmodernism is not only to claim too much, but to claim the very opposite of what is actually taking place. McGrath’s major error can be summed up in the following quote taken from the concluding chapter of his book:
“Atheism is wedded to philosophical modernity, and both are aging gracefully in the cultural equivalent of the old folks’ home.”
This is simply untrue. Atheism is not wedded to philosophical modernity. A quick survey of the major postmodern writers can confirm this: every single one of them is an atheist. Rather than being the bane of atheism, postmodernism is acting as a veritable atheist breeding ground. While McGrath praises postmodernism for being open to religious ideas in a way that modernism never was, there is a sinister corollary to this that is not mentioned: To say that all religions are equally valid, basically amounts to saying that none of them are really true. This is something that is far more at home in an atheist worldview than a Christian one.
Aside from these objections, the book remains an excellent primer on the history of atheism in the western world. And although McGrath fails to convince on a few different points, the compelling (and disheartening) thought that the reader is left with by the end of the book can not be denied, which is this: The single greatest contributor to the growth of atheism over the years is, and always has been, the failure of the church. This, I think, is very sad, but very true.
Alister McGrath, Professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University, (at least at the time of this book’s publication) is a worthy tour guide on such a complex historical journey and he does a wonderful job at tying together various strands of thought, while at the same time making sure never to go too far over the reader’s head. The political motivation of French atheism in the 18th century, the ideological motivation of German atheism in the 19th century, and the sociological motivation of Russian atheism in the 20th century are all adequately and succinctly explained (for a book of this size), and this is where the book really shines. Any reader new to the subject will have no problem following this vivid history, as well as understanding the theories of thinkers such as Feuerbach, Marx and Freud. This is something McGrath should definitely be commended for.
It is only when the book begins to look at the future of atheism does it begin to lose steam. McGrath’s proposal is that atheism is on the decline (hence the title) and that it is losing the battle of the hearts and minds of people on three different fronts: 1) Lack of organization and leadership, 2) Pentecostalism, and 3) Postmodernism. Sadly, this three pronged attack fails to convince that the ‘twilight of atheism’ is upon us.
Lack of atheist leadership and organization is perhaps the greatest thing going against the current atheist movement. McGrath uses Madalyn Murray-O’Hair as the proof text for this point, and although this is perhaps a tad too anecdotal, his point is still heard. While millions of Christians meet every single week for moral reinforcement, encouragement and fellowship, atheism can only offer a handful of books here and there, normally written by people who come off as more pious and arrogant than even the worst televangelist. Hardly anything one can organize a successful group around.
The other two arguments against the popularity of atheism (Pentecostalism and Postmodernism) are more than a little lacking. Although it cannot be denied that Pentecostalism, with over half a billion adherents worldwide, has certainly made a tremendous impact, McGrath gives no evidence whatsoever that these growing numbers of Pentecostals are having an inverse affect on atheist numbers. To the contrary, Pentecostals usually gain followers from people who already consider themselves to be ‘religious’.
Finally, McGrath sites the fall of modernism and the rise of postmodernism as another reason that atheism is doomed to failure. Here is where the book falls flat on its face. To claim that atheism is negatively affected by the rise of postmodernism is not only to claim too much, but to claim the very opposite of what is actually taking place. McGrath’s major error can be summed up in the following quote taken from the concluding chapter of his book:
“Atheism is wedded to philosophical modernity, and both are aging gracefully in the cultural equivalent of the old folks’ home.”
This is simply untrue. Atheism is not wedded to philosophical modernity. A quick survey of the major postmodern writers can confirm this: every single one of them is an atheist. Rather than being the bane of atheism, postmodernism is acting as a veritable atheist breeding ground. While McGrath praises postmodernism for being open to religious ideas in a way that modernism never was, there is a sinister corollary to this that is not mentioned: To say that all religions are equally valid, basically amounts to saying that none of them are really true. This is something that is far more at home in an atheist worldview than a Christian one.
Aside from these objections, the book remains an excellent primer on the history of atheism in the western world. And although McGrath fails to convince on a few different points, the compelling (and disheartening) thought that the reader is left with by the end of the book can not be denied, which is this: The single greatest contributor to the growth of atheism over the years is, and always has been, the failure of the church. This, I think, is very sad, but very true.
May 1, 2010
http://nwhyte.livejournal.com/1430527.html
Yet another book on religion where I basically agree with the author but found the book itself really unsatisfactory.
Basically, McGrath seemed to me to be asking the wrong question. His argument identifies 'atheism' as a collective identity more than is really warranted by his own evidence; towards the end he seems to almost criticize atheists for not being as well organised as the Church, which sort of misses the point. More widely, he never makes it clear whose atheism or belief is under discussion, though I felt that in the present day he really just means Oxford dons. Non-Christian faiths are barely mentioned; there is an anecdote about the triumph of Christianity in Korea in the 20th century which simply does not refer to other religions practised by Koreans. This really isn't good enough.
The internal structure puzzled me as well. I would have preferred a more strictly chronological organisation. But instead we have a chapter on Feuerbach, Marx and Freud, followed by one on the sciences post-Darwin, followed by an examination of atheism in classic literature from the Enlightenment on (that last being one of the better chapters in the book). It is as if Freud knew nothing of Darwin, and Darwin knew nothing of Keats. (I confess I had not preeviously heard of Feuerbach, but that may just be my ignorance.)
Other irritations: James II was not Charles II's son (p 14). I was surprised to read (p 264-265) that 'The role of religion in creating and sustaining communal identity has been known for some considerable time, and has become increasingly important since about 1965'; I think it's just possible that religion played an important role in creating and sustaining communal identity for quite a long time prior to that date.
I suspect that this book was intended to be in part a rebuttal to Richard Dawkins, who is very briefly dissected, but unfortunately it is too full of its own complacency to be effective.
Yet another book on religion where I basically agree with the author but found the book itself really unsatisfactory.
Basically, McGrath seemed to me to be asking the wrong question. His argument identifies 'atheism' as a collective identity more than is really warranted by his own evidence; towards the end he seems to almost criticize atheists for not being as well organised as the Church, which sort of misses the point. More widely, he never makes it clear whose atheism or belief is under discussion, though I felt that in the present day he really just means Oxford dons. Non-Christian faiths are barely mentioned; there is an anecdote about the triumph of Christianity in Korea in the 20th century which simply does not refer to other religions practised by Koreans. This really isn't good enough.
The internal structure puzzled me as well. I would have preferred a more strictly chronological organisation. But instead we have a chapter on Feuerbach, Marx and Freud, followed by one on the sciences post-Darwin, followed by an examination of atheism in classic literature from the Enlightenment on (that last being one of the better chapters in the book). It is as if Freud knew nothing of Darwin, and Darwin knew nothing of Keats. (I confess I had not preeviously heard of Feuerbach, but that may just be my ignorance.)
Other irritations: James II was not Charles II's son (p 14). I was surprised to read (p 264-265) that 'The role of religion in creating and sustaining communal identity has been known for some considerable time, and has become increasingly important since about 1965'; I think it's just possible that religion played an important role in creating and sustaining communal identity for quite a long time prior to that date.
I suspect that this book was intended to be in part a rebuttal to Richard Dawkins, who is very briefly dissected, but unfortunately it is too full of its own complacency to be effective.
March 15, 2008
I have read several essays and have heard lectures by McGrath over the past couple of years. His credentials are formidable and his philosophical reasoning is articulate and sound. He is an Anglican scholar and professor of Historical Theology at Oxford University.
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mcgrath/
McGrath is aware of historical/cultural milieu. He writes of the salient junctures in Western intellectual history that brought modern atheism into a credible worldview. His orientation is from a British standpoint, but has a fair and competent grasp of "the west" in general. He takes the reader through Feuerbach, Freud, and Marx, the French Revolution, and British atheism. He only occasionally mentions the "new atheism," as the "Four Horsemen" had t yet to their mark on the contemporary literary scene.
I give it three stars because he gives a bit too much credit to the post-modern context. Personally, I have a penchant for modernity, since the newer alternative is self-refuting from the get-go. Despite quantum theory (which no one gets - even Feinman) one thing cannot be true if it's exact opposite is true. In other words, the Aristotelean construct is as true today as it was when he articulated it. The law of non contradiction lives -- discourse has no meaning otherwise, The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World is an interesting and convincing look at the problem atheism faces now, and for some time to come.
But it is not over. Atheism offers something romantic and liberating, but it also has a more serious problem dealing with the modernistic view of "truth" even though modernity led us into the destructive paths it laid in the last century. Yet, true means true and false means false. I am a programmer and cannot get out of that pesky problem.
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~mcgrath/
McGrath is aware of historical/cultural milieu. He writes of the salient junctures in Western intellectual history that brought modern atheism into a credible worldview. His orientation is from a British standpoint, but has a fair and competent grasp of "the west" in general. He takes the reader through Feuerbach, Freud, and Marx, the French Revolution, and British atheism. He only occasionally mentions the "new atheism," as the "Four Horsemen" had t yet to their mark on the contemporary literary scene.
I give it three stars because he gives a bit too much credit to the post-modern context. Personally, I have a penchant for modernity, since the newer alternative is self-refuting from the get-go. Despite quantum theory (which no one gets - even Feinman) one thing cannot be true if it's exact opposite is true. In other words, the Aristotelean construct is as true today as it was when he articulated it. The law of non contradiction lives -- discourse has no meaning otherwise, The Twilight of Atheism: The Rise and Fall of Disbelief in the Modern World is an interesting and convincing look at the problem atheism faces now, and for some time to come.
But it is not over. Atheism offers something romantic and liberating, but it also has a more serious problem dealing with the modernistic view of "truth" even though modernity led us into the destructive paths it laid in the last century. Yet, true means true and false means false. I am a programmer and cannot get out of that pesky problem.
January 15, 2012
Not knowing what this book would be about, I was a bit hesitant to jump right in to reading it. But it was recommended by a trusted friend, who proved to be right on how much I’d be able to relate to the content of the book.
Twilight of Atheism traces the timeline and geography of atheism that has encompassed different parts of the world. His style of writing makes what could be a boring subject into a riveting one. My mind soaked up his arguments and explanations like a sponge. The history contained within this book is rich–I learned new things about things that I (wrongly) thought I already knew much about. I come away from reading it humbled by how little I know about the history of Christianity and other world religions.
I also found several sections of the book to be “autobiographical” to me. In other words, I could see myself in several paragraphs. Alliston Mcgraff, the author, shared his story of how he came to be believer, echoing much of my own story. I saw myself on many pages of this book.
Easy to read, but challenging enough to cause one to review history lessons they may have long forgotten, and put together pieces of history that may not have seemed to have a connection, only to find out that they are connected in much deeper fashion. I would agree with the author that this is the twilight of atheism.
I would highly recommend this book. You can purchase by clicking on the picture of the book below.
Twilight of Atheism traces the timeline and geography of atheism that has encompassed different parts of the world. His style of writing makes what could be a boring subject into a riveting one. My mind soaked up his arguments and explanations like a sponge. The history contained within this book is rich–I learned new things about things that I (wrongly) thought I already knew much about. I come away from reading it humbled by how little I know about the history of Christianity and other world religions.
I also found several sections of the book to be “autobiographical” to me. In other words, I could see myself in several paragraphs. Alliston Mcgraff, the author, shared his story of how he came to be believer, echoing much of my own story. I saw myself on many pages of this book.
Easy to read, but challenging enough to cause one to review history lessons they may have long forgotten, and put together pieces of history that may not have seemed to have a connection, only to find out that they are connected in much deeper fashion. I would agree with the author that this is the twilight of atheism.
I would highly recommend this book. You can purchase by clicking on the picture of the book below.
July 26, 2012
The title in Dutch from the book of Alister McGrath can bring the reader on the wrong idea that atheism has taken his final downfall. The English title is much better: The twilight of atheism: the rise and fall of disbelief in the modern world . It is not giving this idea.
Alister McGrath gives in this book a very interesting and good overview from were atheism came from and why its is not so more from our time. The culture background is very good seen by him and he shows were atheism is wrong in his thinking and philosophy. McGrath shows by history why atheism never got the influence the thought they would have in this world when men leaves his believes.
A very, very interesting book for those who are interested in the way atheism came from, how they think and why they think that way. It is not written in the first hand for apologetics reasons but it helps a lot in knowing what atheism is and where it comes from.
One big min is that the book has no footnotes (in Dutch translation. I do not know how the English is). The topic, the way it’s written, the context gives al the reason to take footnotes in it would make the book even more fallible for study.
Alister McGrath gives in this book a very interesting and good overview from were atheism came from and why its is not so more from our time. The culture background is very good seen by him and he shows were atheism is wrong in his thinking and philosophy. McGrath shows by history why atheism never got the influence the thought they would have in this world when men leaves his believes.
A very, very interesting book for those who are interested in the way atheism came from, how they think and why they think that way. It is not written in the first hand for apologetics reasons but it helps a lot in knowing what atheism is and where it comes from.
One big min is that the book has no footnotes (in Dutch translation. I do not know how the English is). The topic, the way it’s written, the context gives al the reason to take footnotes in it would make the book even more fallible for study.
July 27, 2007
Judging from recent best-seller lists, this book (published in 2004) might seem to have been premature in its farewell to atheism.
Or not.
"The Twilight of Atheism" is more about history than arguments, and the history is fascinating. McGrath sees the golden age of atheism as beginning with the fall of the Bastille in 1789 and ending with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
McGrath's bottom line, as I understand it, is that atheism isn't doing very well these days because it's not compatible with the postmodern world view that's prevalent. (The postmodern world view isn't particularly friendly toward Christianity, either.)
So perhaps the current outbreak of atheism at the bookstores is a case of being brightest before the dusk.
Or perhaps its a reaction to another theme of McGrath's: that Christianity and other deistic religions are often their own worst enemies. My favorite quote from the book on that topic:
"The English experience suggested that nobody really doubted the existence of God until theologians tried to prove it."
Or not.
"The Twilight of Atheism" is more about history than arguments, and the history is fascinating. McGrath sees the golden age of atheism as beginning with the fall of the Bastille in 1789 and ending with the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989.
McGrath's bottom line, as I understand it, is that atheism isn't doing very well these days because it's not compatible with the postmodern world view that's prevalent. (The postmodern world view isn't particularly friendly toward Christianity, either.)
So perhaps the current outbreak of atheism at the bookstores is a case of being brightest before the dusk.
Or perhaps its a reaction to another theme of McGrath's: that Christianity and other deistic religions are often their own worst enemies. My favorite quote from the book on that topic:
"The English experience suggested that nobody really doubted the existence of God until theologians tried to prove it."
September 14, 2009
Good piece of intellectual history that surveys the rise and fall of atheism in the modern world. McGrath reviews the spread of atheism in the West from the storming of the Bastille in 1789 to the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. Lots of interesting biographical insights into various figures as well as numerous useful quotations. I thought his best angle was how atheism sold itself as the key to liberation during the French Revolution of the late 18th century and the Russian Revolution of the early 20th century, but ended up being a brutal tool of oppression. He carefully noted on many occasions how both religious people and people opposed to religion have been guilty of heinous and tyrannical actions. This is a good reminder in our post-9/11 age that the common rhetoric insinuating that religion alone is the cause of war and genocide is historically unjustifiable.
Displaying 1 - 30 of 50 reviews