One of the greatest tropes I find myself running up against when arguing with theists is their belief in the Bad Atheist. This came up in a debate with a theist called IMPhoenix1. IM was insistent that atheism was a homosexual conspiracy, and, after a verbal smack-down he retreated in anger none the wiser. No information I cited could pierce the vale, because the Bad Atheist trope is not only useful to evangelicals, it's vital. The Bad Atheist works as a stand-in for all atheists, replacing the various flavors and forms of atheism from the most indecisive agnosticism to the most ardent PEARList in one brush. Here are the characteristics of the Bad Atheist:
1. The Bad Atheist secretly believes in God, but pretends not
This usually is accompanied with one of three boilerplate explanations:
a. The Bad Atheist is a homosexual or libertine who wishes to pursue their sexual appetites without guilt as illustrated by this quote from IMPhoenix1: "Ah You are indeed a homosexual! Judging from your writing. You speak too much. Homosexual Atheists are very self delusion and very self denial of the truth that they insistently deny that there's no Creator though it's a fact and well established that THERE IS."
b. The Bad Atheist is overtly or covertly a Satanist who wishes to promote a Godless world-view as a stand in for devil worship.
c. The Bad Atheist once had a terrible experience in Church, or simply does not have the mental capacity to accept a personal loss without blaming God for it.
2. The Bad Atheist assumes intellectual trappings to mask their insecurities
3. The Bad Atheist is actively seeking to destroy moral culture and society
4. The Bad Atheist is aware of morals, and aware that morality comes from God. He/She either fools himself/herself and follows God's morals, actively seeks to destroy morality because it is God's, or lives like a libertine.
5. The Bad Atheist secretly hates plurality, and democracy, despite the benefits he/she gleans from it, prefering to establish an atheistic totalitarian technocracy ruled by genocidal scientists.
As you can see, the Bad Atheist is a pretty Bad Person. This model is almost unassailable in the minds of many theists, especially evangelical theists. There is no amount of evidence you can provide that can not be brushed away under one of these. Dawkins? He falls under #2. Hitchens? #3, and so on. The typical response of most atheists is to derisively attack this point of view, deserving as it is, like all bigoted points of view of ridicule and condemnation. However, the Bad Atheist trope is rooted in something much deeper, I've begun to discover, a deep fear springing from cognitive dissonance about the theistic mindset.
Many modern evangelicals view of Christianity has been so twisted out of proportion that likely neither Jesus nor Paul would recognize it. God is infinitely good, yet infinitely inflexible. No amount of good works, moral action, or right living can save you in this God's eye. The only thing that can save you is speaking the magic words, falling to your knees and believing. In the ultimate pollution of John 14:6, there is simply no other road to explanation than proclaiming Christ as your savior. It surpasses mere ritual or epiphany almost to the point of magic spell. This is a message repeated ad nauseum in any Jack Chick tract, in the Left Behind Series, in any show on the Christian Broadcast Network. This mindset leads to a point of view that is not only dismissive of good acts and righteousness but actually contemptuous of them. After all, these acts, without connection to Christian salvation are worse than worthless, they distract from the only way to salvation.
This presents a deeply disturbing image of God. A God unconcerned with justice, mercy or righteous acts outside of submission. It must create a powerful cognitive dissonance, I believe, in the minds of many evangelicals. How can God be all-loving, yet still send good people to hell who don't believe? Thus, enter the Bad Atheist, a way to make those 'good people' into very, very Bad People. The Bad Atheist makes it easy to see why all atheists, and non-believers deserve eternal hell. After all, they know the truth, but actively perpetuate a lie, and by doing so, deny others salvation. Dawkins' actions are thus infinitely worse than Judas'. Like the devil, he and others are working to damn souls whom they secretly know could be going to heaven. What could be worse than that?
Perhaps, rather than outright condemning their foolishness, we need to start working within the premise, exposing them to their own dissonance in the most direct way possible. Has anyone had any success in doing this?
1. The Bad Atheist secretly believes in God, but pretends not
This usually is accompanied with one of three boilerplate explanations:
a. The Bad Atheist is a homosexual or libertine who wishes to pursue their sexual appetites without guilt as illustrated by this quote from IMPhoenix1: "Ah You are indeed a homosexual! Judging from your writing. You speak too much. Homosexual Atheists are very self delusion and very self denial of the truth that they insistently deny that there's no Creator though it's a fact and well established that THERE IS."
b. The Bad Atheist is overtly or covertly a Satanist who wishes to promote a Godless world-view as a stand in for devil worship.
c. The Bad Atheist once had a terrible experience in Church, or simply does not have the mental capacity to accept a personal loss without blaming God for it.
2. The Bad Atheist assumes intellectual trappings to mask their insecurities
3. The Bad Atheist is actively seeking to destroy moral culture and society
4. The Bad Atheist is aware of morals, and aware that morality comes from God. He/She either fools himself/herself and follows God's morals, actively seeks to destroy morality because it is God's, or lives like a libertine.
5. The Bad Atheist secretly hates plurality, and democracy, despite the benefits he/she gleans from it, prefering to establish an atheistic totalitarian technocracy ruled by genocidal scientists.
As you can see, the Bad Atheist is a pretty Bad Person. This model is almost unassailable in the minds of many theists, especially evangelical theists. There is no amount of evidence you can provide that can not be brushed away under one of these. Dawkins? He falls under #2. Hitchens? #3, and so on. The typical response of most atheists is to derisively attack this point of view, deserving as it is, like all bigoted points of view of ridicule and condemnation. However, the Bad Atheist trope is rooted in something much deeper, I've begun to discover, a deep fear springing from cognitive dissonance about the theistic mindset.
Many modern evangelicals view of Christianity has been so twisted out of proportion that likely neither Jesus nor Paul would recognize it. God is infinitely good, yet infinitely inflexible. No amount of good works, moral action, or right living can save you in this God's eye. The only thing that can save you is speaking the magic words, falling to your knees and believing. In the ultimate pollution of John 14:6, there is simply no other road to explanation than proclaiming Christ as your savior. It surpasses mere ritual or epiphany almost to the point of magic spell. This is a message repeated ad nauseum in any Jack Chick tract, in the Left Behind Series, in any show on the Christian Broadcast Network. This mindset leads to a point of view that is not only dismissive of good acts and righteousness but actually contemptuous of them. After all, these acts, without connection to Christian salvation are worse than worthless, they distract from the only way to salvation.
This presents a deeply disturbing image of God. A God unconcerned with justice, mercy or righteous acts outside of submission. It must create a powerful cognitive dissonance, I believe, in the minds of many evangelicals. How can God be all-loving, yet still send good people to hell who don't believe? Thus, enter the Bad Atheist, a way to make those 'good people' into very, very Bad People. The Bad Atheist makes it easy to see why all atheists, and non-believers deserve eternal hell. After all, they know the truth, but actively perpetuate a lie, and by doing so, deny others salvation. Dawkins' actions are thus infinitely worse than Judas'. Like the devil, he and others are working to damn souls whom they secretly know could be going to heaven. What could be worse than that?
Perhaps, rather than outright condemning their foolishness, we need to start working within the premise, exposing them to their own dissonance in the most direct way possible. Has anyone had any success in doing this?
