The Emotional Intensity of the New Atheism

One of the few things that’s new about the new atheism is their claim to have the monopoly on reason and logic. Modern atheists frequently assume that they have reason and logic on their side, and often feel like talking to people about their belief in God is like trying to reason with the unreasonable. In claiming the intellectual high ground, they’re often unaware about how emotionally invested they are in their worldview. For many atheists, talking about the existence of God is a purely intellectual exercise, and for them their conclusion about God’s non-existence is not something that they’re emotionally attached to. In their minds, their rejection of theistic claims is reasonable and logical, but not at all emotional.

Unfortunately this is seldom the case. While they’re often well practiced in rehearsing intellectual arguments that often do little more than point out why someone who has an a priori assumption that God doesn’t exist, is sceptical about the explanatory power of the theistic worldview; they’re far from emotionally detached from the view that they so passionately argue for. The most obvious expression of this is ad hominem arguments. People who are confident about their views and about themselves have no need to resort to name calling. Putting other people down is something that children do in order to feel better about themselves. And yet atheists in the public eye continue to defend “the place for mocking” people who disagree with them about the existence of God.

David Robertson (a Christian pastor and author) argues that while the new atheism has the appearance of being intellectual, it’s far more emotional, and this is why it’s so vitriolic. On one occasion, while he was speaking at Cambridge on how emotional the new atheism is, an atheist lecturer stood up and said “What do you mean we’re emotional? We’re not emotional! What are you talking about? You idiot! WE’RE NOT EMOTIONAL!” at which point another person in the audience interjected by saying “Shut up you fool and sit down. You’ve just proved his point.” To be fair, everyone is emotional about what they believe (even if they prefer to speak in terms of what they don’t believe), and most atheists have been burned by bad experiences with Christians and/or churches. Christians should seek to empathise with these emotions, not look down on them.

In debates between theists and atheists on youtube, facebook and other online forums, the comments that get the most ‘votes up’ on youtube or ‘likes’ on facebook or other forums are often the ones that ridicule another person’s comment. People feel good when their opponents are ridiculed and their position is vindicated. In fact, when Hitchens was asked why he spent so much time arguing against believers, he consistently described how he enjoyed being vindicated against his opponents. But people who are genuinely seeking the truth or honestly trying to educate people don’t laugh at people who reject what they have to say, they’re saddened by it. People who care about truth mourn when others reject it; people who just want to win, laugh at others in order to try and claim victory and exclude differing points of view.

I’ve been in countless online debates with atheists; I couldn’t tell you how many hours I’ve spent trying to “reason” with atheists on youtube and facebook. In my weaker moments I’ve responded to aggression with aggression, telling myself that their arguments deserve to be ridiculed, but it’s always pushed people away from engaging with Christianity. Atheists that take part in these debates consider their arguments to be self evidently strong arguments, and so dismissing them lightly gives them the impression that you’re willing to ignore self evident truth in order to hold onto what they consider to be a fairy tale. To them, we’re putting our fingers in our ears and singing la la la la, in the face of clear evidence.

In only when I’ve answered graciously and with respect that I’ve made progress in online conversations with atheists. Online debaters (on both sides) are generally open logic and argument, but only if they feel that they’ve been heard, and the weight of their argument has been felt. I now spend much more time asking questions to examine their assumptions, rather than repeating arguments from John Lennox or William Lane Craig which they’ve often already heard and dismissed. I’ve been surprised how easily ‘a gentle answer turns away wrath’ (Proverbs 15:1) and how much progress can be made if ‘when we are slandered, we answer kindly’ (1 Corinthians 4:13).

People say things in online debates that they would never say to someone’s face. It’s easy to ridicule someone online because you don't personally feel the hostility that it creates in the future, but it still creates hostility and often hardens people against your side of the debate. As I engage in youtube debates, I’m trying more and more to put myself in the other person’s position and understand why they’re so convinced of the strength of their argument(s), and it’s been much more fruitful. Keep in mind that they’ve probably spent a lot of time arguing with Christians who haven’t been as logical or reasonable as they would like, and they feel like their position is the only reasonable position to take. Above all, don’t respond in kind to verbal abuse. Take a deep breath, pray for them (not against them), and remember how Jesus responded to the ridicule of those who crucified him – by giving his life so that they might live.