God Is Not Great

Religion – the quintessential original sin.

Hail him, hate him, Christopher Hitchens has been one of the great polemicists of modern times. He is as close to Mencken when it comes to employing flair to debunking the pretentious claims of religion as anything else this century has thus far produced. He simultaneously inspires and inflames through his passion whether expressed with oratorical flourish or via the aperture in his quill. His much publicised treatise against the greatness of god, written some years before the cancer that currently afflicts him began its war of manoeuvre, is replete with all the vintage vigour we have come to expect of this exemplary writer.

It is not one particular god that Hitchens has in mind but the religions that over the years have created their own version of god which they have sought to inflict on everyone else. Christians, Jews, Muslims are not left unpicked, nor are some of the sects that are offshoots from the major religions. Intelligent Design is ridiculed with wit and panache. As are those Jewish Rabbis of Hasidic fundamentalism who sexually assault children by biting off their foreskins, on occasion infecting the children and causing fatalities as part of some quaint but dangerous religious ritual disgracefully not criminalised by US law. His perspective on religion is captured in one striking line where he tackles the old murderous bible:

The Bible may, indeed does, contain a warrant for trafficking in humans, for ethnic cleansing, for slavery, for bride price and for indiscriminate massacre, but we are not bound by any of it because it was put together by crude uncultured human mammals.

For those who interpret this hate filled tome literally, Hitchens has a pithy phrase: ‘rightly are the simple so called.’

Hitchens is to holy men what pesticide is to insects. These people, when they had the power, would specialise in determining how long a human could be kept alive while being roasted by some Vicar of Christ. Holy men always have to be listened to or else; they insist upon it. It is their god-given right to assail us with their hectoring and demand that we abide by what they tell us. Even if we do not practice their religion, rest assured they will practice it on us, with or without our consent. Our opinions on the matter are simply opinions that don’t matter. Holy men don’t have something as trivial as an opinion; theirs is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Hitchens makes a point that gets to the heart of religion. It must seek to interfere with the lives of non-believers: ‘the true believer cannot rest until the whole world bows the knee.’ But it is more than that; it must also trespass on the space of fellow believers of a different faith. Religion is chronically incapable of minding its own business.

In support of his observation that holy men cannot brook people choosing to ignore them Hitchens draws attention to the malign delight experienced by the religious believer when disaster strikes. It is revenge delivered by their sky daddy because the world would not listen to them:

When the earthquake hits, or the tsunami inundates, or the twin towers ignite, you can see and hear the secret satisfaction of the faithful. Gleefully they strike up “you see this is what happens when you don’t listen to us”.

Hitchens sees religion as a poison and illustrates this by pointing out how religions have campaigned against the polio vaccine in Nigeria or AID-curbing condoms in Africa; deadly diseases that can be either cured or combated by science but are accelerated by religion. The Catholic Church would rather see Africans dead than condom sporting. But the fallback position is that people don’t really have to be dead. By discarding their condoms those who will physically expire from AIDS have the offer of everlasting life. Hitchens rightly concludes from this that Christianity is like voodoo or vampirism in its need for some version of the undead to sustain it.

Again, rightly are the simple so called.

Religion does not like being put in its place, always seeking a lofty status from where it can preach on high to others who might not want to listen to any of it. But its power to intrude has been pushed back by democratic secular sentiment to a point where much of it now has to abandon its essence and instead masquerade as a people friendly commodity.

Many religions now come before us with ingratiating smirks and outspread hands, like an unctuous merchant in a bazaar. They offer consolation and solidarity and uplift, competing as they do in a marketplace. But we have a right to remember how barbarically they behaved when they were strong and making an offer that people could not refuse. And if we chance to forget what that must have been like we have only to look to those states and societies where the clergy still has the power to dictate its own terms … to pass laws forbidding people to insult its omnipotent and omniscient deity, or even his prophet.

The public can come away from God Is Not Great with an understanding of how important secular freedom is; that religion where it appears civilised is always as a result of pressure from without and rarely as a consequence of a change of heart on the part of the men of god.

In the midst of his polemic Hitchens is often witty. He brings a wry smile to the face in asking why the Almighty can do no better than make himself known to past illiterates in the wastelands of the Middle East, areas already rife with superstitions, prophets and deranged holy men pronouncing themselves the son of god. As Pat Condell might say, desert gods for desert people; but we don’t live in deserts and have no need of desert gods.

But how easily such things spring up. This is highlighted by Hitchens’ treatment of Mormonism. When Joseph Smith, a convicted fraudster, decided on his next scam, the Book of Mormon, even he could not have foreseen the vast reservoir of human credulity that was just waiting to be fished from by any angler with an angle. Mormonism was ‘a plain racket’ that ‘turns into a serious religion before our eyes.’ There is nothing particular to Mormonism, however, which would set it apart from other religions as a racket. All religions are racketeering enterprises where the buyer is duped into parting with something in return for nothing. Give me your money or surrender your autonomy and you can be the future owner, after you are dead of course, of a ranch on Jupiter - that type of thing.

Hitchens captures the sheer fantasy of Christianity in quoting CS Lewis:

A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic – on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg. Or else he would be the devil of Hell.

My view, go worship a poached egg. With a bit of salt they are tastier than wafers. But then the Church of the Poached Egg is likely to meet a challenge from the Church of the Fried Egg which in turn will give rise to a church of the Scrambled Egg. All egging their supporters on against the other. Now we know the true significance of the Easter Egg.

God Is Not Great is a book that any witness taking a courtroom oath could honestly swear upon.

Christopher Hitchens, 2007. God Is Not Great. Atlantic Books: London.

15 comments:

  1. Super post Anthony, I,m a great fan of Hitchens and he puts his arguments foward in terms that even us ordinary mortals who are not Maynooth and theologicaly trained can follow, mind you I am a grat fan of the begatting in the bible it is a pity our church of FSM didnt have a begatting sect although that auld spaghetti can be really hard to hold on to when boiled unlike a good christian martyr or an alter boy!

    ReplyDelete
  2. Great post, Anthony. God Is Not Great is excellent reading and easy reading.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I just got two complaints, alledging discrimination, from a boiled egg and a pepper pot.

    When the only 'evidence' a religion can provide is wee peasant girls halucinating or seeing jesus' face on a gable wall or in her rice crispies; ask yourself, does that shit make you cringe? Well, that's as close as you'll ever get to what religion is selling.

    Faith is one thing, self delusion and desperation are another.

    ReplyDelete
  4. AM, as usual, you're in good spirits here so to speak. While I found Hitchens far less nuanced than the likes of Nicholas Wade, Julian Baggini, Daniel Dennett or even Michel Onfrey or Sam Harris, as with the inevitable tag-team Richard Dawkins, Hitch has a knack for the polemic page turner and more power to him for getting millions to read him and debate him and ponder his positions.

    As you may recall, you and I share with a lot of TPQ readers a fascination with religion; I love contemplating its impacts; others on TPQ I compare hate its impacts. I approach it sometimes nowadays as if studying an alien life form.

    Note these new case studies, from the New Yorker: "The Apostate: Paul Haggis & the Church of Scientology" and this NYT review: Scientologists, Catholics & more money than God

    I find as I grow more distanced from my cradle Catholicism it and other systems ironically or tellingly interest me all the more, in their rich combinations of inspirations, desperations, aspirations, and humiliations.

    P.S. My 2008 review of 'god is not great'

    ReplyDelete
  5. He is likeable Hitchens - he strikes me as a brave man outside of writing skills i mean... I watched a doco interview on him recently... However I say God IS great but RELIGION (manmade constructs) and many BELIEVERS (rantin' ravin' judgemental, seeking to control/dictate) often are not...

    @ Anthony very cutting takes from you ahaha I did laugh because some of it is so dead on true.
    BUT this was the best:
    RE:'Many religions now come before us with ingratiating smirks and outspread hands, like an unctuous merchant in a bazaar. They offer consolation and solidarity and uplift, competing as thy do in a marketplace. But we have a right to remember how barbarically they behaved...'
    How freaking true that last one. Cannot argue with that or put up a defence. It simply just is... Religion and constructs terrify/often revolt me but individuals with belief in God don't as long as they are seeking to live it out without imposing it on me. I got my belief in Jesus and not even poisoned, religious nutters can taint it. It is a private conviction thing and my business not religion or ritual or BS... Real to me is God but UNREAL the so called godly leaders etc

    ReplyDelete
  6. I think we all know who "IndiemediaIreland" is. Welcome back, Brian Clarke!

    ReplyDelete
  7. Alfie,

    because I never read him I didn't know it was the author of paedos and piggies. Just thought 'uh, another one of these,' Then when it was pointed out that 'the creep is back' off he went - immediately!!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Anthony,

    Too right. Apparently, the Shit Man now refers to this blog as the Faecal Quill!!! He is also demanding access to the Boston College oral history archive. And I thought I was crazy...

    ReplyDelete
  9. Alfie,

    a really discerning fellow!

    ReplyDelete
  10. As a confirmed Atheist, let's not get too carried away with the Hitchens Lovefest....this is a former trot turned neo-conservative who fully backed George Bush's war policy and called for (and acitively supported) his re-election. By his own admission he acted as an "adviser" throughout that period. He is also no friend of Irish Republicanism in any of its forms. Kicking religion in the balls, that have been discredited since the writings of Karl Marx amongst others, is NO big deal! He writes well but to compare him to Mencken is a stretch. Myers or you old friend Thumper could give him a run in the bullshit department. Personally, I hold my nose when this lot are mentioned.

    ReplyDelete
  11. SMH,

    'Many religions now come before us ...’ – a very apt Hitchens mode of expression.

    ‘Real to me is God but UNREAL the so called godly leaders etc.’

    While I don’t agree I do see logic in that. What could Irish bishops possibly tell anybody about god?

    Fionnchú,

    You are right about Hitchens. He can make a great argument. A great polemicist. There is of course much to disagree with him on but that does not detract from his ability. It is a while since I have read Harris, just in the final pages of Dawkins at the minute, one by Dennett to read along with another Baggini. I have not read Wade or Onfrey.

    ‘As you may recall, you and I share with a lot of TPQ readers a fascination with religion’ !!!

    More a fascination with getting rid of it.

    If something contradicts science then immediately we call it into question. If mice suddenly started catching cats we would say WTF.

    ‘I approach it sometimes nowadays as if studying an alien life form.’

    That is a good take on it. The arguments some of them present have no earthly sense whatsoever. Some of the stuff John McGirr was coming out with before he left us just seemed unintelligible to me. I know there is faith but ...

    I always like the thinking religious person who makes the case through reason like Hans Kung.

    Thanks for the links form the New Yorker and the NYTR. Plus your own. I will reread your review today.

    ReplyDelete
  12. God Is Not Great

    Jim,

    ‘Hitchens Lovefest’

    Wrong place. We have yet to see one.

    ‘....this is a former trot turned neo-conservative who
    fully backed George Bush's war policy and called for (and actively
    supported) his re-election. By his own admission he acted as
    an "adviser" throughout that period. He is also no friend of Irish
    Republicanism in any of its forms.’

    Neither here nor there in terms of his take on religion.

    ‘Kicking religion in the balls, that have been discredited since the writings of Karl Marx.’

    He does a much better job on religion than Marx.

    ‘to compare him to Mencken is a stretch.’

    As far from Mencken as he might be, on religion who this century is closer to Mencken?

    Jim & Marty,

    Thanks. I found it the same.

    The one true church can stand no other churches before it. So we Pastafarians are up against it. At least they have not stoned us yet. Our fate shall be to be slowly boiled in holy water!

    ReplyDelete
  13. Anthony a cara better boiled in oily water stops one becoming a "sticky" mess

    ReplyDelete
  14. Hitchens cynically supported George Bush, a confirmed right wing Christian fundamentalist fanatic, and kept his trap shut when the argument for war was expressed as "a Crusade" against an "Axis of Evil". In other words, he is quite prepared to stand with "The Religious" when it suits his "cause".

    Sam Harris is a much better writer on religioin and can actually talk knowledgeably about science - http://www.samharris.org/

    I love Galloway's decription of Hitchens - "A Butterfly that turned into a slug".

    ReplyDelete
  15. Jim,

    Hitchens was on the wrong side of the line in relation to the Iraq War. I cannot fathom his position.
    But he never viewed it as a religious crusade and is on record as saying as much. He was not standing with religion but with US foreign policy which has little to do with religion regardless of what the raving right scream. That hardly makes his support any better but it more accurately describes it.

    Harris, in my view, is not half the writer/polemecist that Hitchens is. He has a scientific background but so does Dawkins - doesn't make either a particularly good writer. Hitchens is a brilliant writer. That many of his views suck is another matter.

    Galloway, a useful put down in a debate but apart from that ...

    ReplyDelete