The “new atheists,” as Chris Hedges calls them (When Atheism Becomes Religion: America’s New Fundamentalists), label all religion as superstitious, outdated, magical thinking. They claim to be scientific and rational in their certainty about God and religion, but they are not. Instead, they are, Hedges argues, the preachers of a new religious fundamentalism without God that contrives an ideology of progress by idolizing science and reason as the ways to perfect humanity.
The certitude that God cannot be real and, therefore, cannot possibly love us is not scientific but ideological. It is a belief, not a verifiable fact or hypothesis. In this ideology, there is then no divinely given value to human or any life, leaving only whatever value we choose to assign it based upon our current notions of what is good and worthwhile. Such belief can make it seem expedient to determine that some human lives have no value worth preserving because they have become impediments to achieving progress toward the goal of a better, greater humanity. Such greater-good ideologies, therefore, lead to culture clashes, identity politics, ruthless preemptive strikes (wars of choice) upon peoples considered threats or impediments (evil doers or sub-humans), and even genocide.
In their scorn for religion, the new atheists and their fans who accept their ideology fail to distinguish between magic and religious faith. Indeed, they insist there is no valid distinction to be made. Are they correct? My reply has to be, “No, but.” But what?
The claim that science and reason disprove God is unscientific and unreasonable, as were the old claims that science and reason proved God. What the atheistic ideologues do is attack the obvious foibles and dangers of religious fundamentalism then claim thereby to have discredited all religion. To me, that ploy seems analogous to condemning abusive relationships, then claiming to have discredited love.
It’s easy to debunk creationism as pseudo-science and poor biblical interpretation, but so doing does not thereby discredit biblical faith in our Creator or faith’s view of humanity’s stewardship of the earth as God’s creation. Showing that Intelligent Design is fake science (as just a somewhat more sophisticated brand of creationism) does not offer any reasonable comment on biblical and theological discussions of creation and providence. Neither does discrediting biblical literalism say anything at all about a biblical understanding of the nature, value, and purpose of human life. Science is morally neutral, and reason depends much more upon culture, privilege, and (yes) emotion than many who adore it would care to admit.
But is there a valid distinction between magic and religious faith? Rejecting the pronouncements of the opponent does not by itself validate the belief the opponent has feebly attacked.
What is magic? I’m not talking about stage magic which is entertainment by skillful deception. Neither am I talking about fictional, fantasy magic which is for fun and escape but sometimes, as in the Harry Potter novels, also offers insights into human nature, relationships, social conditions, and even theology. I’m talking about “real” magic which seeks to conjure supernatural power (demonic or divine) and use it for human purposes of security or power. When infused into religion, this magic offers means for supposedly gaining control over the power of God. Therefore, religious rites, rituals, sacred writings, doctrines, mystic or charismatic experiences, mission efforts, ministries, and salvation formulas stand always in danger of being degraded into magic.
I cannot by any means make God do anything. I cannot guarantee God’s aid in my chosen undertakings or draft God into the service of my success.