It's just over 10 years since the publication of possibly the most famous atheist book of all time. Richard Dawkins' The God Delusion was the most popular, but by no means the only best-seller which took aim at organised religion around the same time.
The first wave of new atheist smash hits included Sam Harris' Letter To A Christian Nation (2006), Daniel Dennett's Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon (2006) and Christopher Hitchens' God Is Not Great (2007). These were followed up by many other polemical screeds proclaiming not only the death of God but the complete stupidity of religious people.
In the wake of the New Atheism (which wasn't really new at all – it was merely restating old arguments against theism) came the rebuttals. Theologians began to hit back and show why God was indeed a good hypothesis. Alister McGrath penned a couple including Why God Won't Go Away: Engaging with the New Atheism (2011), David Bentley Hart also wrote two long responses, including Atheist Delusions: The Christian Revolution and Its Fashionable Enemies (2009).
What the last 10 years has shown is that despite claims to the contrary from extremists on both wings, there are decent, rational arguments on both sides. Whether you have a faith or not, it simply won't do to dismiss the other 'side' as irrational, unthinking or even dangerous. Sam Harris, who rails even against moderate religious believers, says: "Reading scripture more closely, one does not find reasons to be a religious moderate; one finds reasons to be a proper religious lunatic – to fear the fires of hell, to despise nonbelievers, to persecute homosexuals, etc." This kind of blanket dismissal has the effect of closing down discussion. A much more constructive approach is modeled in others publications, such as a recent one entitled An Atheist And A Christian Walk Into A Bar.
Closer to this spirit, I was pleased to see a video on the Guardian website this week with the intriguing title 'Atheists: you're not as rational as you think'. In it, academic Dominic Johnson briefly outlines the argument of his latest book, God is Watching You: How The Fear Of God Makes Us Human.
Johnson, himself an atheist, argues that belief in God is one of the factors which makes us more altruistic and is good for society. He also suggests that even though many people don't believe in God, they do have other beliefs which, in this respect, function in a similar way. So, when someone believes that 'what goes around comes around', they are also likely to behave in a way that's beneficial to society rather than in purely selfish terms.
To Christians, looking at faith in this way can feel quite reductive or even calculating. After all, we don't believe simply because it's good for society or because it's evolutionarily advantageous to the species. Faith is about much more than that.
Yet we shouldn't be too quick to dismiss this line of argument. If God is real and cares about the world, as the Church has proclaimed for almost 2,000 years, then it's likely that belief will encourage more altruistic, co-operative behaviour. A world and a people which God created would be likely to be in God's image – co-operative, collaborative and best expressed through relationship rather than individualism.
We need to sound a note of caution, though, before we send copies of Johnson's book to all of our most fierce atheist critics.
Johnson isn't suggesting we're right to believe in God, merely that belief has been advantageous. As Christians, we value truth as well as effectiveness. Therefore, it's not good enough for us to argue in favour of our faith purely on the basis that it happens to be good for the species as a whole. We need to cling to the truth of our beliefs as well as the good effects they have.
We need to get to a place where there is a better quality of discussion between atheists and Christians as well as believers of other faiths. We need to stop sniping and try to understand the other group's point of view. This is difficult while (especially in America) society is so polarised and political positions remain closely wedded to the kind of faith you profess.
If atheist voices, like those of Johnson, are willing to join the conversation in a cordial and non-aggressive way, we should be pleased. In fact, we should join in.
Follow Andy Walton on Twitter @waltonandy.
