| Part ofa series on |
| Irreligion |
|---|
Related topics |
Antitheism, also spelledanti-theism, is the philosophical position thattheism should be opposed.[1][2] The term has had a range of applications. Insecular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to the belief in anydeity.
The wordantitheism (or hyphenatedanti-theism) has been recorded in English since 1788.[3] Theetymological roots of the word are theGreekanti andtheos.
TheOxford English Dictionary definesantitheist as "One opposed to belief in the existence of a god". The earliest citation given for this meaning dates from 1833.[4][2] The term was likely coined byPierre-Joseph Proudhon.[5]
Antitheism has been adopted as a label by those who regardtheism as dangerous, destructive, or encouraging of harmful behavior.Christopher Hitchens (2001)[6] wrote:
I'm not even anatheist so much as I am anantitheist; I not only maintain that all religions are versions of the same untruth, but I hold that the influence of churches, and the effect of religious belief, is positively harmful.[6]
Other definitions of antitheism include that of the French Catholic philosopherJacques Maritain (1953), for whom it is "an active struggle against everything that reminds us of God".[7]
Thedefinition ofRobert Flint (1877), Professor of Divinity at theUniversity of Edinburgh was similar. Flint's 1877Baird Lecture was titledAnti-Theistic Theories.[8] He used"antitheism" as a very generalumbrella term for all opposition to his own form of theism, which he defined as:
the "belief that the heavens and the earth and all that they contain owe their existence and continuance to the wisdom and will of a supreme, self-existent, omnipotent, omniscient, righteous, and benevolent Being, who is distinct from, and independent of, what He has created."[8](p 1)
Flint wrote:[8]
In dealing with theories which have nothing in common except that they are antagonistic to theism, it is necessary to have a general term to designate them. Anti-theism appears to be the appropriate word. It is, of course, much more comprehensive in meaning than the term atheism. It applies to all systems which are opposed to theism. It includes, therefore, atheism, but short of atheism, there are anti-theistic theories.Polytheism is not atheism, for it does not deny that there is a deity; but it is anti-theistic since it denies that there is only one. Pantheism is not atheism, for it asserts that there is a god; but it is anti-theism, for it denies that God is a being distinct from creation and possessed of such attributes as wisdom, and holiness, and love. Every theory which refuses to ascribe to a god an attribute which is essential to a worthy conception of its character is anti-theistic. Only those theories which refuse to acknowledge that there is evidence even for the existence of a god are atheistic.[8](p 23)
However, Flint also acknowledged that antitheism is typically understood differently from how he defines it. In particular, he notes that it has been used as a subdivision ofatheism, descriptive of the view thattheism has been disproven, rather than as the more general term that Flint preferred. He rejected the alternativenon-theistic:
not merely because of its hybrid origin and character, but also because it is far too comprehensive. The theories of physical and mental science are non-theistic, even when in no degree, directly or indirectly, antagonistic to theism.[8](p 444–445)
Opposition to the existence of a god or gods is frequently referred to asnontheism, ordystheism, ormisotheism.
Examples of belief systems founded on the principle of opposition to the existence of a god or gods include some forms ofAtheistic Satanism andmaltheism.
Christopher New (1993)[9] proposed an altered definition of the wordantitheism as part of a thought experiment. He imagines what arguments for the existence of anevil god would look like, and writes:
Antitheists, like theists, would have believed in an omnipotent, omniscient, eternal creator; but whereas theists in fact believe that the supreme being is also perfectly good, antitheists would have believed that he was perfectly evil.[9][10]
New's changed definition has reappeared in the work of W.A. Murphree.[11]
{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link)