Overeducated & Unemployable

Though it has been argued that an atheist doesn't need a companion, The Young Atheist's Handbook by Alom Shaha might be just another gospel*, preaching to an assembly of non-believers. The author is more ambitious, and hopes to be a humble guide to those searching for a meaningful life, be it filled with religion or in a godless world.
The best guide one can be, is through example. Alom Shaha fills the pages with his own search for meaning, from a poor immigrant family where he was raised a Muslim, to his current atheist activism. Most of the book tells a very personal story, which can easily be seen as a weakness. Isn't this what we read everyday on blogs, but then with pictures? Instead of pictures Alom Shaha interlaces his text with quotes from philosophers. Epicurus, Plato, Nietzsche are mentioned. The author builds his arguments around facts taken from scientific studies. This way he can turn the weakness of his book into a strength.

The Young Atheist's Handbook says it on its title page: "Lessons for living a good life without God". It's a book that primarily reaches out to adolescents who could be the author's own students. Within a very personal story readers can find lots of food for thought. The handbook isn't one that says you what to do, but how to do it. It serves as that wonderful teacher who nudges you in the right direction on the path to become a good person living a good life. Most important every child should be able to choose that life for herself through critical thinking. (The author tends to be a bit preachy when he drives that point home**.)
Using his own personal history to lure his readers in, Alom Shaha has outed himself as a sneaky teacher who knows the tricks of the trade. In a world where teachers of religious education, various world view courses or philosophy classes can work with a ton of material on religion, The Young Atheist's Handbook is (excuse the pun) a godsend. It should be required reading for students since it provides a straightforward account of what it means to be an atheist. And that's rather unique.

For the young atheist, it's a compelling read that makes her crave for more. For the old one, who followed a similar track to atheism***, it's an impulse to deeper thought and a welcome break from "New Atheism".

*The gospel mentioned here can now be found as a download at Anne Provoost's website. (pdf in Dutch)
**Strangely he does it in my voice.
***That would be me. Since I have some more thoughts on different aspects of the book, which didn't fit into a review, I'll reserve those for another post.

Some weeks ago Monseigneur Léonard, archbishop of Belgium, declared that the current state of religious education is at an all-time low. There should be a clear line in the courses taught in primary and secondary school. The subject matter should be Jesus and Catholic doctrine and not this amalgame of civil studies it is now.
Of course both teachers and advisors strongly disagreed with their archbishop. Belgians have a tradition of interpreting the Roman guidelines rather loosely. For decades several religion teachers have openly preached against the rule of the pope, showing an openness towards different worldviews and any critique involving their own. This climate doesn't dismiss those that think differently, but lets the work of Philip Pullman happily coexist with that of Saint John. There is even a curiosity with regard to the critiques that come forward in Pullman's work.

His latest novel The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ can be read in this way. It is part of Canongate's The Myths series that lets "the world's finest writers" retell a myth in a contemporary and memorable way. Pullman's retelling of the myth of Jesus Christ and the first Christians brought on lots of hostility. Even though there was only the title of the book to talk about, Pullman was accused of being a blasphemer.
In this retelling of the life of Jesus Christ, Mary gives birth to twins. The eldest son she calls Jesus, and the youngest she nicknames Christ, for it is this child that the shepherds find swaddled in a manger. Jesus grows up to be a strong man and becomes a preacher. Christ is sickly and timid. He keeps to the background, but is very much taken in by what his brother preaches. Prompted by a stranger who shares his ideas about building a Church that can bring God's Kingdom on earth, Christ starts documenting the life of his older brother Jesus.
The stories Christ tells, are meant to show a truth beyond the facts. It is the Church that will decide which truth to hold dear and which to cast away. Throughout the book one can find Pullman's contempt for this kind of Church.
The Good Man Jesus and the Scoundrel Christ reads in fact like an apocryphal text, a story written during Jesus' life, but never withheld as the truth. One can't really consider such a text blasphemous – without taking into account the question whether one can in fact use the name of God in vain when you're not religious. Pullman's writings are indeed more heretic: they propagate a different truth, a new reading of a well-known story. By retelling the story of Jesus (and) Christ Pullman points out that the gospel is only a story that pretends to be truth. Its actual truth doesn't lie in the story told, but elsewhere.

It has been said in these quarters that an atheist doesn't need a field guide to tell her how to behave in this one life. Faith in a supranatural being doesn't have to be replaced with faith in something else. Science doesn't need faith. It is.
But like Muslims, who are all terrorists, atheists are thrown onto a heap of people having put their faith in science. Writer Anne Provoost has some thought-provoking words to say about this subject in an interview in the literary section of De Morgen of today. Her search for an atheist gospel started with a silly road-incident involving herself on a bike and the reckless chauffeur of a van. When questioned about his recklessness the driver smiled and answered "God looks out for us. He takes care of you and me." What does an atheist reply to that? What do you say when the director-general of Catholic schools declares she has the conviction God has a plan for her? Does God have a plan for non-believers as well? What do I do if I don't want to part of that plan? And how do you know about that plan?
It is easy to point the finger at believers, and say that they are wrong and mistaken in their beliefs for this or that reason, but what do we have to offer? Anne Provoost calls it a gospel*: a meaningful message to show that the impious aren't necessarily sinful or empty inside. This gospel differs in two ways from the writings of other atheists: It doesn't show itself as the adversary of religion and it gives religious experiences a place within atheism. In her own words (quickly translated from Dutch):

I've tried [to explain my gospel] with an image that everyone can understand: when a computer is unable to do something we get an ERROR-message. It doesn't try to define what's outside its reach, let alone judge it. What lies beyond ERROR is called "something" by some, "God" by others. We atheists on the other hand accept the limit of knowledge and understanding. [...]
[...] Believers have very sexy images of what lies beyond ERROR, we haven't. When we said that beyond the limit of knowledge isn't some sort of extra-material entity, we are called silly materialists. But even the most rabid atheist knows you get goosebumps when looking at something beautiful, a work of art, a landscape. That question I've asked myself: Can we find an image that clarifies our belief that we are unable to understand everything? For me the distinction between atheism and believing is as clear as glass. The atheist says he experiences something that exceeds the limits of knowledge, but doesn't believe it involves anything supranatural. The atheist doesn't believe that what lies beyond ERROR will abolish all laws of physics.**

What she says, isn't new to me. Contrary to the somethingists***, most atheists embrace the finiteness of the world. There are limits to everything and we must live with them – and usually I'm even glad that everything ends.

*I don't think Anne Provoost uses the term in the strict meaning of a text we all should adhere to and "believe in".
**Quick and dirty translation of Filip Rogiers, "We moeten zelf met een blijde boodschap komen" from DM Uitgelezen, Wednesday April 2 '08, p. 3.
***My word for people who believe their has to be "something" beyond what we perceive, solely based on the fact they feel this when they come into contact with beautiful things, but who don't bother to give this something a name.