Posted on 07/24/2007 10:17:00 AM PDT by SirLinksalot
Theologian Douglas Wilson and atheist Christopher Hitchens, authors whose books are already part of a larger debate on whether religion is pernicious, agreed to discuss their views on whether Christianity itself has benefited the world. Below is their exchange, one in a series that will appear on our website over the course of this month.
Douglas Wilson is author of Letter from a Christian Citizen, senior fellow of theology at New Saint Andrews College, and minister at Christ Church in Moscow, Idaho. He is also the editor of Credenda/Agenda magazine and has written (among other things ) Reforming Marriage and A Serrated Edge: A Brief Defense of Biblical Satire and Trinitarian Skylarking. His Blog and Mablog site inevitably makes for provocative reading.
Christopher Hitchens wrote, God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything(Twelve Books). Hitchens is a contributing editor to Vanity Fair and a visiting professor of liberal studies at the New School. He is the author of numerous books, Thomas Jefferson: Author of America, Thomas Paine's "Rights of Man," Letters To a Young Contrarian, and Why Orwell Matters. He was named, to his own amusement, number five on a list of the "Top 100 Public Intellectuals" by Foreign Policy and Britain's Prospect.
CLICK ABOVE LINK FOR PART 1 TO 6 OF THE ONLINE DEBATE
(Excerpt) Read more at christianitytoday.com ...
I am not a Christian, and I do not believe in the Resurrection. But I thank God every day that our nation was founded by people who did.
I’m not a big Hank Hannegraaff fan (and I’m sure I’ve misspelled his name!), but he wrote a very compelling book called “Resurrection”. I recommend it for fascinating reading.
I just don’t see that these debates have any point.
On some level I think Hitchens is trying to provoke a Iman type respones like his pal got for writing the Satanic Verses. The fact that Christians return his insults with patience and reason is a wonderful witness;no Fatwah just “Now Christopher”... BTW ironic that Christopher means “Christ Beare”. There’s still time Mr. H.
The former have given us real human rights, material prosperity, life (for the most part) and freedom. They have sent out people who founded the schools and hospitals of the world. The latter, for the most part, have brought oppression, poverty, murder, genocide, and enslavement.
Now. It's not quite as simple as that, because most of the atheist nations were not founded upon an atheist creed that truly valued humanity, but instead upon Communism with it's "revolution of the proletariat." Still, their histories are instructive. Specifically, there was no apparent morality inherent in their ethos that would prevent the mass enslavement and genocide that resulted.
And yes, there have been church-led regimes that were oppressive and murderous as well. But wherever these have occurred, they have been (1) both far rarer and far smaller in scale than those in atheist-run societies, and (2) in direct negation of the essential principles on which the Christian faith is based.
At its core, atheism really gives people no compelling reason for self-sacrifice. Atheism is ultimately concerned about the self: me, me, me. The Christian faith, on the other hand, is concerned about God, me and you. For this reason, on the larger-than-one scale, the Christian faith produces a better society.
And for this reason, the rational atheist, even if he is only concerned for himself, must conclude (or at least, certainly ought to) that he would rather live in an essentially Christian society than in an essentially atheist one.
Hitchens starts out with attacking Christianity on the grounds that it is not the exclusive holder of morality, and furthermore, not really moral at all (therefore not good for the world). Second he states that if great charitable works have been brought forth in the name of Christianity, then it is more than balanced out by all the great evils brought forth in the name of Christianity.
The first point shows a profound misunderstanding of Christianity itself. It is not a moral code, and in fact rests primarily on the supernatural push on the conscience through the Holy Spirit for moral guidance. Secondly, he has a monstrous historical ignorance to claim that Christianity has brought nearly the levels of evils on the world as it has good through charity and changed lives.
I believe that much of what Hitchens believes rests tacitly on Christian theology that goes unquestioned in his mind. He simply goes out of his way to deny and explain away the source of the worldview he holds to implicitly.
read later
I question the existence of this creature. How can the athiest be absolutely sure that no God exists? Agnostics I can respect intellectually. But since "nothing" can't tell the athiest that he doesn't exist the athiest is not reasonable when he says that God does not exist.
I suppose that would explain all the atheist soup kitchens and children's hospitals.
Yes.
And just what were these "great evils"? Other than largely unfounded claims by revisionist anti- Christian historians.
"And yes, there have been church-led regimes that were oppressive and murderous as well."
Again, Who, what, where and when were they? This is so often repeated as a generalization but lacks any real historical proof. Now if you correct the wording to read- "oppressive and murderous regimes that led campaigns against the church and Christians', that would be more historically accurate.
Douglas Wilson is a serious thinker and an excellent communicator. Hitchens is going be feeling like a legless man at a shin kicking contest.
Some interesting Hitchens quotes from the link:
“religious belief has now become purely optional and cannot be mandated”
“I believe [morality] to be derived from innate human solidarity”
“I have nowhere claimed nor even implied that unbelief is a guarantee of good conduct or even an indicator of it.”
“Ordinary morality is innate in my view.”
“I agree that the origins of the cosmos are obscure—mysterious, if you like—to both of us.”
“I say that our “innate” predisposition to both good and wicked behavior is precisely what one would expect to find of a recently-evolved species that is (as we now know from the study of DNA) half a chromosome away from chimpanzees.”
“animal and human “altruism” is contradicted by the way in which species are also designed to fight with, kill, dominate, and even consume each other.”
“Every now and then, in argument, I find myself glib enough to make a cheap point or a point that might evoke instant applause from an audience. But I am always aware of doing so, or if you like of the temptation to do so, and I strive (not always with success) to resist the tactic, and rather dislike myself when I give in to it. Why do I do this? Socrates called this restraint the daemon: an inner voice that helps us toward self-criticism....I am content to regard it as indefinable”
“To state the case in another way, it suggests that without celestial sanction, you yourself would be unrestrained in your appetites and careless of other people.”
I’m sorry you misunderstood my post. I was summarizing Hitchens’ two primary points and stating that both are based on ignorance. Hitchens promotes popular misconceptions and revisionist history of Christianity. I have a hard time believing that someone would write a book on a subject of which he apparently has no knowledge.
Got through 1/2 of it so far. It’s worthwhile reading although thus far Hitchens has ducked the central question being posed by Douglas Wilson.
I find it amusing that Hitchen’s writes: “Here is the reason why I lay so much stress in my book on the importance of William of Ockham and his justly celebrated razor. Why on earth—if you excuse the impression—do the faithful spend so much time creating a mystery where none exists? And why do they insist on inserting unwarrantable assumptions?”
William of Ockham was, of course, a Christian and a Franciscan friar.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.