The Bible tells Christians not to be of the world, sharing its distorted priorities, but it does call upon believers to be in the world, fully engaged. Many Christians have abdicated this mission. They have instead sought a workable, comfortable modus vivendi in which they agree to leave the secular world alone if the secular world agrees to leave them alone. Biologist Stephen Jay Gould proposed the terms for the treaty in his book Rocks of Ages when he said that secular society relies on reason and decides matters of fact, while religious people rely on faith and decide questions about values. Many Christians seized upon this distinction with relief. This way they could stay in their subculture and be nice to everyone.
But a group of prominent atheists-many of them evolutionary biologists-has launched a powerful public attack on religion in general and Christianity in particular; they have no interest in being nice. A new set of antireligious books-The End of Faith, The God Delusion, God Is Not Great, and so on-now shapes public debate. These atheists reject the Gould solution. They say that a religious outlook makes specific claims about reality: there is a God, there is life after death, miracles do happen, and so on. If you are agnostic or atheist, you have a very different understanding of reality, one that is formed perhaps by a scientific or rationalist outlook. The argument of the atheists is that both views of reality cannot be simultaneously correct. If one is true, then the other is false.
The atheists have a point: there are not two truths or multiple truths; there is one truth. Either the universe is a completely closed system and miracles are impossible, or the universe is not a closed system and there is the possibility of divine intervention in it. Either the Big Bang was the product of supernatural creation or it had a purely natural cause. In a larger sense, either the secular view of reality is correct or the religious view is correct. (Or both are wrong.) So far the atheists have been hammering the Christians and the Christians have been running for cover. It's like one hand clapping.
This is not a time for Christians to turn the other cheek. Rather, it is a time to drive the money-changers out of the temple. The atheists no longer want to be tolerated. They want to monopolize the public square and to expel Christians from it. They want political questions like abortion to be divorced from religious and moral claims. They want to control the school curricula, so that they can promote a secular ideology and undermine Christianity. They want to discredit the factual claims of religion, and they want to convince the rest of society that Christianity is not only mistaken but also evil. They blame religion for the crimes of history and for the ongoing conflicts in the world today. In short, they want to make religion-and especially the Christian religion-disappear from the face of the earth.
The Bible in Matthew 5:13-14 calls Christians to be the "salt of the earth" and the "light of the world." Christians are called to make the world a better place. Today that means confronting the challenge of modern atheism and secularism. My new book What's So Great About Christianity, which is just hitting the stores, provides a kind of tool kit for Christians to meet this challenge. The Christianity that is defended here is not "fundamentalism" but rather traditional Christianity, what C.S. Lewis called "mere Christianity," the common ground of beliefs between Protestants and Catholics. This Christianity is the real target of the secular assault.
I have written this book not only for believers but also for unbelievers. Many people are genuine seekers. They sense there is something out there that provides a grounding and an ultimate explanation for their deepest questions, yet that something eludes them. They feel the need for a higher sense of purpose in their lives, but they are unsure where to find it. Even though they have heard about God and Christianity, they cannot reconcile religious belief with reason and science: faith seems unreasonable and therefore untenable. Moreover, they worry that religion has been and can be an unhealthy source of intolerance and fanaticism, as evidenced by the motives of the September 11 terrorists. These are all reasonable concerns, and I address them head-on in this book.
This is also a book for atheists, or at least for those atheists who welcome a challenge. Precisely because the Christians usually duck and run, the atheists have had it too easy. Their arguments have gone largely unanswered. They have been flogging the carcass of "fundamentalism" without having to encounter the horse-kick of a vigorous traditional Christianity. I think that if atheists are genuine rationalists they should welcome this book. It is an effort to meet the atheist argument on its own terms.
Nowhere in this book do I take Christianity for granted. My modus operandi is one of skepticism, to view the claims of religion in the same open-minded way that we view claims of any other sort. The difference between me and my atheist opponents is that I am skeptical not only of the irrational claims made in the name of religion but also of the irrational claims made in the name of science and of skepticism itself.
Taking as my foil the anti-religious arguments of prominent atheists like Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Christopher Hitchens and the others, What's So Great About Christianity shows the following: 1) Christianity is the main foundation of Western civilization, the root of our most cherished values. 2) The latest discoveries of modern science support the Christian claim that there is a divine being who created the universe. 3)
If you want to read more about the book, check out my website dineshdsouza.com
Reader Comments ( Page 2 of 36)
16. OK, Douchebag, here's a challenge for you: Try writting a blog where you don't plug your sh*tty book.
Jimmy Hoffa at 10:17AM on Oct 12th 2007
17. Responding to Ken S (#4)
Alan in #3 asked for more evidence to support DD's claims.
I would like just SOME evidence from you to support your claims?
What policy has been advocated by Jews, or Catholics, or Southern Baptists, or Pentecostals, or the Assembly of God, or by any denomination that would give you cause for concern?
Yes, there may be a few extremists within these denominations and may be some independent churches, but, that is hardly worth getting worked up over. These extremists are not in a position to impact public policy.
ray at 10:20AM on Oct 12th 2007
18. #8 DB
"Christians, Christ says, should always turn the other cheek -- so D'Souza is already not fulfilling a truly Christian requirement."
Acually when Jesus was slapped by Pilate, Jesus did not turn the other cheek....rather questioned Pilate as to why he was struck.
Think about it.
NickP at 10:40AM on Oct 12th 2007
19. Mr. D'Souza has placed this debate in the light of his wisdom. By enhancing divisions in the beliefs of human beings, he goads every interested party into making his ideas more relevant than their own. If I spend an hour trying to convince a lion not to kill a wildebeast, but offer no plausable alternative, I would expect that the lion would eat me. It is a matter of choosing to act in a manner that creates the hope of a better existence to be determined later, or acting in a manner that makes our current existence a better one. I find the second choice more appealing, and relevant.
The Prophet at 10:33AM on Oct 12th 2007
20. D'Souza wrote, "The atheists no longer want to be tolerated. They want to monopolize the public square and to expel Christians from it."
D'Souza makes it so easy! First of all, atheism is not subject to "toleration" by beleivers - atheists have equal rights under the Constitution and D'Souza and other theists of his ilk only THINK they are doing us a favor by tolerating our existence. The truth is that there is no choice - we have every right that anyone else has.
Secondly his premise that atheists want to "monopolize" the Public Square is so typically deluded that it is a joke. Without precisely one known elected official known as an atheist, and the balance, over the decades, only known to be theists, it is theists that do not want to relinquish their monopoly on the public square. For decades school prayer was common in public schools; NEVER has it been taught in school that no God exists. D'Souza, however, would probably complain that a methodologically naturalistic science is atheism in disguise; he really WOULD prefer that our school become more like Hogwarts where the supernatural is an acceptable avenue for scientific inquiry. Unfortunately, that would no longer be science. But he'd complain anyway.
It is theists that have forced school children to spout "under God" in their classrooms every day, not "under NO God." The currency reads "in God we trust," not under NO God we trust" and so on.
D'Souza is equating neutrality in matters religious as atheism and obvious religiosity/supernaturalism as neutrality. The fact that many buy into this doesn't change the fact that it's basically irrational.
He is pathetic.
Gerry Dantone at 12:38PM on Oct 12th 2007
21. Geez, more of DD's droning on and on about how holy and righteous he is...the rest of us who actually have the audacity to question the bible or the bible thumpers saying evolution is false, we are just stone cold atheists who will rot in hell...samse stuff from the Pat Robertson crowd, blah blah blah
David S. at 10:33AM on Oct 12th 2007
22. Responding to ken's lie (#9)
According to SECULAR historians, the 20th century is the bloodiest in recorded history. Depending on which stats you believe, the death toll ranges from 60 to 100+ million people. What is NOT in dispute is that the OVERWHELMING MAJORITY of the deaths came at the hands of totalitarian regimes that were either atheist or at least antagonistic against religion.
IF any person on this forum should hang their head in SHAME, it is the ATHEISTS, not the people of faith.
ray at 10:46AM on Oct 12th 2007
23. One other note: It's amazing how intellectually dishonest the critics can be when the topic is Christianity. Above I'm reading that Islam and Christianity worship the same God. Not true: Christians believe God came to earth in the form of a man, in the person of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, to die and resurrect for the sins of humanity. (For God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him would not perish, but have everlasting life.)
Muslims believe Christ was only a prophet & that one can get to heaven through faith and service to Allah. Big difference. (In Christianity, one killed for his faith is a martyr. In Islam, a martyr is somebody who blows himself up while killing others.)
For people to assert that these two faiths worship the same God demonstrates the same level of misunderstanding that it takes to believe that the the Third Reich had a Christian foundation, even though this evil group was occultic in nature and left behind all kinds of symbols documenting that fact. They were completely antithetical to the Jewish and Christian faith as demonstrated by the fact that they were murdering Jews and Christians, along with many others.
(One clarification about my previous post: I'm not suggesting capital punishment for all killing, just some first degree murders.)
Dave at 10:48AM on Oct 12th 2007
24. The title of the boosk should be 'what COULD be great about religion". Unfortunately, the major religions take simple, everyday truths, ascribe them to the deity of choice and bundle them with all kinds of nonsensical dogma. To 'believe' you have to embrace all or nothing, or, of course, suffer eternal torture of whatever variety. The simple everyday truths are truths even without the dogma and are usually widely accepted on their own merit. They are the basis for secular law and civility. Don't need all the fantasy/fairy stuff to go with it.
As far as science, it is an ongoing, developing body of knowledge and/or theory. Evolutionary theory seems to have some basis but the progression of ancestry has many gaping holes. The same goes with 'big bang' and origins of the universe theories. Those studies are admitted to be works in progress by all involved with them. It is no crime to say "we don't know yet", and frankly doesn't change our daily lives much.
Would that so-called 'Christians' (a term insulting to the person they claim to 'follow') and other followers of religions at least learned how their religions came into existence, the cultural context in which the scrolls/tablets were written and see that they were basis for teaching the simple truths, not the fluffy wisardry that it became attached to.
D'nesh himself tries to hide the fact he participates with the would-be Christian Taliban in America. Thankfully, the founding fathers had the wisdom to not grant governing powers to fairlyand religions.
Danaman at 2:09AM on Oct 13th 2007
25. Responding to Ray's comment,
What policy by (certain religion here) is a cause for concern?
How about the teaching/funding of abstinence education instead of teaching about safe sex. It’s proven that abstinence education is 100% ineffective and that there are more underage pregnancies where this is being taught. The Bush Administration funds these worthless programs and refuses to fund programs for Stem Cell research, and dare I mention the “A” issue. There are plenty of issues that the Religious Right lobbies for that affects public policy.
Buggs at 10:54AM on Oct 12th 2007
26. "They want to discredit the factual claims of religion..."
I doubt that I will get an answer except "buy the book!", but I would like Mr. D'Souza to list the "factual" claims of religion. It is my impression that since there is little fact, there must be a lot of faith.
robert g paul at 11:06AM on Oct 12th 2007
27. When responding to issues, why do we have to attack the person who shares those views? Is it that we lack the ability to attack the issues?
David at 10:53AM on Oct 12th 2007
28. To Buggs #23:
Abstinence education has not been proven inneffective. I noticed you cited no source for that. I don't have a source to cite either (because I don't remember which publication it was in), but I recall reading that including abstinence education in sex ed programs resulted in significant decreases in STD and pregnancy rates, especially if taught alongside safe sex, and that teaching both is by far the most effective means of combating sex-related social ills.
Steve at 11:11AM on Oct 12th 2007
29. First of all, atheists are not attacking Christianity as you say. There are a small minority of course who do, but they are an extreme minority. Most live in this world content with their beliefs, however they got them, and don't impose them on anyone else. Most atheists today actually cower to "believers" because they know that they are generally looked down upon,(atheist president? ain't gonna' happen!!!) as if they are somehow inferior for being godless. They KNOW this not to be the case, but feel as though trying to explain themselves to a believer is futile, because as a rule, people of deistic faith often loose some of their reasoning skills once they subscribe to a religion. Believers are hard to argue with because they often throw away logic in place of dogma. And just a few points...human beings are the foundation of civilization, not religions. This country was founded by people, not a book. Sure, some read this certain book and followed it's teachings, some misconstrued it's words and BURNED those who dared to ask questions. "Miracles" is just another way of saying "I don't understand", and that happens to all of us at some point. Some of us accept that challenge and investigate, others would rather assign the supernatural to any temporary "miracle". Just think, where would we be today if everyone in the past credited the supernatural for our lack of knowledge, instead of investigating it with the scientific approach. So here's the REAL CHALLENGE Dinesh...have God meet me on the playground at 3 o'clock sharp. There would be nothing I'd enjoy more than to meet this guy and ask some questions. I'll be there with an open heart and mind...waiting...the question is, will he (He)?
TZINGULARITY at 11:18AM on Oct 12th 2007
30. Ray -
Where have the spokesmen for ANY denomination been when the most vocal of the Christian rightists (Coulter, Gingrich, Hannity, Limbaugh, et al) assert that the United States of America is a CHRISTIAN nation? Whenever this assertion is made, the silence of the Christian leaders over the exclusion of non-Christians from American society is deafening. This must be regarded as complicity. Gingrich wrote an entire book stating his case for shoving Christianity down the citizenry's collective throat. The approach for most Christians appears to be, "I will stand by and let someone else shove it down your throat so no one can accuse me." Cowards.
Julie at 8:04PM on Oct 15th 2007