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 4 of 36)
46. There's a million dollars under your bed! Yes really. Go look; I'll wait.
Huh, that's weird. Did you look really hard? Are you sure? Maybe you should try again, and look really, really hard this time.
Hmmm, did you look under the carpet? Well, you gotta look under the carpet. I know what I said; but under the carpet under the bed is still under the bed.
Nothing? You can't just feel for lumps; it could be in large bills spread out in a thin layer. You've got to pull up the carpet. Hey, with a million dollars you can get a new carpet, right?
I don't think you're putting enough effort into this. You're going to have to tear up the floor too. Of course I'm sure it's there; It says so right here on this old treasure map. Can you prove the map's a forgery? I didn't think so.
Well of course you have to dig: it's buried treasure, isn't it? You always have to dig for buried treasure. Everybody knows that. Are you stupid or something?
Deeper.
Okay mister know-it-all, prove there's no treasure. See, you can't! It's an irrational claim. You'd have to dig all the way to China. You do believe in China don't you? Have you ever seen China? See, everybody believes in things they've never seen, so keep digging.
Deeper!
I had some of the dirt analyzed. There are minute traces of gold. You must be getting close. No, it can't be natural; if gold just occurred naturally we'd all be rich, now wouldn't we.
Deeper!!
This guy I know took the dirt sample you sent me, calculated the trace amount of gold per cubic foot, then calculated the total volume of a column of dirt the size of your bed stretching all the way to the other side of the earth, then made some adjustments for increased gold density near the core, and viola! scientific proof that there's a million dollars in gold under your bed! Isn't that great?
You can't stop now, you're so close. What are you so mad about? Look at what great shape you got in from all that digging! Surely that's worth a million dollars right there. I think you really believe that gold is there anyway. Why else would you have dug that hole? I think that you're just afraid that if you keep digging you'll find gold. Why do you hate money so much? Are you some sort of communist?
Okay, that's it, me and some of my friends are going to come over and make you dig. I will not stay out of your bedroom! Your rights? What about my rights? It's totally unfair for you to deny me the right to that gold just because you don't believe it's there. Or rather, claim to not believe it's there: I think you're really just lazy.
Why are you running around telling people there is no gold under your bed? That's just more proof that deep down you really know it's there. If you really didn't believe there was any gold there it would never occur to you to mention it. After all, nobody runs around saying "There's no Santa Claus buried under my bed." You only have to deny the Gold because you know it's true.
You agoldists are such hypocrites. You talk about tolerance and rights, then persecute those of us who just want to be left alone to make you dig under your bed. My congressman is going to hear about this.
-From JHuger.com
Brian at 1:16PM on Oct 12th 2007
47. This morning there was a knock at my door. When I answered the door I found a well groomed, nicely dressed couple. The man spoke first:
John: "Hi! I'm John, and this is Mary."
Mary: "Hi! We're here to invite you to come kiss Hank's ass with us."
Me: "Pardon me?! What are you talking about? Who's Hank, and why would I want to kiss His ass?"
John: "If you kiss Hank's ass, He'll give you a million dollars; and if you don't, He'll kick the shit out of you."
Me: "What? Is this some sort of bizarre mob shake-down?"
John: "Hank is a billionaire philanthropist. Hank built this town. Hank owns this town. He can do whatever He wants, and what He wants is to give you a million dollars, but He can't until you kiss His ass."
Me: "That doesn't make any sense. Why..."
Mary: "Who are you to question Hank's gift? Don't you want a million dollars? Isn't it worth a little kiss on the ass?"
Me: "Well maybe, if it's legit, but..."
John: "Then come kiss Hank's ass with us."
Me: "Do you kiss Hank's ass often?"
Mary: "Oh yes, all the time..."
Me: "And has He given you a million dollars?"
John: "Well no. You don't actually get the money until you leave town."
Me: "So why don't you just leave town now?"
Mary: "You can't leave until Hank tells you to, or you don't get the money, and He kicks the shit out of you."
Me: "Do you know anyone who kissed Hank's ass, left town, and got the million dollars?"
John: "My mother kissed Hank's ass for years. She left town last year, and I'm sure she got the money."
Me: "Haven't you talked to her since then?"
John: "Of course not, Hank doesn't allow it."
Me: "So what makes you think He'll actually give you the money if you've never talked to anyone who got the money?"
Mary: "Well, He gives you a little bit before you leave. Maybe you'll get a raise, maybe you'll win a small lotto, maybe you'll just find a twenty-dollar bill on the street."
Me: "What's that got to do with Hank?"
John: "Hank has certain 'connections.'"
Me: "I'm sorry, but this sounds like some sort of bizarre con game."
John: "But it's a million dollars, can you really take the chance? And remember, if you don't kiss Hank's ass He'll kick the shit out of you."
Me: "Maybe if I could see Hank, talk to Him, get the details straight from Him..."
Mary: "No one sees Hank, no one talks to Hank."
Me: "Then how do you kiss His ass?"
John: "Sometimes we just blow Him a kiss, and think of His ass. Other times we kiss Karl's ass, and he passes it on."
Me: "Who's Karl?"
Mary: "A friend of ours. He's the one who taught us all about kissing Hank's ass. All we had to do was take him out to dinner a few times."
Me: "And you just took his word for it when he said there was a Hank, that Hank wanted you to kiss His ass, and that Hank would reward you?"
John: "Oh no! Karl has a letter he got from Hank years ago explaining the whole thing. Here's a copy; see for yourself."
From the Desk of Karl
1. Kiss Hank's ass and He'll give you a million dollars when you leave town.
2. Use alcohol in moderation.
3. Kick the shit out of people who aren't like you.
4. Eat right.
5. Hank dictated this list Himself.
6. The moon is made of green cheese.
7. Everything Hank says is right.
8. Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.
9. Don't use alcohol.
10. Eat your wieners on buns, no condiments.
11. Kiss Hank's ass or He'll kick the shit out of you.
Me: "This appears to be written on Karl's letterhead."
Mary: "Hank didn't have any paper."
Me: "I have a hunch that if we checked we'd find this is Karl's handwriting."
John: "Of course, Hank dictated it."
Me: "I thought you said no one gets to see Hank?"
Mary: "Not now, but years ago He would talk to some people."
Me: "I thought you said He was a philanthropist. What sort of philanthropist kicks the shit out of people just because they're different?"
Mary: "It's what Hank wants, and Hank's always right."
Me: "How do you figure that?"
Mary: "Item 7 says 'Everything Hank says is right.' That's good enough for me!"
Me: "Maybe your friend Karl just made the whole thing up."
John: "No way! Item 5 says 'Hank dictated this list himself.' Besides, item 2 says 'Use alcohol in moderation,' Item 4 says 'Eat right,' and item 8 says 'Wash your hands after going to the bathroom.' Everyone knows those things are right, so the rest must be true, too."
Me: "But 9 says 'Don't use alcohol.' which doesn't quite go with item 2, and 6 says 'The moon is made of green cheese,' which is just plain wrong."
John: "There's no contradiction between 9 and 2, 9 just clarifies 2. As far as 6 goes, you've never been to the moon, so you can't say for sure."
Me: "Scientists have pretty firmly established that the moon is made of rock..."
Mary: "But they don't know if the rock came from the Earth, or from out of space, so it could just as easily be green cheese."
Me: "I'm not really an expert, but I think the theory that the Moon was somehow 'captured' by the Earth has been discounted*. Besides, not knowing where the rock came from doesn't make it cheese."
John: "Ha! You just admitted that scientists make mistakes, but we know Hank is always right!"
Me: "We do?"
Mary: "Of course we do, Item 7 says so."
Me: "You're saying Hank's always right because the list says so, the list is right because Hank dictated it, and we know that Hank dictated it because the list says so. That's circular logic, no different than saying 'Hank's right because He says He's right.'"
John: "Now you're getting it! It's so rewarding to see someone come around to Hank's way of thinking."
Me: "But...oh, never mind. What's the deal with wieners?"
Mary: She blushes.
John: "Wieners, in buns, no condiments. It's Hank's way. Anything else is wrong."
Me: "What if I don't have a bun?"
John: "No bun, no wiener. A wiener without a bun is wrong."
Me: "No relish? No Mustard?"
Mary: She looks positively stricken.
John: He's shouting. "There's no need for such language! Condiments of any kind are wrong!"
Me: "So a big pile of sauerkraut with some wieners chopped up in it would be out of the question?"
Mary: Sticks her fingers in her ears."I am not listening to this. La la la, la la, la la la."
John: "That's disgusting. Only some sort of evil deviant would eat that..."
Me: "It's good! I eat it all the time."
Mary: She faints.
John: He catches Mary. "Well, if I'd known you were one of those I wouldn't have wasted my time. When Hank kicks the shit out of you I'll be there, counting my money and laughing. I'll kiss Hank's ass for you, you bunless cut-wienered kraut-eater."
With this, John dragged Mary to their waiting car, and sped off.
-From JHuger.com
Brian at 1:23PM on Oct 12th 2007
48. Dinesh:
I rather enjoyed your article as it is well written and argues some very valid points in the debate between atheists and believers, Christians in particular. I would personally like to learn more about your positions on the questions you raised. However, as a militant atheist I am not going to purchase your book. I believe it would behoove you to expand on your views rather than directing readers to your literary creation. Though, I do thank you for pointing me to the reading I might enjoy.
It appears to me that in recent times the debate between atheists and believers has degraded into name calling and bickering. Atheists continually degrade the opposing party’s mental capabilities, while believers scream persecution with every article or book published that challenges their beliefs. I noticed that Christians are particularly vocal in these debates. Of course, it may be just due to my own ignorance of other sources. In any case I personally strongly advocate for a civilized debate based on verifiable facts and arguable theories. Let us return to the Ancient Greek roots of our Western Civilization and contest with peaceful eloquence (not that I claim eloquence for myself).
I will attempt to argue some of your points here, firstly the barrage of atheist propaganda. The debate of existence of gods has been going on for thousands of years and three books hardly amount to “barrage”. Christian and other religions have their own publications which are made available to all who wants them as well as distributed door to door. It appears to me that Christians are not quite running for cover. Especially, not with “one hand clapping” http://www.io.com/~snewton/zen/onehand.html.
Secondly, there are continuous attempts to make religion and morality interchangeable and present Christianity as the foundations of moral codes. All societies in the world independently developed similar codes of conduct for the individuals to follow. Most of these societies did not encounter Christianity until very late in their development. As it is many people have a problem with “an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth” concept. All societies, however, have a concept of “punishment must fit the crime”. I will cite here the Norse and pre-Christian Anglo-Saxon concept of Wergild, or Blood Money. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wergeld. Of course, whether or not the individual actually follows these codes is a question of morality. I am very well acquainted with highly moral people on both sides of this conflict. I have also encountered very immoral people among those go to church very often as well as among atheists. I would argue that religion does not guarantee morality and atheism is not a prerequisite for immorality. I think this answers your point No. 1 - Christianity is the main foundation of Western civilization, the root of our most cherished values.
Two. “The latest discoveries of modern science support the Christian claim that there is a divine being who created the universe”. I consider myself a fairly educated man but I have not encountered any mention of that in scientific community. Perhaps a link or two?
Three. “Darwin 's theory of evolution, far from undermining the evidence for supernatural design, actually strengthens it”. In my opinion, Darwin’s theory states that species progressed from simpler to more complex without any outside intervention except that of their immediate environment. Perhaps I should reread “On the Origin of Species”.
Four. “There is nothing in science that makes miracles impossible”. In my view, science seeks reasonable and verifiable explanations to natural phenomena instead of raising hands in the air and proclaiming: “God made it.”
Five. “It is reasonable to have faith”. By what reason would one reach that conclusion?
Six. “Atheism, not religion, is responsible for the mass murders of history”. While some of the worst tyrants and mass murderers in history were atheist, Stalin for once, countless genocides wee committed in the name of a god. Though individuals like Stalin or King Philip II of Spain would be really working overtime killing their allotted millions if they did not have hordes of fanatic followers. Whether crying for God or Destruction of religion they did the dirty work. I would argue that all such crimes were committed for power, political or economic.
Seven. (very interestingly you make Seven points. Coincidence?) Atheism is often motivated not by reason but by a kind of cowardly moral escapism. Again, you appear to equate morality with religion. What exactly is “Cowardly moral escapism”?
I would really like to examine more of you views and, perhaps, even gain a little glimpse at the content of you book. You know “first hit is free” kinda thing.
igorvrt at 2:25PM on Oct 12th 2007
49. Puh-leaze, as if you're asking the tough questions, approaching it from a skeptic's viewpoint. Your book, which you advertise in every damn blog, if its anything like your others will be a rehash of other people's easily refuted arguments.
The only thing I'll admit you're right about: atheists love to criticize fundamentalists, because it's like shooting fish in a barrel. They should be going after the more mainstream religious folks, who are already in doubt but have trouble shaking off religion in such a superstitious culture.
AndrewV at 1:36PM on Oct 12th 2007
50. This sentences pretty much sums up Mr. D'Souza's thought process: "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."
He's skeptical of skepticism? What does that mean? I'll trust rationality and empirical evidence until it fails to prove (or even contradicts) what I already believe?
You can read a full response here
sidfaiwu at 1:53PM on Oct 12th 2007
51. Brian...That was...AWESOME!! Thank you from the bottom of my heathen heart!! HAHA really though that was great!!
Mikie at 1:54PM on Oct 12th 2007
52. In the late 1700s some people wanted democratic rule. Conservative elements of the church pointed to the Bible and said it proved that the king ruled by God's will.
In the mid 1800s some people wanted to end slavery. Conservative elements of the church pointed to the Bible and said it proved that God approved of slavery.
In the early 1900s some people wanted to give women the vote. Conservative elements of the church pointed to the Bible and said it proved that God made women inferior to men.
In the mid 1900s some people wanted to end segregation. Conservative elements of the church pointed to the Bible and said it proved God wanted to keep the races separate.
When you look back at how your parents and grandparents dealt with these things, are you ashamed or proud?
Now some people want to allow gay marriage. Conservative elements of the church are pointing to the Bible and saying it proves God hates homosexuality.
When your children and grandchildren look back at how you deal with this, will they be ashamed or proud?
-From JHuger.com
Brian at 1:54PM on Oct 12th 2007
53. Apparently, I can't use hyperlink tags here, so I'll have to copy-and-paste the entire URL. If you want to read my full response, you can do so at http://www.sidfaiwu.com/blog/?p=58.
sidfaiwu at 1:56PM on Oct 12th 2007
54. This blog entry is nothing more than an advertisement for D'Sousa's latest book. Whatever one may think of his opinions, I do hope AOL did not pay him for the post. In fact, you should charge him and use the revenue to improve your service to members.
As for the content of his books, they are so well known that it is difficult to see who would pay to read the books other than the choir he always preaches to.
Sarah Canzoneri at 1:25PM on Oct 13th 2007
55. The latest discoveries of modern science support the Christian claim that there is a divine being who created the universe. -Dinesh
---------------------------------
Uh, NO. The latest findings in quantum physics point to the idea of a consciousness base to reality, as in it's all a communal dream of sorts, NOT to a deity of any particular sort. This is why some famous researchers in QP have become MYSTICS (not christians)...
But you can't handle the truth, so have it your way. You always do anyhow.
Brian at 2:25PM on Oct 12th 2007
56. The Bible in Matthew 5:13-14 calls Christians to be the "salt of the earth"
----------------------------
Y'ever try to grow anything in salted earth?
So, it fits.
Brian at 2:29PM on Oct 12th 2007
57. This is also a book for atheists, or at least for those atheists who welcome a challenge.
----------------------------------------
Yawn. What challenge? Oh, you mean it's a challenge for a rational mind to read so much collected drivel without losing interest. I get it.
AIDS is a challenge for atheists. Cancer is a challenge. Global warming is a challenge. If you think your book is a challenge, you're just puffed up with your egotistical christian pride. And seeing that, for me, is no challenge.
Brian at 2:35PM on Oct 12th 2007
58. In a larger sense, either the secular view of reality is correct or the religious view is correct.
-----------------------------------------------
Or neither one is correct and reality is all a communal dream of sorts, as indicated by some findings in quantum physics. Consciousness-based rather than matter-based. A third choice. You forgot to mention it. And perhaps there's even a fourth choice... We just don't know. But we're finding out, slowly but surely. Be patient and don't try to guess the answer before the findings are in. That's just being stoooooopid, dinesh.
Brian at 2:45PM on Oct 12th 2007
59. re: # 8 I agree with DB here. Jesus did not throw secularists out of the temple. He threw out religious charlatains who were making a stealing from the people in the name of religion. As a Christian I think it is time we threw the "money changers" out of our churches and denominations. It is in part because of them that some people refuse to give God a second glance.
re: #9 The NAZIs were not Christian, nor were they truly modern atheists. They were neo-pagans. By that I do not intend either to link them with modern American pagans. In Germany the NAZIs used rituals and ideals from the Norse paganism to rally the people to their cause. Unfortunately the churches, Lutheran and Catholic, permitted this to happen, and in some cases even endorsed their actions. Not because the NAZIs were Christian but because the church leaders were willing to go along to get ahead.
You who oppose Christianity would do well to recognize that all men are capable of great evil. It is not only particular to the religious.
However, you also should be aware that without an authority greater than man or mankind there is nothing which is truly evil. Only that which does not serve Me.
Dale Greenlee at 3:26PM on Oct 12th 2007
60. Brian -- excellent posts! 43 and 44 are funny as hell! Thanks for the link.
DD -- thanks for posting your nonsense so that we can have fun with it. Don't think I'll buy that book, though...
Joe Bob at 3:10PM on Oct 12th 2007