Is religion the problem? This was the topic of my debate with America's leading atheist Christopher Hitchens before a packed house of a thousand people at the Ethical Culture Society auditorium in New York city. Hitchens is the author of God Is Not Great and I am the author of the new book What's So Great About Christianity. Unfortunately the organizers had to turn more than a hundred people away. It was a ferocious and lively debate, which also had its light moments, and many people on both sides said afterward that it was the best God v. atheism debate that has so far been held.
The current crop of atheists -- Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett, Steven Pinker -- are mainly Darwinians who don't believe in God because they regard evolution as providing a sufficient accounting for life. Hitchens, however, says he is not an atheist but an "anti-theist." By this he means that he isn't just an unbeliever; he hates the God of traditional religion. He condemns Christianity as a wicked religion involving a sadomasochistic God who indulges in a gruesome sacrifice of his son. And why? To compel people to grovel before him. And if they don't (in Hitchen's portrayal) God hurls them into hell for eternity. Hitchens sees the crimes of religion, such as the Inquisition, as stemming from the inherently totalitarian nature of religion.
My argument in the debate was that Christians would hardly recognize their beliefs and practices in this harsh and unbalanced account. For Christians, God helps to give ultimate meaning to life. Religion gives us a moral code to live by and to teach our children. Faith helps us to deal with hardship and suffering. The prospect of the afterlife gives us hope and helps us to believe that there is eventual justice in which the good are rewarded and unrepented evil held accountable. For Christians it is not the death of Christ but the resurrection that is the central doctrine. Sadomasochism doesn't even enter into it.
Some of the most lively moments in the debate came when Hitchens and I discussed whether religion or atheism is responsible for the mass murders of history. I pointed out that even the Spanish Inquisition--a favorite atheist bugaboo -- killed 2,000 people over 350 years. By contrast, atheist tyrants like Mao and Stalin and Pol Pot killed tens of millions within the space of a few decades. Hitchens sought to argue that Communism retained many of the features of autocratic religious states. I countered by saying that if we hold religious regimes responsible for the crimes done in God's name, we should hold atheist regimes responsible for the crimes done in the name of creating an atheist utopia. Let's not blame religion not only for its own offenses but also for the offenses done by atheists on behalf of an atheist ideology.
Who won? That's for you to judge. Hitchens and I are scheduled to appear tonight on Hannity & Colmes on the Fox News Channel to have another swing at each other. Our debate was also taped by C-Span 2 (Book TV) and will be aired on Saturday at 7 pm Eastern time.
You can watch the entire debate here.
If you want to read more about my views, you can find them in my new book What's So Great About Christianity.
Reader Comments ( Page 5 of 44)
61. D'nesh, thank you for doing this debate and for taking the stand you took. However I must take strong issue with your claim that the cross is not central in Christian doctrine. While the cross without the resurrection would be meaningless, the reverse is also true. Jesus' substitutionary death on the cross for the sins of all who would ever believe is the heart of the gospel, and without it, we have nothing. Eternal life is meaningless if the wrath of God has not been removed against us, as was accomomplished by his substitutionary death.
Kirk at 8:00PM on Oct 24th 2007
62. Do not confuse religion with God. Religion in it's man-made earthly form, is for men who wish to talk their way in to Heaven. Remember, it was "religious" men who nailed christ to a tree.
Trust in the Lord your God.. Read you Bible. The answers come easy for believers.
Mr. Hazel at 8:01PM on Oct 24th 2007
63. God did create men and women equally. He did it because he desired love and fellowship. GOD has the power to FORCE people to love HIM...but he wants people to CHOOSE to love HIM. Otherwise how would you know if you were truely loved? So he gave people a choice...and that choice is what allows EVIL. God is not a sadist!! The GREATEST commandment is to "love God with all your heart, all your soul and all your strength" the second greatest is to "LOVE YOUR neighbor as yourself." GOD IS LOVE. God didn't destroy his son...man did. MEN who even as Christ died...through HIS very death...were FORGIVEN for killing the son of God if they would recieve him as such. Our misconceptions of GOD and who God is...usually come from our relationships with our own parents. We see HIM and we see THEM. But HIS love is perfect. There is no sin that is unforgivable. But we have to believe enough to ASK for forgivness...and then don't keep doing what we had to be forgiven for. I see God like a protective parent. If you have a small child who is fastinated by the pretty red, hot burner on the stove and you tell that child...DO NOT TOUCH the stove!!! You do not do it to deny the child some pleasure. But the child doesnt' know that...so he touches the stove. HE gets burned...who did it?? Did the parent burn the child? NO. The parent tried to spare the child. But the CHILD chose NOT to listen. So he learned the hard way. Often we blame GOD for our own decisions that we made WITHOUT GODs wisdom...then we BLAME GOD for the out come.
nobdysfool at 8:01PM on Oct 24th 2007
64. Mr. Hitchens, as an atheist, needs to read up on his science. As with many atheists, his ego has made him believe that life only includes human beings (and moreso, human beings on our planet or even in our solar system). Life did exist on Mars (which I do believe has been proven through what samples we've attained just from little scoops of its soil) and life could exist on any planet, if even dormant, for all we know. A virus can lay dormant, frozen, until unleashed again by finding the proper temperature...but reagardless, it IS life (even if we don't like them...and they don't like us). Was it not barely forty years ago that we accomplished something as great as landing on the moon? Yet, ancient cultures like the Egyptians and the Mayans and the Druids understood the rotation of the solar system and the galaxies surrounding us thousands of years ago. And in an actual scientific sense, we are but babies in our own solar system, merely observing other planets from thousands upon thousands of miles away. And that's just our solar system!
I've never been to California. It's only a little more than two thousand miles away from me...but I don't pretend to believe that all people in California are simply pompous actors, slutty heiresses and avid marijuana growers--as I have observed via my televisionscope. I've come to understand that reality is different than what I've learned in school, or what I've observed on television. I've had an adverse reaction to over-zealous religious types who wish to force their opinions down my doorstep. So I refuse to accept that either side is "right". Humans will differ in opion based on what makes up feel comfortable. Me, I'm somewhere in the middle...but I just feel that Hitchens is a guy who thinks he's an intelligent human, but has the same soul compacity as one of the Geico cavemen.
maddydred at 8:04PM on Oct 24th 2007
65. God is something you experience, not something you debate about. I don't argue with athiests simply because they have not had a spiritual experience of God. Why bother debating with someone who has not had a personal experience with spirit? You might as well ask a 2 year old what a sirloin steak tastes like. Since they have never experienced a steak, there is not much they can say. Unlike an atheist though, a 2 year old will keep his mind and hopes open until one day he has the experience of the steak. Then he will know for himself. He will not think how the steak tastes. He will not believe how the steak tastes. He will know how the steak tastes. Atheism is so negative and so closed minded.
Frank at 8:05PM on Oct 24th 2007
66. D'Souza wins by default. Atheists are by definition idiots, because they deny somehting they cannot truly know or not know. Agnostics, on the other hand are reasonable and reasoned thinkers.
I've read a good deal about religion, the reformation, enlightenment, was a religion major, and Hitchen's argument is very very tired and only gets traction with adolescent minds. Of course religion and christianity (AND especially catholicism) has hideous moments. BUt it has evolved a half millenium since its most egregious times and is truly responsible - esp. Judeo Christianity) for the very milieu in which tolerance thrives. He is looking at historical Christianity. If you want to condemn it historically fine but recenet Christianity is the best thing the world has going for it - no other religion organizes so much charity, is so self effacing - shit - local Maine catholic charities bring black Muslims from Africa to America and they aren't here to assimilate, let me tell you. They pour tons of money and effort into the swamps and deserts of the world. Atheists don't. Communists don't. Muslim's don't. And so on and so on. Plus, Darwin can explain everything that has happened since creation, and does it well (I happen to be a Religion BA, Zoology MS, Darwinist, Agnostic, Jew, and political conservative). D'Souza is correct. More blood has been spilled by totalitarians, secularists, Marxists, and politicians than by religion, Do the math.
joseph ullman at 8:05PM on Oct 24th 2007
67. I laugh at Liberals who say Conservatives are numb to suffering, as some have done in response to the D vs. Hitchens debate. In a recent book entitled "Giving"; the author investigated who in America gives the most. Guess who it is? Stingy Conservatives, or giving, loving Liverals? Well, golleeee as Gomer Pile would say, it's those stingy Christian Conservatives!!! You see, there was no corollation with politics - the real corollation was with regard to one's Christian beliefs - for those who go to church regularly, giving is very high; for those who go to church rarely, or not at all, giving is very low. And guess who goes to church more often? Republicans! Gasp! Could it be that the most loving, most caring Americans are Christian conservatives? What shall we do? Who shall we call?
This notion that there is no proof of God is ridiculous - there are four separate testimonies from four people who witnessed or were living in the time of Christ - their names are MArk, Matthew, Luke, and John. If there were only one account, one could say there is a lack of reasonable proof - but my word, FOUR accounts - now who is the ludicrous among us? What court would not accept the testimponies of four witnesses?
I rest my case. By the way, God doesn't send anyone to Hell - He made sure of that by giving His Son. WE CHOOSE Hell -- you got it - since we have free will, we can choose to discard God's Holy word, we can choose to ignore Jesus' sacrifice for us, and in doing so, we choose Hell for ourselves. It wasn't God that made us ignore Him - we did it all by ourselves. Thingk on this long and hard before you respond. God gave us His only SOn so that we might not suffer such a fate. If you do so suffer, you chose to. Such a pity. May you reconsider before time runs out...
Bob at 8:05PM on Oct 24th 2007
68. 'Hitch' talked much but said nothing. Thinking there is no higher intelligence is simple stupidity. As if there is no one greater than the atheist.
Paul at 8:07PM on Oct 24th 2007
69. It pains me to say that Hitchens won (which he did) since he's such a drunken right wing dirtbag most of the time, but credit must be given when due. Christianity is based upon blindly praising a sadistic, arrogant, self adoring entity that allows evil people to prosper and good people to suffer (read the Book of Job sometime for a lesson on that). Most Christians dont have the ability to grasp the irony of wearing a sculpture of a horrifically tortured and mutilated man around their necks as if its a beautiful sign of love for humanity. Its like wearing a severed head around your neck and saying Daniel Pearl is your messiah. And if Christ "died for our sins", then why do we still have to pay for them anyway?
saintsubversive at 8:08PM on Oct 24th 2007
70. D'Souza is a moron. He couldn't adequately represent heat for a fire. Hitchen's God may be one of hellfire and damnation, but that IS the Christian God. If your'e going to nit-pick that, you'll lose. You can't make Christianity conveniently fit your definition. You're either a by the book Christian or you're 'something else'.
yabbi at 8:13PM on Oct 24th 2007
71. Man, someone tell Dinesh that he needs a MODERATOR.
Just watching the lack of PROTOCOL on that was UGLY.
Also though Dinesh lost, IMO; if Hitchens overly focused on the Nazis, Dinesh overly focused on the Inquisition. there were many other "martyrs" of religion in the history of christianity - so this is simply the pot calling the kettle black.
Dinesh's focus on communism fails to acknowledge the FAILURE of the Christian religion as one of the great impetus' for its origination. It also fails to acknowledge that the implementation of authoritarianism was lifted from the example of the Christian religion. The Dostoevsky thing is so bad it is ALMOST a logical fallacy (with apologies to Dostoevsky himself.
Jake
lawja02 at 8:13PM on Oct 24th 2007
72. Hang in there Ria (#38) and know that Jesus Christ loves you very much.
check out the blog on this subject at www.mynewhorizons.org
steve hinton at 8:14PM on Oct 24th 2007
73. There can be no "winners" in a debate such as this. Those who believe in religion have been "hardwired" or programmed over many generations to believe whatever it is that they believe. No matter how clever your quips and no matter how high your IQ you are never going to undo 1000's of years of programming in one little debate! C'mon people!
Robb at 8:15PM on Oct 24th 2007
74. Shoving God Out of our lives is the problem. I don't need to listen to any b.s. from these atheists. When they face God one on one, they'll see they are nothing. HE is all!
Dyan at 8:16PM on Oct 24th 2007
75. comment 68 "D'Souza wins by default. Atheists are by definition idiots, because they deny something they cannot truly know or not know. Agnostics, on the other hand are reasonable and reasoned thinkers."
It appears you didn't read Dawkins' "The God Delusion." He has a chapter entitled "The Improbability of God." As you rightly point out, atheists (and science generally) cannot *disprove* anything. So Dawkins says that although he cannot disprove fairies either, he puts them and god in the same realm of extremely low probability and technically he's agnostic about both. You believe in God with no evidence other than your self-delusion whereas atheists reserve judgment on anything until there is reason to believe otherwise. You, sir, I propose, are by definition more the idiot.
Rick at 8:16PM on Oct 24th 2007