I debated atheist Michael Shermer, editor of Skeptic magazine, yesterday on the Michael Medved radio show. It was a two hour debate, and conducted at a high level that is not characteristic of radio programs. The main focus of the debate was my bestselling book What's So Great About Christianity, and in the course of the discusson we covered a lot of topics from the fine-tuned universe to why humans evolved morality to whether Adam and Eve were real people.
Shermer, always ready with his ream of data, uncorked some fascinating statistics about how Christians are more prone to social pathologies than non-Christians. For example, the more-religious United States has higher crime rates than the less-religious Europe. In America, evangelical Christians are apparently more likely to be uneducated and to have higher violent crime rates than non-Christians. Shermer even cited a study showing that secular doctors were more likely to do voluntary work than Christian doctors. Shermer went on and on about all this, and I was waiting for him to reveal that Christians have a greater tendency to bestiality than secular folks, but to my surprise Shermer had no data on this subject.
Actually U.S. crime rates today are not substantially higher than those of Europe. That's because there has been a marked decline in violent crime in America. But even the old statistics prove nothing, because the U.S. is an ethnically diverse society, immigrant societies always have higher crime rates, and European countries typically don't have the black-and-white problem that is peculiar to America. Yes, evangelical Christians in America may be poorer and less educated than non-Christians, but that may be because evangelical Christians are more concentrated in the South. One can hardly conclude that evangelical Christianity makes you poor and dumb. Finally C.S. Lewis made the point that a religion like Christianity which advertises itself as a remedy for human sin and brokenness is bound to attract more people who find themselves to be sinful and broken. Christianity attracts sinners for the same reason that doctors attract patients: one can hardly hang out at the doctor's office and then condemn the service because predominantly messed-up people keep showing up day after day.
Shermer and I will be debating December 5 at George Washington University and the public is invited. (I will post the venue and time on this blog.) We will also be debating December 9 at 2 pm at Cal Tech in Pasadena, California. Tickets are available for this event at a nominal price and you can find the details at skeptic.com. Seating is limited so book early.
Reader Comments ( Page 16 of 16)
226. That guy Shermer is a fool. Go get him, Dinesh! The debate should be a piece of cake for you.
NancyY at 6:42PM on Nov 10th 2007
227. I haven't written for some time but I've continued to read some of the posts. Brian, you are still too angry to be posting and Will, you may read every single book ever written by man, you will gain information but not any wisdom as you have proven over and over again. Brian, you criticize typing errors on other people's posts while in your own posts you not only type incorrectly but have grammar errors and spelling mistakes throughout. I won't even get into the "logic" aspect. Some posts are repeats and STILL lack logic. As far as being poor and uneducated, I would love for you to attend a single service at my church. There is a fleet of the latest and most expensive Mercedes on the market, Maybachs and a large number of the members own new million dollar homes they built themselves. The problem in America is that there is way too much stereotyping and too many people want to profit from "christianity". Dinesh is one of these people. I don't agree with him and I choose not to spend too much of my precious time posting here. Christianity is NOT what most people know it to be. Church leaders prey on the gullible and weak-minded and the poor and hopeless to fill their pews and keep their salaries coming. I attended a church where the leader was an adulterer yet even when the proof came out, he still insisted that how could someone like him who preaches against things like that commit the act himself and the congregation believed him like zombies. Most of you posting on here know what christianity is and the only problem I see is that there is lack of it in the people who choose to label themselves as such. People "convert" to christianity for gains, whether it's food or clothing or just knowing that if they are ever in need the church will come through for them. That does not a christian make. Ther are many wolves dressed in sheep's clothing and the Bible states this quite clearly. To all of you who spew out Bible verses, focus more on trying to understand what you're saying and less on using them for attacks.There is a passage in the New Testament that describes clearly all the categories of people who will not make it to heaven if they live that lifestyle - greed is among those sins. Dinesh advertises his book for love of money. Jesus never wrote a book that was on the New York Times best-seller list for a long time but HE did inspire a BOOK that is more popular than anything anyone at any time ever wrote. To Dinesh - your article on Hitler was pathetic. Your version of christianity is that for your own gain - political correctness to attract the most buyers. You and people like you are what makes these bloggers refuse such a christianity and one day you will have to answer for your actions. Hitler was of Jewish descent and your version of events was a fabrication of your own mind.
dlaz at 9:57PM on Nov 10th 2007
228. Exactly what is meant by the "Black and White" Problem? I guess that means America has only two ethnic groups. I would also guess, considering the source, that this means that Blacks are the problem and certainly not whites. This is exactly the type of attitude that makes people wonder if there are any real Christians in America. I am an African American Male and I have never been incarcerated. I have two post-graduate degrees and I am a working professional. I live in an ethnically diverse neighborhood and I own my home. I am not a problem to anyone. I am also a Christian who is tired of the politicizing of my religion. Why do we still stereotype everyone. When I meet a white person I don't see the descendants of slave owners or the perpetrators of genocide on entire cultures of Native Americans, or the invaders and conquerers of every culture that they came into contact with as they "discovered" new lands.I do not care what statistics say about Christianity or about any group. I value people on an individual basis. If everyone would do that, we would live in a better world.
Paul Hansen at 7:37AM on Nov 11th 2007
229. DARWINISM and ATHEISM: UNSCIENTIFIC & MYTHICAL
http://evolutionfacts.blogspot.com
prffsrx at 2:19PM on Nov 11th 2007
230. Denial of evolution = acceptance of flat-earth.
Acceptance of god = acceptance of Santa Claus.
Knight_of_BAAWA at 2:28PM on Nov 11th 2007
231. Belief in evolution is completely unrelated to the belief in flat-earth. Same with God and Santa Claus.
Or does he thnk the two topics are "orthogonal".
Just another example of a bigot who has nothing intelligent to add, yet wants to slam someone else.
Of course, he still thinks "poly" = 1, 2, 3, ...
What an idiot.
ray at 12:45PM on Nov 12th 2007
232. Belief in god is the same as belief in a flat earth. There's no evidence for either, and only idiots believe it.
pathological liar ray is just another example of a bigot who has nothing intelligent to add, yet wants to slam someone else.
The idiot still thinks that you can't talk about just one god of a polytheistic pantheon! How stupid can you get?
Knight_of_BAAWA at 12:31AM on Nov 13th 2007
233. You are generally right about it intllectually easy to become christian. Many just ask you to profess your belief in Jesus and you are a member. However, to become Catholic one must study for 9 months the Bible, the teachings, tradition, and history. Then when properly educated you are initiaed into the Church. This can be seen in the Catholic Church's deep tradition of education in all fields of science, philosophy, and the arts. Another example inludes the large number of schools and hospitals the Church runs.
Larry at 9:44AM on Nov 13th 2007
234. Knight wrote (232) : “Belief in god is the same as belief in a flat earth. There's no evidence for either, and only idiots believe it.”
So, if you can claim that two items share one characteristic, then, you can logically claim that the two items are the SAME? That is Logic 101 at a 3rd grade level. My dog has more intelligence than that!
Cows have 4 legs. So do pigs, so I guess Knight believes that cows and pigs are the same thing???
Knight also wrote: “The idiot still thinks that you can't talk about just one god of a polytheistic pantheon! How stupid can you get?”
His original statement was “monotheism is a subset of polytheism.” So now he is claiming that monotheism = talking about just one god of a polytheistic pantheon?
This clown is truly an idiot or a liar!
Knight - you continue to be an embarrassment to your feloow atheists.
The Agnostics disowned you a long time ago!
ray at 1:37AM on Nov 15th 2007
235. One of the great things about debates is that they produce interesting results. Obviously the fact that statistics show that on some some statistics versus atheists, Christians fare worse should be of concern. It also shows a great limitations of statistics collated from general data and surveys.
Our love of statistics is based upon the excellent method of scientific experiment. I create a hypothesis and test that hypothesis through experiment. I measure these experiments with statistics. However, one just can't do the reverse, i.e. have statistics and derive what the experiment was and the hypothesis. There is a reason why social science is in the liberal arts departments and not in the science department: many scientists don't consider social scientists as true scientists.
The only useful way of comparing atheists and Christians would be to compare a sample set of comparable individuals (adjusted for age, income, ethnicity and so forth). Then introduce them with a form of Christianity and Atheism and measure the results of the behavior over a period of time.
However, even this is somewhat limited because there are different forms of both Christianity and Atheism. Which ones could be measured. Also what do you do about other religious faiths (Islam, Hinduism and so forth)? For instance of one is Islamic crime statistics are not only influenced by religious belief but also sharia law which is enforced in Islamic countries and sometime unofficially enforced among Islamic communities in non-Islamic countries.
Also how do measure if someone is atheist or Christian? By how they declare is what pollsters often use but many people declare themselves based upon how they were raised. If I was raised atheist but came to those conclusions simply because my parents were atheists (and may have never taught me a thing about atheism) and never questioned those beliefs am I a good candidate to saying how atheist? You can change the terms from atheist to Christian and you can also see the problems.
The best way (in a social science way) to see if Christianity (or Atheism) for that fact does produce social problems would be to undertake a very large sample of people would have converted from one theology to the other. The sample would have to be adjusted to reflect for income, age and racial backgrounds. Then you should interview them after a sufficiently long period of time and then discard those whom have have had not stayed in the same denomination for a sufficiently long period of time (for Christian) or different atheistic philosophy (secular humanists, Marxists, etc). The reason for dropping those who repeatedly switch philosophies is sometimes a lack of theistic conviction is expressed by a travel mentality (if I join this denomination or adopt this philosophy I will find truth).
What I am trying to say is that you are trying to measure those people who are seeking for truth (and think they have found it) and to see for those people, which philosophical or theistic explanation for truth from those people who are just looking for a philosophical or theistic explanation that will justify their own actions. This is very hard to find because almost everyone says they are trying to find truth but few often do.
I have just thought of another way you could examine the behavioral differences between athesists and Christians. If you could find atheistic and Christian communities in a non-Christian country that tolerates Christian and atheistic belief (that both controls the media privately and governmentally) that might be a credible way of measuring the morality of the two populations. Of course you would have to adjust the sample for education, age, income, etc but you would generally eliminate the lack of belief because the cultural pressure on both atheists and Christians would be to convert to the dominate religion of the culture would be enormous.
I'm not saying that any of the alternative social scientists methods I have proposed will find a true answer because in some ways there are great limitations on social scientists versus physical scientists (I can't treat people in the same way I can treat animals or objects) but they are more credible than just quoting statistics which just seem to indicated that wealthy, intellectual people are attracted to belief systems that offer them greater options for their leisure time than do poor people.
David Hart at 4:19PM on Nov 21st 2007