Over the last several months, Andrew Sullivan (a prominent political blogger who is both gay and Catholic) has been engaged in a formal blog debate with outspoken atheist Sam Harris about faith—specifically, about whether or not religious faith is more or less rational than the atheist worldview. That debate has now come to an end; you can read the full exchange at Beliefnet. If you don’t have time to read through the entire debate, at least take a look at the final few exchanges and especially at the closing statements of Harris and Sullivan.
I suspect that most of you, like me, have a lot of theological differences with Sullivan, but I don’t want to focus exclusively on that. I’m curious what you think about the approach each debater took in the exchange, and if you think one of them comes across more effectively than the other. A few things to ponder as you read through the (lengthy) debate:
- Is Christianity “reasonable” in a way that can be expressed logically, in a debate like this? Or is something as personal as a relationship with Jesus Christ an experience that just can’t be expressed in the logical and scientific terms that atheists like Harris demand? At times, each participant expresses a bit of frustration at the feeling that they’re just talking past each other. Is that inevitable in a debate like this?
- Put yourself in Sullivan’s position. How would you have responded to Harris’ opening salvo? (And if you’re not a Christian, how would you have responded to Sullivan’s opening shot?)
- Sullivan’s theology can be characterized as pretty liberal. Does that impact, positively or negatively, his ability to respond to atheist challenges? Would your theological perspective dictate a different type of argument to use in a debate with an atheist, or does Sullivan hit all the important points?
- Do Sullivan’s frequent references to the value of doubt, mystery, and humility in one’s faith strike a chord with you at all? Or are they a bit of a “cop-out,” as Harris seems to suggest?
- Do you see value in debates like this, which tend to end on some variation of “well, I guess we’ll just have to agree to disagree”?
It’s not everyday that we see such a detailed exchange between a believer and a non-believer; so I think debates like this are well worth paying attention to even if we don’t feel comfortable with the believer’s theology. Having read the debate, what do you think?
Loading ...
May 3, 2007 at 16:37
Why does he have to be gay? I’ll read the debate simply because of it’s importance. But now I have to bear in mind that the Christian veiwpoint argued for in this debate is by a non-Christian himself. That is if he is happily gay, and does not attempt change. For surely all Christians know that homosexuals will have their part in the lake of fire. But if this guy is plauged by homosexuality as a temptation of the spirit rather then a freely made choice, then I can understand.
May 6, 2007 at 15:14
Micah said: But now I have to bear in mind that the Christian veiwpoint argued for in this debate is by a non-Christian himself. That is if he is happily gay, and does not attempt change. For surely all Christians know that homosexuals will have their part in the lake of fire. But if this guy is plauged by homosexuality as a temptation of the spirit rather then a freely made choice, then I can understand.
I wonder if a person who claims to be a Christian but “happily” exceeds the posted speed limit, or “happily” eats to much desert, or “happily” watches a TV show that Micah considers unchristian, will likewise have their part in the lake of fire?
For what it’s worth, I consider every person who honestly believes him or her self to be a Christian, is a Christian, regardless of the obvious “sin”.
It is comments like this one from Micah that makes atheists like myself say, thanks…but no thanks.
May 7, 2007 at 12:01
After reading much of the blog, I came to realize that Sullivan was not the right man to debate Harris. As an intellectual Christian, I have read many books by Apologists that clearly answer and illustrate Christianity much better than Sullivan does. In fact, it bothered me that Sullivan included this statement “Is the Bible uniquely the word of God? Yes—...I don’t believe in its inerrancy or its literal truth.” This “inerrancy” and “literal truth” is a central Christian belief. It becomes extremely difficult to build a case for Christianity when you don’t believe in the inerrancy of the Scriptures. Sullivan’s “liberal Christianity” definately hurt not only his debate with Harris, but also his Christian witness. Harris has a much more solid foundation of his faith in Athiesm that Sullivan does for Christianity. Let Harris debate the likes of Ravi Zacharias, Lee Strobel, or Hank Hanegraaff and this will be an entirely different (and more interesting) debate. These debates are extremely rewarding and educational, however they do need to be more evenly matched.
May 7, 2007 at 13:30
This “inerrancy” and “literal truth” is a central Christian belief. But Ryan, isn’t biblical inerrancy only central to you particular view of Christian belief?
Question form an atheist: Who gets to decide what is a necessary belief with regard to Christianity? I would think that is an important question because it seems there are many who point an accusing finger at those who are not “true Christians”, and yes, I am sure there are those who will point that finger at you, Ryan, because your beliefs do not match their particular view of what a Christian must believe…agree?
May 8, 2007 at 10:23
hi bob, my name is mart. I am a Christian, and I agree with you with regards to Christian division. It is a very unfortunate fact that many Christians do not share the same doctrinal interpretation. But I also believe in a perfect, wise, kind, loving and just God. It would be very hard to see Him if your eyes are fixed on flawed men. I think you are a very intelligent man, and If you are genuinely interested in finding the “truth,” I challenge you to let go of all your biases and approach “my” religion with a “clean slate.” Everything about the Bible is consistent and checkable. Try reading it . God is real and He is isn’t that far from each of us. And to answer your question, only God decides on what is necessary and true. He is the only judge, not ryan or micah.
May 9, 2007 at 09:36
Hi Bob, thanks for the reply. I didn’t mean to condemn or accuse anyone, and I apologize if I came across that way. If someone says they believe in Jesus, I’ll accept them as a Christian regardless of their doctrinal differences.
Your question is a good one, and my answer is obviously a Christian one (and echoes Marts answer): God decides which is a necessary Christian belief. I know how that must sound to an Atheist, but that ties in with my feeling that the Bible must be inerrant or Christianity falls apart. If the Bible is in error, then each person can pick and choose what is important to them while disregarding the rest as wrong. That is how cults begin. Of course, the inerrancy of the Scripture is a debate for those with much more time and scholastic ability than I have, but there are some great websites to look at about it. If you’re interested, check out http://www.carm.org, http://www.equip.org, http://www.leestrobel.com, or http://www.str.org and post your thoughts. It’d be great to hear what you thought of those sites. I think you’ll find some very interesting information there.
Anyway, that’s my answer. And yes, many probably can or do point their finger at me, but without SOME concrete doctrine (like the deity of Christ & his life, death, and resurrection), then what defines us as Christian (or Athiest – your doctrine is that of no God, right)? Good talk! I look forward to your next post.
May 9, 2007 at 13:53
Hi Ryan,
I didn’t mean to condemn or accuse anyone, and I apologize if I came across that way.
Not at all.
If someone says they believe in Jesus, I’ll accept them as a Christian regardless of their doctrinal differences.
But you said “This “inerrancy” and “literal truth” is a central Christian belief.” Perhaps I am misunderstanding you. Can someone believe in Jesus but not believe biblical inerrancy or biblical literal truth and still be a Christian?
God decides which is a necessary Christian belief.
Yes, well, since there are hundreds of Christian sects (denominations) who all differ to a degree on doctrine, some doctrines that can be considered “central” to the faith, and since we can’t ask God which denomination has the correct belief, we are left to use the bible to try to figure it all out. That obviously doesn’t help because it is because of the bible that there are so many denominations. Agree?
If you’re interested…www.carm.org, http://www.equip.org, http://www.leestrobel.com, or http://www.str.org…It’d be great to hear what you thought of those sites.
I don’t want to take up a lot of time and room posting here. Who knows, I could spend an hour typing only to find that my post is considered unacceptable, though the moderators have been gracious enough to allow me to share my thoughts, and for that I am appreciative. I am familiar with those sites. I listened to Hanegraaff for several years before our local station discontinued his program. But you do realize, don’t you, that there are numerous non Christian sites where a plethora of information is available that disagrees with the information on the sites you listed. Have you ever done any reading in any of those sites?
For what it’s worth, I was a bible believer for 25 years. I ceased believing 7 years ago.
I don’t believe there is any evidence for the existence of any gods, but I am open to the possibility. I just need some convincing historical and scientific evidence before I offer my assent.
I call myself an atheist, though I am not sure that accurately describes my affliction
May 9, 2007 at 18:24
Hi Bob, great reply. I’m curious, what made you cease believing if you don’t mind me asking? Just wondering. Ok, here comes my best attempt at a short response to your questions.
Can someone believe in Jesus but not believe biblical inerrancy or biblical literal truth and still be a Christian? Absolutely, and many people do. But I still hold to my assertion that without Biblical inerrancy it becomes extremely difficult to back up your beliefs. You run the risk of becoming confused as to which scriptures to believe and which ones you believe are in error. Eventually, you don’t have a leg to stand on. If you have that kind of faith to believe in Jesus without believing in perfect Scripture, then good on ya, but that’s more faith then I’m willing to have (I’m sure you’ll agree).
I do agree with you that the Bible is one reason for so many different denominations; however, as long as it is a Christian denomination I do not believe them to be in danger of not being saved. If Jesus Christ is the focus, everything else are just details and worship styles (obviously there’s a little more to it, but not enough room here to get into all that).
I’m glad you are familiar with those websites, and yes, I am familiar with the non-Christian sites as well. Early on in my Christian faith I was challenged by an Agnostic friend to defend my faith. He accused me of only being a Christian because of my parents (just like being a Republican or Democrat). He was right, and so I dumped everything I believed. Trashed it all. But throughout college I became more convinced of a Creator because of my science classes (sounds wierd, doesn’t it?). The physicists and biologists who were Christian had way better arguments during their seminars than their non-Christian counterparts (Lee Strobel has similar seminars on his site). That made me curious, I now believed in a God, and I knew that each religion is mutually exclusive, so if God had one that was right you would think He would let us know. I launched into fervent research sessions to see if I could find which religion was true. I studied everything I could find on all major religions (including Athiesm and Agnosticism), and to make an extremely long story short, feel convinced that it takes less faith to believe Christianity to be true than anything else. It became more of a study of the authors than the info though, because we live in a world where 83% of statistics are made up on the spot. I think it all boils down to which author you believe the most.
Anyway, I’d better sign off for now before I write a novel.
May 10, 2007 at 15:02
Hi bob, marts here. I have done some reading on most of those sites and books on atheism as well. I used to be an agnostic too. I assure you there is historical evidence for the bible and Christ. I also recommend Lee Strobel’s book, “The Case for Christ.” Regarding other denominations, I agree with ryan, other Christian churches use the same bible, and are usually Christ-centered, and it’s the culture that varies within these churches. Only three other major denominations have their own bible: the Catholic bible, Jehovah’s Witnesses’ New World translation, and The Mormon’s “Book of Mormon”. As for scientific evidence, it is virtually impossible to physically prove God’s existence by measuring Him. I’m sure you’ve read it in the Bible that He is Spirit. We do not have the necessary equipment to measure him. He entered our world, though, in human form. Those who had a personal encounter with him believed him, the rest rejected him, spat on his face and nailed him on a piece of wood. Like what ryan mentioned earlier, people with enough time and scholastic ability, could probably come up with philosophical and scientific evidence for God’s hand in the universe. But none of it would matter unless you personally decide to receive and experience him yourself. One of Jesus’ claims is that He is still alive today and that you could invite him into your life. He did not just come here to prove he exists, he came here to bring the dead people of a dying world back to life. I live in the Philippines. It is officially Asia’s most corrupt nation. People are murdered here for very shallow reasons everyday, rarely for religious reasons, mostly for survival, power, & comfort. My father was imprisoned a couple of months ago for political reasons. Many people here are like broken-off twigs who have become convinced that they are independent from the tree from which they have fallen from. This is a very dark and dead place. But in the middle of all this chaos it is also here that I have witnessed irrational but awesome faith, and how God moves in the lives of people. I believe light fulfills its destiny in the darkest places. I also believe that God uses great men with great minds, such as yourself and ryan, and places in them a burden for truth. I hope you find it, bob. God bless you both!