Tag Archives: Christianity

News

Does New York Times executive editor Bill Keller understand Christianity?

3 Comments

Hey look! The executive editor of the New York Times, the most liberal “newspaper” in the country is comparing conservative Christian beliefs to belief in space aliens!

Excerpt:

If a candidate for president said he believed that space aliens dwell among us, would that affect your willingness to vote for him? Personally, I might not disqualify him out of hand; one out of three Americans believe we have had Visitors and, hey, who knows? But I would certainly want to ask a few questions. Like, where does he get his information? Does he talk to the aliens? Do they have an economic plan?

Yet when it comes to the religious beliefs of our would-be presidents, we are a little squeamish about probing too aggressively.

[…]Rick Perry and Michele Bachmann are both affiliated with fervid subsets of evangelical Christianity — and Rick Santorum comes out of the most conservative wing of Catholicism — which has raised concerns about their respect for the separation of church and state, not to mention the separation of fact and fiction.

Got that? If you’re a conservative Christian, then Bill Keller thinks that your view should raise concerns about whether you are able to separate fact and fiction – like the people who believe in space aliens.

Well – I am going to help Bill Keller with this problem. In fact, I’ll address the rest of this post to him.

Bill Keller – I know that in New York, you might never have to face questioning by anyone who disagrees with you. I understand that. But you really need to be more careful about hearing both sides of debates before you start talking about the issues in public. I can help you, Bill. I can point you to the debates where you will hear both sides. Many people get their impressions of Christianity from movies like “Jesus Camp”, “Footloose” and “Inherit the Wind”, and we don’t want you to be one of those people.

Below are some actual academic debates featuring an actual Christian scholar debating on topics like whether God exists, whether Jesus rose from the dead, and whether atheism is an adequate foundation for morality. You can watch those to find out what Christians really believe and why.

Formal academic debates for New York Times executive editors

William Lane Craig vs Christopher Hitchens on the existence of God:

William Lane Craig vs Bart Ehrman on the resurrection of Jesus:

William Lane Craig vs Sam Harris on morality:

And here are a couple of extra ones on social issues: (yes, we’ve thought about those issues, too)

You recognize those prominent atheists, don’t you Bill? Hitchens, Harris, Ehrman? That’s right – those are the people you’ve read about in Time magazine and in Newsweek! But you don’t know who Willliam Lane Craig is, do you? Well you won’t read about him in popular magazines, Bill. Yes, he’s a scholar. You have to read about him in academic presses, like Oxford University Press, where he is published. Yes, Bill – evangelical Christians even publish on social issues in prestigious academic presses, like Cambridge University Press, too. No, I know you don’t read academic books right now. We’ll get there, Bill. Baby steps. Baby steps.

Well, now. Wouldn’t you like to watch those debates and learn how the ideas of prominent atheists ideas hold up under questioning? You wouldn’t? Oh, that’s just being intolerant and close-minded, Bill. Just watch them anyway. No, your side doesn’t win. No, the outcomes are not even close. But that’s good Bill – that’s how people form accurate views – by listening to both sides, not just one side. That’s how you gain knowledge, Bill. It’s good for you to know what you are talking about, instead of just forming your entire worldview based on mockery and prejudice, and isolated from all logical analysis and empirical validation.

And when you’re done with the debates, we’ll find you some nice books on these topics featuring evangelical Christians from top academic presses, like Oxford University Press, Cambridge University Press, and so on. Just let me know when you’re ready, Bill.

Further study

To my regular readers: I’ve written before about what scientists know about bias in the mainstream media.

Commentary

Is evolution compatible with Christianity?

11 Comments

Denyse O’Leary found this article at the Washington Post about a Christian woman who discovered Darwinian evolution through the works of Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne. She found it to be incompatible with Christianity. (H/T Uncommon Descent)

Excerpt:

But of course evolution poses a problem for Christianity. That’s not to say it poses a problem for all Christians, since many Christians happily accept evolution: they see Genesis 1 as merely a metaphor, and declare that if God chose to create us using evolution, that’s fine by them. I used to be this kind of Christian myself; but I must confess that my blitheness was only possible because I had only the vaguest possible idea of how evolution works and certainly didn’t know enough about it to realize that unguided-ness is central to it.

While I welcome anyone who recognizes that the evidence for evolution is such that it cannot sensibly be denied, to attempt to co-opt evolution as part of a divine plan simply does not work, and suggests a highly superficial understanding of the subject.

And:

Evolution poses a further threat to Christianity, though, a threat that goes to the very heart of Christian teaching. … Evolution could not have produced a single mother and father of all future humans, so there was no Adam and no Eve. No Adam and Eve: no fall. No fall: no need for redemption. No need for redemption: no need for a redeemer. No need for a redeemer: no need for the crucifixion or the resurrection, and no need to believe in that redeemer in order to gain eternal life. And not the slightest reason to believe in eternal life in the first place.

That’s the understanding of evolution that she got from Richard Dawkins and Jerry Coyne.

Denyse O’Leary mentions that there is a group of “Christian” Darwinists who have no problem at all with the scientific claims made by atheistic Darwinists. They oppose intelligent design – the idea that science can detect effects in nature, like protein sequences, that are best explained as the result of intelligent causes. When it comes to what the science can show, atheists and “theistic evolutionists” agree: God didn’t do anything. So why are these “theistic evolutionists” pushing a theory that leads people to become atheists, when properly understood?

News

Is Christianity about doing nice things or upholding God’s reputation?

8 Comments

This comment seemed to get a lot of response on Facebook. It’s short, so I am posting it to see if anyone has any opinions about it.

I have been thinking about how people can be raised as Christians and yet become non-Christians. I am beginning to think that the problem is twofold. Early-raised Christians may get the idea from the typical Christian life that Christianity is like what goes on in church. Happiness, singing, families and games, and mostly well-off people dressed in their Sunday best. When they see the suffering and poverty in the real world, they get annoyed with God for not making people happy and healthy and wealthy, and they then turn to government to meet those needs and create happiness and freedom from poverty here on Earth.

I think we need to tell people early on that Christianity is about knowing God and suffering like Jesus suffered. They have to get used to the idea that other people in other religions are not “bad” but they are WRONG and they aren’t doing their homework. (My Hindu friends, for example, take it as a point of pride that they don’t update their religious beliefs for facts, but just believe what is their national and family religion – it’s about nationalism and culture, not truth) And they have to get the idea that Jesus is not championing the elimination of suffering through wealth redistribution, but private charity.

I think this idea that Christianity is about making people feel good and getting along and being liked is pernicious. A relationship with God doesn’t mean projecting YOUR needs onto him, and having a fit if he has different goals and priorities. A relationship with God means caring about what he wants, and suffering with him when things happen that grieve him. I do believe God is sovereign and allows these things to happen.

A previous post from last week had my preliminary thoughts on this, and my friends and I are talking it over. Mariangela has a lot to say about this topic for sure, if she wants to comment.

But not all the news is bad… I was in church on Sunday and I was thinking about this more. Our sermon had a mix of good works and defending God’s existence and character, but it was more the latter than the former. A solid focus on defending God’s reputation and moral standards, and then doing good was mentioned as well at the very end. But this is an exceptional church I was at. They have apologetics book studies featuring Lee Strobel books, and they have hosted Greg Koukl as a speaker. I think in churches where they DON’T have that focus, people will just stop going since they can be good and do nice things without having to go to church.

What do you think?

Friend me on Facebook here. Follow me on Twitter here.