On Tuesday, June 5, my buddy Hugh Hewitt will be hosting a debate between philosopher John Mark Reynolds and journalist Christopher Hitchens on the existence of God and the impact of religious belief on daily life. It will be on Hugh's national radio program, airing from 6:00 to 9:00PM, Eastern time.
Hugh has asked me and other "Godbloggers" to suggest propositions for this debate. So, here are a few he might want to consider:
1. The research compiled and presented by physician and medical researcher Larry Dossey, Jr. has demonstrated a strong connection between prayer and higher success rates for medical treatments. Proposition: Prayer is a legitimate tool of medical treatment.
2. Recent works by several historians have documented the positive impact Christian faith has had on the development of Western ethics and socieities. Proposition: In spite of horrible things done "in the Name of Christ," Christianity has had an overwhelmingly positive effect on its adherents and on the societies it has touched.
3. Proposition: It requires greater blind faith to believe that the universe has just happened into existence than to believe that an intelligent being created it.
4. Proposition: Jesus Christ is God-in-the-flesh and God's ultimate self-disclosure.
5. Proposition: Grace is the unique concept which indicates that Judea-Christian teaching about God is either true or false.
I may have more. But those seem like good ones with which to start.
3 comments:
Mark,
Thanks for the notice. Hitchens can be compelling and his language skills are amazing. I'll be interested in reading about the debate. Your propositions are interesting.
#1 is excellent because it describes objective benefits of faith.
#2 is part of what I imagine Hitchens's book contests. My own sense is that your proposition is accurate, but difficult to prove.
#3 seems rather subjective in measuring quantity of faith. The faith required to believe in the lack of origin of God might also need to be included, not just His creations.
#4 and #5 cannot be argued outside of assuming the validity of Scripture and church doctrine (I think).
Hitchens arguments have been moral in nature, so the origins and basis for morality seems significant, as well as the relative characteristics of believing that morality is subjective (no God) versus objective (God).
Here's a few more propositions:
6. It is an act of faith to believe there is no God.
7. Any stated moral doctrine can be perverted through action and extension.
8. Moral doctrine can be viewed as religion.
9. If religion did not exist it would be invented.
10. The historical prevalence of religion is evidence of its utility.
11. A rational God would agree with Hitchens. :)
Ultimately, I'm just curious what is the absence of religion, or the ideal that Hitchens is pursuing?
Here's some recent debates and critiques of Hitchens's book which I found somewhat interesting:
"Is Christianity Good for the World?" -- Christopher Hitchens and Douglas Wilson debate.
Hitchens, Sharpton and Faith
Peter Hitchens's critique of his brother's new book.
Most of these found through HotAir: NYT recap: Hitchens versus Sharpton on the existence of God; Update: Hitch versus Douglas Wilson at Christianity Today
Kevin
What I meant by "Ultimately, I'm just curious..." is, what is the ideal morality that Hitchens is pursuing, and why couldn't that be a religion?
Hi Mark,
What did you think about the debate?
Post a Comment