Subscribe to Christianity Today
Subscribe to Christianity Today
July 6, 2009
Free E-mail Newsletters:
RSS Feeds | Audio | Twitter

Home > 2007 > MarchChristianity Today, March, 2007  |   |  
Atheist Apostle
Sam Harris has little patience for theists of any sort.



ADVERTISEMENT

In the tradition of Voltaire, Friedrich Nietzsche, and Bertrand Russell, Sam Harris, a graduate in philosophy from Stanford University, has been battering at the walls of religious faith, especially Christianity and Islam. His first book, The End of Faith (2004), was a New York Times bestseller. Predictably, he received a torrent of argumentative mail from Christians and promptly decided to write another book, Letter to a Christian Nation (2006). The aim of this second volume, he says, is quite simply "to demolish the moral and intellectual pretensions of Christianity in its most committed forms."

This has been tried before, of course. After Voltaire predicted that Christianity would be extinct within 100 years of his death, his estate became a Bible Society headquarters. It is true that Europe, on the whole, has marginalized religious faith. But in the United States, nearly 90 percent of the population regularly professes belief in God or a higher power. To Harris's evident irritation, 35 percent also believe in the inerrancy of the Bible, 46 percent in a literalist view of the creation in Genesis, and 40 percent in Jesus Christ's return to judge the world within the next 50 years. Harris believes that this mindset constitutes a "moral and intellectual emergency."

Further, Harris believes that religious faith of any kind constitutes total abandonment of the normal rules of evidence. That might not matter much, he says, if the dominant religious view were that of Jainism, an Indian faith that has traditionally stressed nonviolence. But Harris blames mainstream faiths in the West, such as Christianity, for most manmade horrors, from the Inquisition to Hitler's death camps. (Hitler, he asserts, citing a 1922 speech, was a Christian, and the Final Solution was inextricably linked with Christianity. Many historians, of course, would dispute Harris's reading.) In The End of Faith, Harris claims that anti-Semitism "is as integral to church doctrine as the flying buttress is to a Gothic cathedral." Harris portrays Christianity in both books not just as foolish, but as dangerous.

Yet Harris is much rougher on Islam. He cites at great length some of the most bloodthirsty verses from the Qur'an, suggesting that anyone who can read such verses "and still not see a link between Muslim faith and Muslim violence should probably consult a neurologist."

Islam, Harris says, "more than any other religion human beings have devised, has all the makings of a thoroughgoing cult of death." From this position of flat-out hostility to Islam, Harris goes on to excoriate cultural relativists and long-time icons of the liberal intelligentsia such as the late professor Edward Said of Columbia University. Harris skewers Said—and fellow leftist Noam Chomsky as well—for completely failing to grasp the core wickedness of Al Qaeda. Harris also takes on moral relativism, the New Age, and even pacifism.

Undefined Categories

But in bandying about terms such as "ethical," "moral," and even "sacred" without defining them, Harris seems to contradict himself. Use of moral categories implies genuine moral free will. But Harris seems unable to use these values-laden terms when referring to the unfortunates who inhabit America's death rows. The only reasons these people are there, he says, are "bad genes, bad parents, bad ideas, or bad luck." If that's true, why use terms like "unethical" or "immoral" for any human behavior?

While claiming that atheism is an intellectually superior approach to life, Harris denies that it is a philosophy. He glosses over the wicked acts of atheistic regimes such as Stalin's Russia and Mao's China. In fact, Harris dismisses Communism as "little more than a political religion," as if this makes the murders and enslavement of tens of millions of victims under the aegis of scientific atheism more palatable.





E-mail this pageWrite CTPrint this articlePost a comment





  


Subscribe to Christianity Today and get 3 free trial issues. No credit card required.

Please allow 4-6 weeks for delivery. Offer valid in U.S. only.

If you decide you want to keep Christianity Today coming, honor your invoice for just $19.95 and receive nine more issues, a full year in all. If not, simply write "cancel" across the invoice and return it. The three trial issues are yours to keep, regardless.


Click here for international orders2-for-1 Gifts!

[Reader Reviews]
Average User Rating: 

Displaying 1 - 3 of 18 comments.See all comments
sb   Posted: March 09, 2007 4:13 PM
Harris has always cherry-picked his data, and misrepresented his opponents. But where he really fails is in making a positive case for his own position. Harris’ atheism assumes a universe governed by blind, unthinking, uncaring forces, which have created the world and everything in it, including us. We’re glorified (albeit unlikely) collections of chemicals, and nothing more. What does "ethical," "moral," or "sacred” even mean to such a collection? Harris not only cannot explain why such values should matter to any of us, he can’t even explain their existence in a purely naturalistic universe. And yet, he repeatedly appeals to such qualities when making his argument. In the end, the case for his world view depends on the existence of a real, external moral standard which his own presuppositions expressly deny. But still, credit to him for pressing on through the cognitive dissonance; his tenacity is to be admired, even if his intellectual credibility is not.

Sandrine   Posted: March 07, 2007 2:28 AM
It is absolutely wrong to say that Edward Said was a cultural relativist. Some of his disciples in Asia are cultural relativists, but he always insisted that he was opposed to relativism.

dipaolor@yahoo.com   Posted: March 06, 2007 6:15 PM
Generally, I wouldn’t respond to a response to my comment, but DiverCity must have misread my comment. So in an effort to clarify for the sake of clarification, note that my comment had nothing to do with “moderate” or “nominal” Christians. In fact, I don’t know what DriverCity means by such terms of “primary potency” seemingly intended to disparage such belief. My point was simply that the version of Christianity critiqued by Harris and the collective trinity of atheists isn’t that of Christianity as described in the biblical text, but rather a caricature thereof as manifest in the USA. Dobson and company are about as far from biblical Christianity as is the atheism of Harris, making it, at best a caricature of biblical faith, and thus Harris’s et al.’s critique a caricature (which is what his critique is) of a caricature, ie, a version of Christianity which bears little resemblance to that describe in the NT text. Clarifying further would be casting peals . .

sponsors 








[Browse More Christianity Today]

Search





















Search by Name
Or use Advanced Search to search by program, region, cost, affiliation, enrollment, more!

Search by:





Books & Culture
Christianity Today
Church Law & Tax Report
Church Finance Today
Church Office Today
Leadership Journal
Men of Integrity
Outcomes
Today's Christian Woman
Your Church
ChristianityTodayLibrary.com
PreachingToday.com