Letter to a Christian Nation
Given the timeframe, being post-9/11 and during the second term of the George W. Bush administration, many of the arguments are directed at the hot-button issues of that period in history when compassionate conservatism was in heavy practice.
Contents |
[edit] Rhetoric
In the beginning, Harris employs the use of binary logic to set up his assertions: for example, either the Bible is true, or it isn't; either Jesus is the savior of mankind or he isn't; either Christianity is the one true path to God or it isn't. While this set-up approaches false dilemma, it is, in fact, the very same argument that theologians would use, save that theologians don't recognize the possibilities of "isn't" in either case. In his preface as well as his first paragraphs, he explains that his argument is not directed towards the religious liberal or even the religious moderate, but the religious conservative that would not be tolerant of such atheistic views. More to the point—religious liberals/moderates offer up the possibilities of a spectrum of belief systems, whereas atheism and fundamentalism are wholy exclusive of each other. Harris does not want a spectrum; he wants the debate to be over, with a clear winner and loser.
Additionally, Harris admits that should he be wrong, then it would be the worst possible outcome of his life's work—but given the weakness of the argument for Christianity, he finds this impossible.
Harris uses Bible quotes to show the target Christian the insanity or inanity of their beliefs, quoting passages that he assumes the average Christian has probably not read to show that their morality is not based in the Scriptures—for if it were, they would be killing friends and family members for blasphemy and apostasy, delighting in the Spanish Inquisition and trading in slaves, including one's own daughters.
He makes comparisons to other religions, such as Islam and Jainism whom both he and the fundamentalist Christian would ridicule, to show that Christianity is equally deserving of the aforementioned ridicule—but not before noting that some religions are inherently less violent than others; e.g., if Jainism is inherently less violent and judgemental than Christianity, then how can the Bible be the definitive guide to ethical conduct?
He blames fundamental Christianity for a lack of a consistent life ethic, which not only prevents medical breakthroughs (particularly in regards to stem cell research and HPV vaccines) but also promotes death in undeveloped nations as well as infringing upon the rights of pregnant mothers everywhere.
[edit] Unfortunately
Even though his letter is written to fundamentalist Christians, very few fundamentalist Christians are likely to read it, or feel their worldview challenged by it if they did.
[edit] See also
[edit] External Links
- Letter to a Christian Nation on Google Books