Sam Harris, despite all his claims of rationality and reason, is actually rather ignorant when it comes to Christian belief. Sadly, it is rather obvious that he is more interested in attacking the caricature that he himself has constructed, than he is at getting at the actual truth about what Christianity is and what it claims.
Case in point: Harris claims that at its core, Christianity (and all religion for that matter) is violent and oppressive, ready to kill anyone who doesn’t believe in exactly the same way. Such a characterization is woefully over-simplistic. While there have been times in Church history where violent oppression in the name of Christ has certainly happened, to claim that the sole reason for such violence was that certain people “believed” certain facts that others disagreed with is misleading at best. The fact is there were always a host of other factors in play, primarily that of political ambitions and concerns.
Ever since Constantine became the first Christian emperor, there has been a blending and confusion between the Church and State. Consequently, political motives almost always were a driving force in such oppression. In some instances the supposed “oppression” really wasn’t oppression. When Theodosius outlawed paganism and ordered that pagan temples be closed, it was a political pronouncement to be sure—but the fact was he never really enforced it. He still had pagans in his government and he still allowed temples to be open because he wanted to keep the peace and, practically speaking, keep collecting taxes.
In other instances, “belief” was used as the justification for what was purely a political decision. For example, the king of France viewed the Templars as a potential political threat, so what did he do? He accused them of heresy. Hence, “faith” was used to justify violent political decisions.
Deuteronomy 13:7-11—Kill…the Heretics?
Needless to say, Harris not only does not see it this way. In fact, when he tries to talk about heresy, he doesn’t even get that right either. Early on in his book, Harris makes a valid point that many Christians and Jews do not, in fact, read the Bible in its entirety. Consequently, Harris claims, they “have no idea just how vigorously the God of Abraham wants heresy expunged” (18). He alludes to Deuteronomy 13:7-11 to prove this point: this is the passage in which God tells the Israelites to kill anyone in Canaan if they try to entice them to go after other gods.
The problem with his objection is that he apparently does not even know what the proper definition of “heresy” is. You are a heretic if you claim to be of a certain religious faith like Christianity, but then teach and practice things that run in direct contradiction to the core tenants of that faith. You are not a heretic if you are a part of a different religious faith. Hindus are not “Christian heretics”—they are Hindus. Canaanites were not Israelite heretics—they were Canaanites.
Consequently, when one reads Deuteronomy 13:7-11 one finds that it has nothing to do with heresy. It has to do with how to deal with the immoral, depraved, and wicked religious practices of the Canaanites. Yes, YHWH commands the Hebrews to kill any Canaanite people who entice them to turn away from YHWH and follow other gods. But don’t kid yourself—this wouldn’t have been a matter of going across the street and attending a different church. This would have entailed engaging in things like idol worship, human sacrifice, and cult prostitution, among other practices.
One can object to the seeming brutal command God gives the Hebrews…it certainly does sound shocking to modern readers. But let’s put it in truly modern terms to see the rationale of Deuteronomy 13:7-11. Given the rise of ISIS, and given the fact that they brutally rape women victims, sell them into sex slavery, burn enemies alive, etc., what should the United States do if they find American citizens actually siding with ISIS and actively recruiting disaffected youth to join ISIS? If you think our government should arrest such people, put them on trial for treason, and possibly execute them if they have been involved in any actual terrorist acts, then congratulations, your proposed solution is actually very much in line with Deuteronomy 13:7-11. The cultural situations are somewhat different, but the underlying principle is the same.
Harris isn’t too Good at Comparative Religions
Another questionable statement Harris makes is when he compares Christianity to other ancient religions. He claims that it is ignorant and foolish to believe that things like the virgin birth and the resurrection actually happened, because there are similar stories in ancient myths. What he fails at doing is understanding the difference between historical claims and mythological literature. Now, it is understandable if someone has initial trouble with the Christian claim of the resurrection of Jesus, but it is undeniable that the gospel writers were writing a historical narrative and were thus making a historical and factual claim—they weren’t writing a myth. By contrast, myths—be they Egyptian, Norse, or Mesopotamian—are myths. They are not making factual claims, and everyone knows that. Myths are poetic and symbolic stories that attempt to give explanations for things that are beyond human understanding.
Thus, by comparing the Christian claim that Jesus was resurrected to the myths of Isis wearing a pair of cow horns, Thor carrying a hammer, and Marduk’s sacred animals of horses, dogs, and a dragon with a forked tongue—Harris is making a categorical mistake. It’s the equivalent of him denying the validity of the nightly news because it’s really just the same as the news segment on the Muppet Show. …I really liked that show, let’s enjoy a clip. (Share this post on Facebook if I’ve rekindled your childhood joy).
Along these lines, Harris also loves to make that claim that we are all atheists when it comes to Zeus, Poseidon, or any of the other ancient gods. But this claim too is rather simplistic and naïve. First off, the early Christians would agree with him: gods like Zeus and Poseidon don’t exist. The unique thing about the God of the Bible is that He has acted in history—that is the biblical claim. YHWH is not just some mythological god that has no bearing on actual historical events. And Jesus was a real historical person, not mythological figure, and the people who sat under his teaching and saw him get crucified claimed that they had seen him alive three days later.
One might not believe that claim, but if one is to be intellectually honest, one has to at least acknowledge the fundamental difference between the historical biblical claims regarding YHWH and Jesus and the mythological pictures put forth in the other ancient religions. They are fundamentally different, and yet Harris can’t see that. All he can do is think of cleverly offensive lines like, “Not only do we still eat the offal of the ancient world; we are positively smug about it” (47). Please tell me, who is really being smug here?
But Harris isn’t quite done. He then proceeds to say the following: “We should be humbled…by the knowledge that the ancient Greeks began to lay their Olympian myths to rest several hundred years before the birth of Christ, whereas we have the likes of Bill Moyers convening earnest gatherings of scholars for the high purpose of determining just how the book of Genesis can be reconciled with life in the modern world” (47). In other words, Harris is saying, “Well, at least the ancient Greeks were smart enough to abandon their myths long ago. We stupid Americans still are debating Genesis!”
Well, the fact is, the ancient Greeks did not start laying their Olympian myths aside “hundreds of years before the birth of Christ.” The very fact that Socrates was forced to drink Hemlock proves the exact opposite! Sure, there were certain philosophical groups in ancient Greece who were atheistic, but the ancient world as a whole was thoroughly pagan: the Greek and Roman gods dominated the thinking of the ancient world; Roman emperors were called gods; and Paul debated various Greek thinkers on Mars Hill concerning belief in the gods. Furthermore, virtually the only people in the ancient world who continually mocked and ridiculed the various myths and gods were the Old Testament prophets. Ancient paganism eventually faded away by around 500-600 AD, precisely because of the rise of Christianity and its claim that the true God had acted in history.
Secondly, I find it shocking that Harris would mock scholars for discussing what lessons can be learned from Genesis and how those lessons can be applied to modern life. If you go onto Moyers’ website, you can see a description of the special: “Writers, artists, psychologists, composers, lawyers, college presidents, journalists, translators and Biblical scholars discuss, debate and discover the great stories of Genesis.” It is quite clear that Moyers’ wasn’t discussing the claims of Ken Ham. He was discussing the moral, creative, and psychological power the stories in Genesis have, and how they still impact us today.
Harris, though, can only mock this because he clearly can’t understand the point. Why would anyone want to discuss something that is not 100% factually documented? Ironically, he’s very much like Ken Ham. Not only can he not tell the difference between the historical claims found in the gospels, and the ancient pagan myths, he also holds the assumption that if something is mythological, then it is stupid and worthless because it’s not factual.
The more I read up on both the New Atheist Movement and the Young Earth Creationist Movement, the more I am convinced that both groups share the same fundamental worldview. They’re actually working for the same team—they’re just fighting each other because each one wants to be the starting quarterback. It won’t matter, though—the team is horrible. They can’t even get the basic rules of the game right.
