Facetiously describing himself as the only person who ever represented the devil free of charge, Christopher Hitchens met his match Saturday night in a debate at Biola University.

Billed as one of the great debates of the new millennium, the New York Times bestselling author of "god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything" squared off with one of the Christian world's most formidable debaters, William Lane Craig.

In a basketball gymnasium packed with several thousand students, professors and T-shirt-wearing members of local atheist clubs, the sagacious philosophers went head-to-head on the most profound question of the ages – "Does God Exist?"

With a home court advantage in this "den of lambs," Craig defended Christianity, arguing the "New Atheists" have failed to deliver strong arguments disproving God's existence while Christian apologists are presenting mounting evidence for the existence of the creator of the cosmos.

Craig, a research professor of philosophy at the Talbot School of Theology in La Mirada, Calif. and the author of numerous books, including the recent "Reasonable Faith," gave five arguments in support of faith – the cosmological, teleological, moral and experiential, along with evidence of Jesus Christ's resurrection.

"If Mr. Hitchens wants us to believe that God does not exist then he must tear down all five of the arguments I've presented and in their place erect a case of his own to prove that God does not exist," Craig said. "Unless and until he does that, I think that theism is the most plausible worldview."

But Hitchens, a columnist for Vanity Fair, The Nation and Slate, said most atheists don't believe they can prove the nonexistence of God, but rather find no plausible or convincing evidence that God exists.

"It seems to me that extraordinary claims, such as the existence of a divine power whose son cares enough to come and redeem us, require extraordinary evidence," Hitchens said. "I don't think any of the evidence we've heard from Dr. Craig, brilliantly marshaled as it was, is extraordinary enough to justify the extreme claims being made."

Craig's first argument for theism – the cosmological – asks the most sublime question of philosophy: Why does the universe exist?

In recent decades, astronomers have made remarkable discoveries, including the beginning of the universe more than 13 billion years ago in the "Big Bang" when time, space, energy and matter came into existence. Asserting "out of nothing, comes nothing," Craig argued a "cause" must have brought the universe into being.

"As the cause of space and time, this must be an uncaused timeless, spaceless, immaterial being of unfathomable power," Craig said. "Moreover, it must be personal as well. Now there are only two kinds of things that fit that description. Either an abstract object or else a personal mind. But as objects can't cause anything, therefore it follows that the cause of the universe is a transcendent, intelligent mind."

Hitchens, who barely responded to the argument throughout the night, said scientists are still studying physics and it's too early to reach "certainties of that kind."

In his teleological argument, Craig said scientists have been stumped in recent decades by the discovery that the initial conditions of the Big Bang were fine-tuned for the ultimate existence of intelligent life "with a precision and delicacy that literally defies human comprehension." For example, Craig asked Hitchens to consider the balance between matter and anti-matter in the universe.

"Now, all these constants and quantities fall into the extraordinary narrow range of life-permitting values," Craig said. "Were these constants or quantities to be altered less than a hair's breadth the balance would be destroyed and life would not exist."

Hitchens, however, said Craig's example is based on very limited evidence. If the universe was fine-tuned for the ultimate emergence of humankind, Hitchens said he's perplexed why the universe is full of collapsed suns and failed galaxies and why the Andromeda Galaxy is on a collision course with the Milky Way.

"Is that design or it is an example of extremely random, capricious, cruel and mysterious universe?" Hitchens asked. "Have you thought of the nothingness that is coming? The sun is ultimately due to swell up and burn us to a crisp. This is not fine-tuning, ladies and gentlemen."

Hitchens also questioned why a sentient designer would create so many species over eons of time – 99.9 percent of which have since gone extinct – and why he waited so long to send his son to redeem humanity.

The concern with efficiency and wastefulness, Craig said, is only of importance to those with limited time and resources and the timing of Christ's birth coincided with an exponential explosion in global population. The Population Reference Bureau estimates the number of people who have ever lived on Earth is 105 billion, but only 2 percent of them were born before Christ's birth.

"In God's providential plan for human beings, we see the wisdom of God in orchestrating the development of human life and then bringing Christ into the world in the fullness of time," Craig said.

Turning from the scientific arguments, Craig said if God does not exist then objective moral values cannot exist either.

"The argument is that without God as a transcendent foundation for moral values we are simply lost in socio-cultural relativism," Craig said. "Who are you to judge that the Nazi regime was wrong? Who are you to judge that South African apartheid was wrong?"

But Hitchens said he's unconvinced believers behave any better than unbelievers and cited examples of religious fanatics, such as suicide bombers, who carry out their acts based on their beliefs.

As far as Christ's resurrection, Craig said most New Testament historians have reached a consensus that Jesus was a historical person, died on the cross, his followers discovered his tomb empty and they came to believe God raised him from the dead "despite every predisposition to the contrary."

"Jews have no belief in a dying, much less a rising messiah and Jewish beliefs about the afterlife prohibited anyone's rise from the dead before the resurrection at the end of the world," Craig said. "Nevertheless, the original disciples came to believe so strongly that God had raised Jesus from the dead that they were willing to die for the truth of that belief."

In his counterargument, Hitchens asserted different religions have conflicting claims, but their adherents are "prepared to sacrifice enormously" for their beliefs and are convinced of the truth of their beliefs.

"It's depressingly easy to get a religious rumor started," Hitchens said. "You can always count on an enormous amount of credulity among illiterate, frightened and ill-educated populations."

Finally, Craig said billions of people throughout the world believe in God because they have had an "immediate experience of God."

Hitchens said these testimonies are meaningless to him and while he's made real attempts to study the evidence for God's existence he's concluded religion is manmade.

"I'm sorry, I've tried," Hitchens said. "It's white noise. It's like saying there is only one God and Allah is his messenger. It's gibberish to me."

Although Hitchens has found faith incomprehensible, he noted he learned while researching the career of Mother Teresa that the office of "devil's advocate" had been abolished by the Roman Catholic Church, a role he seems to have taken upon himself.

"So I come before you as the only person who has ever represented the devil pro bono," Hitchens said.

Perhaps Hitchens has forgotten the fortune he's earned writing books lambasting religion and participating in these debates.

And while Hitchens believes religion is a dangerous force in the world, Craig said the packed-out crowds attending these debates at both public and private universities and other forums point toward a realization that the fruits of naturalism has left humanity mired in meaninglessness.

"Therefore, the question of God's existence has become all the more poignant in our age," Craig said. "I'm privileged to be a part of a revolution in Christian philosophy that has been going on over the last half century. I believe we are seeing a tremendous groundswell of interest among people as this revolution is beginning to filter down to the man on the street. People are beginning to question the bitter fruits (of the naturalistic worldview) that have been so evident in the 20th century, and I hope this leads to a tremendous renaissance in Christian thinking and faith."

Oprah Shocker! It's not too late to save U.S. taxpayers billions of dollars, not to mention their core values.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lDFJOzu9SyM

The real story is: The Decline and Fall of Newsweek Magazine.

According to a recent ABC News poll, 83% of Americans identify themselves as Christian. Unless Americans abandon their religious identity, America is, by the stubbornness of numbers, a Christian nation. Although Newsweek’s article is more nuanced, their deceptive cover reveals a blatant effort to discourage believers and privatize Christianity, relegating it to sectarian status. In so doing they end up embarrassing themselves with yet another delusional declaration of victory.

The real story here is The Decline and Fall of Newsweek Magazine. It is losing the Washington Post Company significant money. Newsweek claims Christianity has fallen due to a 10% over the past 20 years of self identified believers. How then should we consider the drop in their circulation from 3.1 to 1.2 million core readers, a decline of over 60% during just the past two years?

Four centuries ago Christian pilgrims came to America seeking the freedom of religious expression. The Framers of the United States Constitution cherished this freedom so they prohibited the Federal Congress from establishing one national religion, fearing a National Church of America would restrict the free expression of other religious beliefs. The First Amendment doubles down on this right by prohibiting the Federal Congress from making laws that restrict the free exercise of religion. U.S. citizens are free to express their beliefs, not only in the public square but in associations, the media, who they vote for and what they vote for as long as no one religion is established by Federal laws, Federal regulations, the Federal purse or Federal agencies such as the military. Although under assault, we enjoy these freedom to this day. Sectarian secularism has not replaced Christianity in America, regardless of what Newsweek is promoting.

http://www.newsweek.com/id/192583

"The only position that leaves me with no cognitive dissonance is atheism. It is not a creed. Death is certain, replacing both the siren-song of Paradise and the dread of Hell. Life on this earth, with all its mystery and beauty and pain, is then to be lived far more intensely: we stumble and get up, we are sad, confident, insecure, feel loneliness and joy and love. There is nothing more; but I want nothing more."

Christopher Hitchens (The Portable Atheist: Essential Readings for the Non-believer)

What, then, should be our approach in apologetics? It should be something like this: 'My friend, I know Christianity is true because God's Spirit lives in me and assures me that it is true. And you can know it is true, too, because God is knocking at the door of your heart, telling you the same thing. If you are sincerely seeking God, then God will give you assurance that the gospel is true. Now, to try to show you it's true, I'll share with you some arguments and evidence that I really find convincing. But should my arguments seem weak and unconvincing to you, that's my fault, not God's. It only shows that I'm a poor apologist, not that the gospel is untrue. Whatever you think of my arguments, God still loves you and holds you accountable. I'll do my best to present good arguments to you. But ultimately you have to deal, not with arguments, but with God himself.

William Lane Craig, Reasonable Faith: Christian Truth and Apologetics, (Revised edition, Wheaton, IL: Crossway, 1994), p. 48.

After the Debate-

Alex Dobuzinskis, a 31-year-old Studio City, Calif. resident, said he believed William Lane Craig made a more convincing case for the existence of God and failed to engage Craig on his arguments. “I don't necessarily think these debates change people's minds, but they are entertaining, and for Christians, it's kind of like bringing the bogeyman in, seeing if you can stand it and then knowing that you can feel stronger about your beliefs.”

Dobuzinskis was one of approximately 4,000 people who attended the debate Saturday night at the La Mirada Christian university. The debate was also broadcast via satellite to 30 states and four nations.

Craig, one of the leading Christian apologists in the world, argued the fact that the universe has a beginning and is fine-tuned for the existence of life points toward the existence of a transcendent designer. Further evidence of God's existence involves objective moral values, people's experiences with God and the historical evidence of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Although Hitchens, the New York Times bestselling author of “god is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything,” glossed over the cosmological argument, he contended the universe is too capricious and cruel to be the creation of an all-powerful designer. Instead, Hitchens said science has painstakingly demonstrated that life evolved through random mutation and natural selection. He thinks the existence of morality is merely an aid to survival and reproduction and people are easily fooled20by religious experiences. He argued the New Testament lacks any “properly-attested witnesses” to Christ's resurrection.

Biola student Alex Valencia, 23, said he believed Craig made a far more compelling case. “As far as the existence of God, I agree with his point about how nothing can come from nothing. There has to be an outside force, being or deity that had to have created the world.”

Gathered outside the gymnasium among a group of Inland Empire Atheist club members wearing T-shirts reading “Friendly Neighborhood Atheist,” Riverside resident Patrick Busby, 59, said he doesn't believe the universe needs a God to exist. “I think humans need a God most of the time. You can see that represented in the percentages (of believers).”

Atheist club member and Colton resident Gilbert Moravetz, 47, said he believed in God for many years, but gave up his beliefs after studying the Bible and concluding “some things didn't add up. It was real obvious during the cross-examination that Hitchens really put Craig on the defensive. He was very uncomfortable – obviously I'm on Hitchens' side – but I think Hitchens really had him over a barrel a bunch of times.”

A grape grower, Al Hubbard said he traveled from his home in Auburn, Calif. to attend the debate. He said he sympathized with many of Hitchens' concerns about the atrocities committed in the name of religion. “It's my perspective that if people who claim to be Christians were in fact following the teachings of Christ those kinds of atrocities never would have occurred. My opinion is if Christians would simply do the things that Jesus taught we would have a totally different world than the one we live in.”

Troy Anderson

Recent Newsweek article, The End of Christian America, prominently features comments by Albert Mohler Jr. who is president of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary. Mohler picks up the conversation in his recent blog post with some assertions of his own.

"One key aspect of Mr. Meacham's argument is his suggestion that what binds America together is not "a specific faith" but instead "a commitment to freedom" and, in particular, freedom of conscience. There is something to this argument, of course. The founding generation did not establish the young republic on any religious creed or theological doctrine. Still, there is something missing from this argument, and that is the recognition that freedom, and freedom of conscience in particular, requires some prior understanding of human dignity and the origins of conscience itself. Though the founders included those who rejected the Christian Gospel and Christianity itself, Christianity had provided the necessary underpinnings for the founders' claims.

Mr. Meacham also suggests that this new situation is perhaps healthy for the church. To this extent I agree -- the church gains a necessary knowledge any time the distinction between the church and the world is made more evident. Our first concern is and must be the Gospel. It is good that non-Christians know that they are not Christians and that Christians be reminded of that fact that what sinners need is the Gospel of Christ, not merely the lingering morality of the Christian memory."

http://www.newsweek.com/id/192583

Send your letter to the editor to feedback@tothesource.org.