Two cousins, one evangelical and one atheist, enter into dialectic over the rationality of faith.
that religion causes more harm than good, especially when in the hands of demagogs, jingo's, and the unscrupulous. I believe that Christianity has become over-burdened with layers and layers of junk (for lack of a better word) that detract from the teaching, and denial of it's real roots for the upholding of fundamental positions that today are simply untenable and in some cases just dangerous.
What is the big problem accepting the principle of the separation of church and state? Evolution? Higher Criticism? Scientific inquiry? Or that the Bible may have errors? Do you really think that any one of those items will bring Christianity falling down? I certainly don't have a problem in accepting some of what Jesus said, but is it all worth the fight just to uphold ancient religion supersitions over objectivity because those objects stand opposed to our modern world?
I can see some value in the community and in some of the moral teachings. However, I also see value in Aristole's moral teachings. I d
I rather enjoyed this book, though it was difficult at spots. They are both very intelligent and have respect for each other, which is refreshing. There is no winner, no loser. But I have to hand it to them for being willing to dialogue with each other in this way.