Sam Harris is an idiot

I watched what I believe where most likely excerpts of Sam Harris' TED conference appearance and I am deeply disappointed. Though I am largely unread and have not heard a lot that Harris and some of his counterparts have to say about religion, I am going to respond. In my opinion, I've heard enough.

Harris, in the 3 minutes I heard, tries to generalize all religions as bad and a distraction from the real issues facing the world. More than a distraction, he goes on to state that because of religion, we have suffering and horrible acts committed against people. His answer, throw out the baby with the bathwater and get rid of all religion — we can make up our own moral code.

Harris seems bright but I would have to guess that the real reason why we find ourselves in the situations he describes is because we have already thrown out those moral codes and decided to do whatever the hell we want. In short, the assumption that they're (religions) all bad so choose mine seems to break his first presupposition - that they're all bad. Secular humanism is a religion, and the god is society and really ourselves and how we can be self actualized to "do good" according to our definition. And our definition can change and be corrupted (thinking Nazi Germany)... but the secular humanist trap is that we can look forward into the glorious future and do better, that we don't have to be condemned to repeat the past. Great ideas, but we always do. Why? Could it be that there is something larger at play? Could it be that we always screw it up? There's always someone trying to take the reigns and achieve their ends?

Harris doesn't like Christianity (according to what I saw) because we discriminate against homosexuals and because people believe things counter to what Christians believe. Yes Christians believe that God wants us to live a certain way to achieve certain ends, notably to be more like Jesus. Few find this attractive or desirable and, again, make it about themselves — how can I be a better person/Christian. Jesus' call is to come and die and find your life in him, according to his rules (love of, grace from, and relationship with and submission to Jesus). Christians don't get to make it up, they get to follow and submit to Christ. This is based on love and a real relationship with a God who is not seen.

Yes, it is crazy to the world but we ask the Lord to meet us and he does. We see glimpses and realize that our world isn't quite the way we all thought that it was. We realize what we thought was solid was hollow, what we thought was red was blue, what we thought was right side up was upside down. This makes absolutists and scientists nervous and elicits the harshest of responses. We were told to expect this and we keep the faith because we know that our God doesn't need letters after his name or publications and approval from peers to be "trustworthy" or have university/institutional credibility. (Similar to street cred but amongst those academics who live their whole lives in the ivory tower).

And to address the criticisms on the rejection of homosexuality and the adherence to a moral absolutism in a era of relativism, let me address the second first. If I disagree with Harris, does that mean that we should get rid of my opinion and his as well because we can't find agreement on it? This is his logic, if there's disagreement, there must be no universal truth. I think it's quite simple — there is a universal truth and someone just doesn't happen to know what that is. I think this is an easier argument to make and the issue would become who is right and who's wrong.

This is something that I think makes sense to Harris as he pleads to push his religion of anti-theism and secular humanism. Christians believe they're right (even though most are confused at best about what they believe, specifically how to arrive at belief, what is that belief in, and what should we do with that belief once we have it). That's our problem and besides the point. Simply put, we believe in an absolute truth with an absolute morality that revolves around the idea of sin. Homosexuality, the practice of it, is considered wrong and therefore Christians oppose it. Not the people but the practice of the act.

Is the rejection of homosexuality a stumbling block — yes. Can we, in a utilitarian manor, just remove this stumbling block by saying that this practice is permissible? No, we can't. And why? Because Christians don't believe that morality is relative, they believe it is absolute. In short, that we don't get to make up the rules, we get to follow Jesus so that we can find greater joy in life. Following Jesus is more than rules, it's about following the personhood of Jesus. This is a complicated subject for those who don't know him, and for those who have trouble wrapping their minds around the concept of following someone who's died and been resurrected and now lives in heaven.

And regarding homosexuality (I promise that I'm not dodging the question), the Christian should say that the practice of homosexuality is a part of the fallen nature of man and should be abandoned for the sake of following Christ. All Christians have to abandon things at the foot of the cross and so do gay people. In the simplest words, homosexuality is wrong because that's not how God designed us to live our lives. It's wrong in the same way as sin is wrong because living in sin is not what God desired for us, or not how he designed us for toward the end of living our lives. Christianity says that you are not your sin and that you can step out of it to follow Jesus and to become more like him — the call for all Christians.

And some people really enjoy their homosexuality and identify with it as being a part of who they are. All I can say is that most people really enjoy stuff and identify those things with who they are, some are more socially acceptable than others. The social acceptability of an identity means nothing to God, it has no bearing on his perspective as social acceptability is something we've created, not him.

I know it is hard for those who struggle with this, who enjoy this, who live this life. All I can say is that is that there are better things than self-seeking lust or a mutually gratifying sexual relationship and that the best thing is Jesus. You may disagree but you don't really know because you've never tried it and you can't really try it without giving your life to it. People come to the cross to become Christians not because they want to try something new but because they realize that what they were doing doesn't really work anymore and they are at the end of their rope, they're done trying to do whatever they think (or whatever other people think) is right or good. Christ meets us at our end, invites us to die to our self and find a new life in him and his ways. This is what it means to be a Christian — there are no other understandings that are biblical.

And how does the homosexual respond? My thought is that they befriend real Christians and try to learn as much about Christ as possible. Secondly, they take a real hard look at their lives and in the words of Doctor Phil, ask themselves "how's that working for you?" Finally, they would need to come to terms with the fact that Christians are to die to themselves, all of themselves, and that would mean that they give up their ambitions, their property, their dreams, to Jesus and allow him to guide and direct them however he pleases. Jesus doesn't just call people to give up their homosexuality, he calls them to give up everything. You might think this isn't fair, and you're right, it's not. It is really really really hard for gay people to give this up, but the reward is worth it.

And it's not fair for another reason. If it were fair, we'd all die for our sins as a punishment for our depravity. Jesus, showing mercy for us in our state of depravity, died on the cross so that we could be restored to a right standing with God. This brings comfort and this frees us from the slavery of the world to do good, to love, to help, to impact. When Christians show the love of Christ, people are blessed and people see the grace of God. While the Christian can live a selfless life because they're following God, the secular humanist is incapable of living a selfless life because they're following themselves or someone else. The selfless life isn't the objective and you can't achieve it by utilitarian means. No, it is the fruit of being a Christian.

Though some are well intentioned, they fail to live by their own standards and then what? They can try again but they will continually fail. This might not be a problem for some but for others, they will struggle to figure it out and they will fail even at that. Eventually, you wonder why you try and then you stop trying, and then you just do whatever you want and sin comes into full bloom. The ethic is functionally gone (their original goal) and they prove our point, that we will always choose a relativistic outcome to achieve our goals over any and everyone else. This proves that relativism doesn't "work" and ends at "I will do nothing, I don't care, and if I can't get what I want, I just want to die." I can't think of a worse life to live.