A two-part PBS series taps into the growing scholarly debate about God, pitting Christians vs. atheists and leaps of faith vs. learned panels.
By SHARON TUBBS
Published September 14, 2004
[Photo: PBS]
Scholar and writer C.S. Lewis is among the most influential modern day defenders of Christianity.
[AP photo]
Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, is seen by many as a leading figure in atheism.
God has become increasingly complicated - and intellectual. No longer is he that divine father figure, intriguing only to church folk who take a leap of faith. That's the old God.
This new, repackaged God has legs. He has expanded outside holy places into science labs and Ivy League seminars where scholars debate his existence. He's the subject of Internet chat rooms and staged showdowns between believers and skeptics.
And he is the star of a two-part PBS series, The Question of God, which airs Wednesday and Sept. 22. Harvard professor and psychiatrist Armand Nicholi leads a discussion among a panel of professionals.
The panelists range from Christian to atheist and spiritual points in between. They share personal experiences and debate between historical flashbacks from the lives of Sigmund Freud, the founder of psychoanalysis, and scholar C.S. Lewis. Freud and Lewis are said to be the most influential figures in modern day atheism and Christian apologetics, respectively. For more than 30 years, Nicholi has studied them and taught a popular class at Harvard based on their writings.
Debates between atheists and believers have earned regular bookings at universities and on TV shows and Christian radio stations.
"The debate has become a lot more sophisticated," said Jason Anderson, executive director of development for the C.S. Lewis Society in New Port Richey.
Part of the reason, he says, is scientific evidence in the past decade that leads to questions about Darwin's theory of evolution and supports a divine creator. It used to be faith vs. science, he said. Now some Christians see science as complementary to the faith.
Brent Yaciw of Tampa, president of Atheists of Florida, attributes the change to a growing number of atheists willing to "come out of the closet." Centuries ago, they would have been hanged for their nonbelief, he said.
Other events have played a role in sparking public debate in recent years.
In 1985, scholars formed the controversial Jesus Seminar conducted by the Westar Institute, a think tank that studies the historical Jesus. Their contention that the Gospels are a blend of fact and fiction riled some Christians and provided ammunition for some nonbelievers. Some of their arguments were featured in Peter Jennings' popular ABC special Answering the Search for Jesus in 2000. Also, pop culture phenomena, including bestselling book The Da Vinci Code, have heightened people's interest in God from a historical and academic standpoint.
The C.S. Lewis Society promotes Christian apologetics, or arguments that defend God's existence. Once housed at Princeton University, the society moved to Trinity College in New Port Richey in 1987 and hosts seminars and lectures around the world. The intellectual God debate has become a necessary evangelical tool, Anderson said.
The Billy Graham style of ministry, asking people to step out on faith, is less effective nowadays, he said. Fewer people go to church, and more of them are "ultra-skeptical."
If Christians want to appeal to unbelievers today, they have to know the lingo of postmodernists and be able to refute their claims, Anderson said. "That's what the church is confronting now," he said.
He thinks these public debates are a good thing, helping Christians make inroads into the Ivy League, like Yale and Brown, where Christian students are anecdotally reporting more converts, he said.
Yaciw says Anderson may be right. In his view, atheists have been at a disadvantage. Yaciw has argued against ministers in radio and college settings.
Christians are typically learned and well-prepared, Yaciw said. Atheists are also prepared, but they are put in the defensive position of trying to disprove the Christian claims in front of an overwhelmingly Christian audience, he said.
"It's much easier to make a bogus claim than it is to disprove one," Yaciw said.
He remembered debating a minister in Tallahassee several years ago. "He walked in with a thick notebook," Yaciw said. "It was tabbed."
The minister made himself out to be the nice guy, Yaciw said. He told the audience not to condemn Yaciw, that he didn't have horns. Yaciw said he came off as the negative one, the "naysayer."
Internet and chat room debates seem more productive for atheists than the open platform discussions, he said. The forums let other atheists know they are not alone. Also, atheists can "plant seeds" with people who have questions about their faith, Yaciw said.
He has gone back and forth with Christians through e-mail. They usually start out wanting to tell him about God, Yaciw said. He typically counters that he already knows about their beliefs and later points out the bad things people have done in the name of religion. They don't accept his views right away, but they might in time, Yaciw said. Going from a religious person to an atheist may take years, he said.
Yaciw's Internet discussions might be down to earth, but the typical scholarly debate about God is a bit more highbrow. The PBS series, for example, is not to be digested with popcorn and soda. It's more of a chamomile tea affair, with mentions of early philosopher Pascal and such concepts to ponder as the origins of society's moral code and whether the notion of "love thy neighbor as thyself" is realistic.
From the panelists' debate over science vs. revelation:
"I'm troubled by the idea that one can be willing to believe in something if it's not true," says Dr. Frederick S. Lee, a physician and scientist.
Winifred Gallagher, author and journalist: "But just because it's not scientific doesn't mean it's not true."
"True for you, or true for all?" says Jeremy D. Fraiberg, lawyer. If it's supposed to be true for all, then there has to be a common standard of evaluation, like a hypothesis and theory.
"We keep making this be the criteria for understanding," says Jungian analyst Margaret Klenck. "If we can understand it, it's one thing. If we can't, it's another."
Fraiberg: "But there's no other way to understand it."
Klenck: "Yes, there is. There are tons of other ways to understand. It's not rational, but rational understanding is only one way of understanding."
That's about as heated - and simplistic - as it gets.
The Question of God airs from 9 to 11 p.m. Wednesday and Sept. 22 on WEDU-Ch. 3. The series chronicles the lives of psychoanalyst and atheist Sigmund Freud and C.S. Lewis, an author and scholar known for his work in Christian apologetics. A panel that discusses their personal beliefs and issues raised by Freud and Lewis includes Michael Shermer, author and publisher of Skeptic magazine; Louis Massiah, independent filmmaker; J. Douglas Holladay, partner at Park Avenue Equity Partners; Frederick S. Lee, a physician and scientist; Winifred Gallagher, author and journalist; Jeremy D. Fraiberg, lawyer; and Jungian analyst Margaret Klenck.
