I have three Bibles, three Qurans, the Jehovah's Witnesses bible, and the Books of Mormon. I have an academic interest in comparative religions and religious criticism, and am myself, a syncretic Deist. I found McAfee's book "Disproving Christianity", although a potentially controversial title, a refreshing and insightful read. Unlike Dawkins, McAfee does not make a mocking diatribe of religion, but instead, presents a fascinating critical study of The Bible, as viewed through the lens of Christianity.
Overall, McAfee presents his arguments logically and rationally, while addressing issues of dogma. McAfee doesn't attack the existence of God or Christianity, but merely points out the many shortcomings in scripture particularly as they have been exacerbated by the growth of fundamentalism over the last century or so.
If we accept the premise that God created humankind as rational beings, then why would He present his message in such a manner as to require a continual suspension of disbelief and reason for human beings to understand?
If we were to view the picture of the Old Testament God as painted in The Bible objectively, we would see a profile emerge of a bi-polar, vindictive and petty deity, who can't seem to make up His mind. Then in the New Testament, He manifests himself in human form as Jesus, preaching peace and sacrificing himself for humankind's sins.
Yet, as McAfee points out, if we accept the premise that Jesus was the human form of the all-knowing, almighty God, where is the actual sacrifice in a divine being who knows beforehand that His death is temporary? Does it truly constitute a "sacrifice" in giving what you are certain will be returned?
I understand that the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus is the fundamental tenet of the Christian faith. Does this mean that you have to suspend your ability to reason to have such faith? If so, why did God imbue us with reason? How are we to know when to correctly apply logic, and when faith is needed?
The Western World was plunged into the dark ages of reason after the fall of ancient Greece and the Roman Empire. Ignorant superstition ruled the West, while reason and science were preserved in the Islamic world. Now, we appear to be plunging headlong into yet another dark age of ignorance and dogma.
Neither I nor the author is suggesting that religious faith is valueless. Yet, to believe or not to believe (or what and how to believe, for that matter) must be a conscious choice by each individual, after they have evaluated the evidence for themselves, without coercion in any manner: no human being should be telling another human what he or she should or should not believe. We may, each of us, simply present our positions for consideration, and leave it at that. Each person will choose the right path for him or herself.
I agree with the author on the point that as churches are tax-exempt organizations they need to stay out of politics--in order to honor the precept of separation of church and state. If they cannot, then they should lose their tax-exempt status. If you are a faith-based organization, by all means--help the poor and needy--but stay out of government.
I think the underlying point the author makes is that most are brought up, or socialized in religion. They are told what they should believe from a very young age, and they are not taught to examine these beliefs, but to simply accept them without question. He acknowledges that Christian values and thinking infuse the American culture. That is simply attributable to the prevalence of Christians in the United States of America. However, we must remember that a nation comprised mostly of Christians does not constitute "a Christian nation".
The Constitution makes it quite clear that there shall be no State-sponsored religion in the United States. This does not mean that public expressions of religious faith should be suppressed--but it also mean that no one religion is entitled to favored status, either--majority or not. America was founded on the principles of innate individual liberty. Minority voices are as free to be heard, and minority creeds are as free to practice, as are those in the majority. This also means that laws must be secular. Laws which do not serve the common good of the whole citizenry, but are instead supported only by creed-specific religious dogma--and are unsupported by objective evidence--are fundamentally un-American.
You can read the Pentateuch and the Septuagint. You can read Irenaeus' "Against Heresies", and Bart Ehrman's "The Lost Christianities". If you consider yourself a person of faith, and your faith is strong and true, it will withstand all challenges.
But Believer, Atheist, or Agnostic--Christian, Jew or Muslim, I urge you to read this book. It may amuse you, or it may inflame you. But if you read it with an open mind--and it makes you just pause to ponder for a moment--then there may still hope for America, after all.
