This week my wife and I spent an evening watching Collision, a documentary on the debates between Christopher Hitchens (one of the proponents of the new atheism) and Douglas Wilson (a Reformed pastor). We were quite enthralled with the dialogue and found the whole experience stretching and strengthening for the most part. While we enjoyed Wilson’s general defense of the existence of God, we had a few issues with both the manner and content of his defense of the Christian Worldview specifically.
He succeeded greatly at demonstrating the incoherence of Hitchens’ assertion that Christianity is bad for the world. Hitchens argues that since the Old Testament contains the slaying of the Amalekites, the biblical worldview is severely compromised and therefore not good for the world. Wilson counters that the Darwinian model, which Hitchens espouses, contains no logical catalyst for caring about the Amelekites at all. After all, if they are the weakest, their survival is of no concern anyway. Wilson explained fairly cogently that in order to invoke a frame of reference which calls for moral objectivity and the judgment of what is good or bad, Hitchens has to borrow from the Theistic worldview!
His eschatological view, i.e. preterism (the view that most or all of the Bible’s eschatological promises were fulfilled in the 1st century) was painfully obvious at numerous instances. Further, he was quite willing to use some language that I would call inappropriate, especially for a Christian.