It is astonishing to me that Mr. Andrew Sullivan would post a transcript of a discussion he had with Christopher Hitchens about God and religion in which Sullivan shows himself to be so thoroughly shallow in his thinking about religion.
For example, he states, "For me, the Incarnation is a much more central doctrine than the Resurrection. The Resurrection, in some ways, is the necessary consequence of the Incarnation, because it’s hard to think of God dying a mortal death." Huh? Jesus did die a mortal death. And, how is the Incarnation a "more central doctrine" than the Resurrection. And, there, in black ink, is Andrew's true hermeneutic: "For me..."
But, then, Sullivan has long tended to leap from his whims to his ontology in a single bound.
NCR Comment code:
We are not able to monitor every comment that comes through. If you see something objectionable, please click the "Report abuse" button. Once a comment has been flagged, an NCR staff member will investigate.
For more detailed guidelines, visit our User Guidelines page.
For help on how to post a comment, visit our reference page.