[CARTER]: I would be skeptical of a report like you describe. My belief in the resurrection of Jesus comes from my Christian faith, and not from any need for scientific proof. I derive a great personal benefit from the totality of this belief, which comes naturally to me.
The fact that something helps you or makes you feel better has no bearing on its truth! His dismissal of even the need for a scientific evaluation of the Resurrection shows that he’s not really operating rationally here. And he’s taking as fact whatever gives him “personal benefit”.
But wait: there’s more!
[KRISTOF] I think of you as an evangelical, but evangelicalism implies belief in inerrancy of Scripture. Do you share that, and if so, how do you account for contradictions within the Gospels?
[CARTER]. I look on the contradictions among the Gospel writers as a sign of authenticity, based on their different life experiences, contacts with Jesus and each other. If the earlier authors of the Bible had been creating an artificial document, they would have eliminated disparities. I try to absorb the essence and meaning of the teachings of Jesus Christ, primarily as explained in the letters written by Paul to the early churches. When there are apparent discrepancies, I make a decision on what to believe, respecting the equal status and rights of all people.
Usually it is the consilience of different accounts that gives veracity; that’s the way science establishes what’s true. In Carter’s case, though, he takes discrepancies to be evidence for truth! And then, based on what he wants to believe, he simply punts and decides which Gospel is true.
Finally, Carter affirms his belief in the literal efficacy of prayer (something disproven in at least one good scientific study of heart patients), but then dismisses the need to show that prayer is efficacious after Kristof cleverly raises the “Why doesn’t God heal amputees?” question:
[KRISTOF]: Do you pray daily, and if so, do you believe in the efficacy of prayer in a miracle kind of way, or in a psychologically-this-helps-me-deal-with-the-world kind of way?
[CARTER]: I pray often during each day, and believe in the efficacy of prayer in both ways. In my weekly Bible lessons, I teach that our Creator God is available at any moment to any of us, for guidance, solace, forgiveness or to meet our other needs. My general attitude is of thanksgiving and joy.
But then Carter says that some exigent needs can’t be met by God:
[KRISTOF]: Skeptics have noted that when prayers are “answered,” there is usually an alternative explanation. But an amputee can pray for a new leg, and a new leg never grows back. Isn’t that a reason to believe that prayer helps internally, but doesn’t access miracles?
[CARTER]: It is usually impossible to convince skeptics. For me, prayer helps internally, as a private conversation with my creator, who knows everything and can do anything. If I were an amputee, my prayer would be to help me make the best of my condition, to be a good follower of the perfect example set by Jesus Christ and to be thankful for life, freedom and opportunities to be a blessing to others. We are monitoring the status of cancer in my liver and brain, and my prayers are similar to this.
If I were an amputee, and believed that God could literally answer prayers, I’d be praying for a new leg!!
I wonder what would convince Carter that these stories in which he rests his faith are fiction.
Here we have a man who says he accepts the tenets of science, but then rejects them if they yield conclusions that don’t make him feel good. In that sense, he’s evincing intellectual hypocrisy. But of course, that’s the mindset required to be a believer yet also feel that you’re modern, liberal, and on board with science.
Yes, I still admire President Carter greatly: he’s a good man who does good works. But I now view him as somewhat delusional and self-deceiving, and thus I’ll never be able to see him in quite the same way again.
