 |
|
|
|
My Take: Why Christians should pray for Christopher Hitchens
By the Rev. Robert Barron, Special to CNN Perhaps you’ve heard of Christopher Hitchens. He is a British writer and cultural commentator who lives and works in Washington, D.C. For decades now, he has been observing the political/societal scene and writing about it in a particularly insightful, witty and acerbic manner. Early in his career, he was something of a Trotskyite, but in the years following September 11, 2001, he emerged as a strong advocate of the Iraq war and, much to the chagrin of his colleagues on the left, a supporter of George W. Bush. He is best known, certainly, for his recent contributions as a critic of religion. His book "God is Not Great: Why Religion Poisons Everything" appeared a couple of years ago and proved to be a bestseller. Since the publication of this text, Hitchens has traveled the country debating a series of religious thinkers—Christian, Muslim and Jewish—meeting them with an extremely swift mind and wickedly barbed tongue. Along with Sam Harris, Daniel Dennett and Richard Dawkins, he is one of the “four horsemen” of the New Atheism, the movement that advocates an aggressive, take-no-prisoners approach to the claims of faith. I think it’s fair to say that Hitchens is playing today the role that another brilliant Englishman, Bertrand Russell, played nearly a century ago, namely that of religion’s public enemy No. 1. Just a few weeks ago, I picked up Hitchens’s latest, an autobiography entitled "Hitch-22." The book is a lot like the man: by turns funny, strange, deeply wise, infuriating, outrageous, critical, sometimes just plain baffling—and never dull. Something that surprised and intrigued me was Hitchens’ affection for two of my own literary heroes, Bob Dylan and Evelyn Waugh. He echoes a number of top critics in saying that Dylan should be mentioned along with T.S. Eliot and W.H. Auden as one of the poetic giants of the 20th century. (Now I’ve said something like that for years, but people usually just write me off as an overly enthusiastic Dylan fanatic). And for Waugh, the author of, among many other novels, "A Handful of Dust" and "Helena," Hitchens has almost unlimited enthusiasm. Here’s why I say I was surprised: Both Dylan and Waugh are inescapably religious writers. In fact, I would argue that it is impossible to understand and appreciate their work apart from the deeply Biblical sensibility that they share. In songs from all parts of his career—"A Hard Rain’s Gonna Fall," "Blowin’ in the Wind," "All Along the Watchtower," "New Morning," "Gotta Serve Somebody," "Every Grain of Sand"—Dylan draws on the Scriptures, and Waugh’s "Brideshead Revisited" is one of the greatest celebrations of Catholicism in all of modern literature. I confess I began to wonder whether, despite his brassy atheism, Mr. Hitchens didn’t have a good deal of sensitivity to things religious. This was on my mind when word came out last week that Hitchens was suffering from esophageal cancer, a particularly aggressive and unforgiving form of the disease. I realize that certain believers couldn’t resist the temptation to see in this misfortune the avenging hand of God: the one who for so long blasphemed God was now getting his just reward. But it’s always a very tricky business to interpret the purpose of the divine providence. After all, plenty of good, even saintly, people die prematurely from terrible diseases all the time, and lots of atheists and vile sinners live long prosperous lives before dying peacefully in their beds. Hitchens’ disease is indeed ingredient in God’s providence, since at the very least it was permitted by the one whose wisdom “stretches from end to end mightily.” But what it means and why it was allowed remain essentially opaque to us. Might it be an occasion for the famous atheist to reconsider his position? Perhaps. Might it be the means by which Hitchens comes to think more deeply about the ultimate meaning of things? Could be. Might it bring others to faith? Maybe. Might it have a significance that no one on the scene today could even in principle grasp? Probably. But what struck me with particular power as I surveyed the Catholic media was that the vast, vast majority of Catholics reported Hitchens’ disease and then, with transparent sincerity, urged people to pray for him. In making that recommendation, of course, they were on very sure ground indeed. Jesus said, “Love your enemies; bless those who curse you; pray for those who maltreat you." Christopher Hitchens is undoubtedly the enemy of Christianity—even of Christians—but he is also a child of God, loved into being and destined for eternal life. Therefore, followers of Jesus must pray for him and want what is best for him. Hitchens seeks by means of specious argument, insinuation, and sometimes plain smear-tactics to undermine religion. He ought to be opposed, vigorously, with counter-argument and clarification of fact. But all the while, he ought to be respected. One of the greatest Catholic apologists of all time, G.K. Chesterton, debated the agnostic George Bernard Shaw up and down England, and their arguments were often pointed and aggressive; but after the debates, the two friends could be seen drinking and laughing together. That’s a model of how a Christian treats his intellectual opponents. So read Christopher Hitchens; disagree with him and get angry with him; defend the faith against his attacks. And pray for him. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of Robert Barron. soundoff (1,319 Responses)1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Next »Post a comment
Next entry »Music festival brings world faiths together
|
  About this blog
The CNN Belief Blog covers the faith angles of the day's biggest stories, from breaking news to politics to entertainment, fostering a global conversation about the role of religion and belief in readers' lives. It's edited by CNN's Dan Gilgoff and Eric Marrapodi, with daily contributions from CNN's worldwide newsgathering team and frequent posts from religion scholar and author Stephen Prothero.  |
|
|
|
© 2010 Cable News Network. Turner Broadcasting System, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
| Advertise with us | About us | Contact us | Help | Advertising Practices
Editor's Note: The Rev. Robert Barron, a priest of the Archdiocese of Chicago, is founder of 
How low of you, Reverend, to take the opportunity of this man's suffering as a chance to promote your own brainwashed agenda. Hitchens has been intelligent and brave enough to recognize the fallacies and faults of religions; if he hasn't danced around his opinion (to say the least), I say GOOD FOR HIM and hope more of us will find the chutzpah to do the same. Religious people and religious determination has caused much pain and much suffering in this world, and it is a threat to both rationality and compassion.
Surprised he liked Dylan?! As if an atheist can't also find beauty, even in religious phenomena or texts?! Atheists aren't aliens, reverend. We can read and appreciate, but still disagree with the very basis of such art. I appreciate the Bible, for instance, for what it is (no more, no less): the best-selling book of all time. Like Lord of the Rings nerds on steroids, your religions have taken your texts too far: Middle Earth doesn't exist, and the stories of the Bible aren't real. Why not appreciate them as story, and not fact? There would be fewer wars...
To hell with religions of ANY KIND! Christopher Hitchins is the one that got it right -religion and in particular muslims and christians are the ones ruining this world with wars and anti-science opinions. May religion perish and disappear for ever!
But until science provides a replacement that meets the emotional, social and other needs of humankind, it will be hard to separate people from what gives them a sense of comfort, peace, fellowship, and a pre-constructed system of morals and/or ethics so they don't have to work hard to internalize and use it. Most people aren't interested in deep philosophical thought. They want something they can just embody and use. Cultural doctrine, in effect, brainwashes, and those who benefit from having power over other people use it as a tool. Religion is a very political concept.
I think to say that his disease is some how part of a divine being's plan is irrational to say the least. That right there made the writer of this blog lose credibility.
To someone who is studying diseases as a living, that is absolutely ridiculous to assert.
It is assertions like this that atheists find unsettling, because as the same process that churns out technological advances simultaneously in other fields of science churns out answers to questions that man has said forever it seems...people are so willing to enjoy the technology and have delight. Yet when a scientist discusses evolution of diseases it instantly turns religious people off.
This hypocrisy is what is most unsettling to atheists I think.
I don't think it is irrational to say that disease can be part of the maker's master plan. I say this as an agnostic leaning towards atheism, and as a scientist. For a believer (Christian or otherwise), God or the maker is the creator of all organisms, including pathogenic ones. So disease can be part of the plan.
The most important point here is that an intellectual debate about God can be carried out respectfully. Try to keep that in mind and not jump to conclusions about whether the "other side" is rational or not.
I love science! I am so happy every time a new discovery is made! We should all be thankful that God gave us the ability to use this tool to discover Truth. But instead, pride sets in and man wants all the glory...............
Dear CM,
Science is not about discovering truth. It is about trying to understanding what's around us in the best way we can given the tools we have at a given time.
Also, just because some of us disbelieve or question the existence of God does not mean we do this out of pride. It is not necessary to characterize people in a negative light just because we disagree.
Hope you will keep an open mind.
CatholicMom – You may love it, but you have clearly shown you know little to nothing about the scientific process; so simply using the tools provided to you by science without any understanding of the wealth of knowledge behind the research and how it works.
Hmmm...maybe the theists have the general concept right, they just missed couple of details. There IS a creator god that created and loves his subjects and wants them to prosper and be happy – those subjects he created are called tumors! Humans are just the juicy foodstuff that he created in his merciful benevolence for them to feast on while they worship him!
Notice that "Creator" has no religious implications, but "Maker" does. When people personify natural creative energy and view it as separate, with separate sentience from its manifestations, it is only one step away from individuals using folklore to create a cultural doctrine that focuses on ritual and social control. Most people do not have the mental capacity to imagine the reality of Nature, and convince themselves that something MUST be calling the shots, pulling the strings, etc. Of course, most are indoctrinated from a young age to do so. Look at how many cultures actually indoctrinate children to have sociopathic tendencies so they can use them as pawns in their personal power-plays.
Mr. Barron:
What a pile of bull. If you really respected Hitchens, you refrain from any chanting, moaning, or fire-dancing to your deity on his behalf. Are you going to sacrifice a goat on his behalf? I'm sure he's expecting premium goat sacrifice for the problem he has. Your mumbling, in other words, is as ineffectual as taping a sock to your forehead and reciting all of Han Solo's lines from Episode V.
If and when Mr. Hitchens is cured, it will be by the sweat and expertise of doctors, not witch-doctors such as yourself.
Having a fondess for religious writing, music, or art does not a believer make. Hitchens has mentioned several times in his debates his fondess for devotional music, the latin mass, gregorian chants etc. But surely you must recognize that our cultures are dominated by religious themes becuase a vast majority of their constituients are themselves religious?
"But what struck me with particular power as I surveyed the Catholic media was that the vast, vast majority of Catholics reported Hitchens’ disease and then, with transparent sincerity, urged people to pray for him."
Surely you mean "transparent malfeasance". There is nothing genuine about the calls to prayer by the media on behalf of Mr. Hitchens. These Lady Hope types always caveat their calls to prayer, as you did, with a wink-wink for conversion and a snide and insincere get-well wish. Take your inconsistant article – which praises with one hand and insults the intelligence with the other – and shove it right where it belongs: up the pope's wrinkled nose.
Why all the bitterness?
I just love the reply to your post . says it all really. Catholicmom asks: Why all the bitterness? Well , honey, let me explain to you, just little lit bit in language all your own. Those who are disrespectful and deny god are gonna hell, right? So, in your book of contradictions, hypocricies and blatant lies we are admonished to disrespect at our peril. Now, when someone with more brains than most of your predatory group comes along we feel sad that he is pilloried and abused by the self same group of predatory and paedophile enabling weirdos that you belong to . Someone with the bravery and intelligence to demythologise your book of second hand stories and cant. We feel dismayed, catholicmom, that there are living ,breathing humans who are able to respond like unimaginative automatons like you. Religiously programmed this time to the Christian station; tomorrow the Islamic jihadists. All ghastly.
Well, I am neither Catholic nor even Christian. And I ask the same question as CM: Why the bitterness?
It diminishes any rational arguments one might have.
Praying for an atheist is disrespectful to say the least. The man admits he respects Hitchens, and then he proposes that everyone practice a patronizing ritual to promote their own feelings of superiority.
I read this article with an open mind, seeking nothing but to understand Mr. Barron's opinion. What I found was a collection of tropes about atheist behavior which betrays on the part of the author a mindset that does not, in fact, respect a nontheist's position enough to examine his own contentions. A response was warranted (although the popularity of this article diminishes the chance of this being read).
To that end, I responded with an honest reaction. The bitterness that was so deftly detected was a measured response to the tone of the article, which is to say it was meant to balance cloying insincerity with sardonic invective. Tone, invective, and focused anger are useful tools for expressing one's points. Once one has digested the logic of an argument and analyzed the methodology of delivery, one provides counterpoints. But aside addressing whatever rational points are made in the article, one must respond to the tone of the article as well. I think I effectively demonstrated that I don't appreciate the implications of what Mr. Barron says in a way that is quite clear to him.
Christopher Hitchens' mind is a near mirror of my own. Practical, principled, and honest. If Mister Baron wishes to pray for anyone, then he should first start with himself, see where that gets him, then perhaps leave well enough alone.
There's an assumption that all or most atheists are free-thinking hedonists. Totally untrue, and Mister Baron's little written sojourn only proves our point.
Good and evil are not handed down from an entity high above, you moron. They come from within.
Good and evil come from within, you say. You are the creator....you are the god? Or do you mean you live by your conscience?
Catholicmom is the reigning queen of distraction and non sequitur.
Man is a social animal. The idea of good and evil is no more than our social gene pushing us towards actions that promote the well being of the group over our own self interests. There is no putting ourselves as god. In a sense, our genetic makeup is all of our gods. It governs how we feel, how we react, what we prize, what we disdain, who we love and who we hate. We are all just genetic puddles fitting neatly into the world's hollow.
For me religion is like greed – everyone is infected with it.... I see no reason why a human would push a system of belief onto another....other than greed.... King James' need to change the bible in order to extort taxes, The Taliban's need to kill everything in sight – Muslims need to control the planet ..... All of it boils down to greed for money or power over another.... The entire human race is fighting to earn 'money'... And we are killing the only planet we can live on in order to achieve what?
That really was a good point, made me really think. It makes so much sense to relate greed and religion. I honestly have never heard that connection before.
Pray all you want, it will not work. Prayers are words, words do not cure cancer modern medicine does. You know the kind science and reason gave us. And do not forget that if your god did give him cancer which he should being al mighty and all knowing in your eyes, it would have no reason to cure the cancer!
AMEN to that. I always found prayer to be worthless, and I prayed a lot having grown up christian/catholic. Let's analyze prayer a little for a moment. This is my prayer proof.
Lets say u are sick like Hitchens. Now god allowed u to be sick, and created the sickness. And u can pray to be cured. If u are cured after praying, people say god heard ur prayers and had a plan for u to not be sick. (This begs the question of why he let u get this sick to begin with!) If u are not cured after praying, people say god heard ur prayers but had a plan that needs u to be sick, and u just do not understand why this is good for u in the long run. OKAY folks, lets consider praying and not praying when u are sick, and see if it makes a difference. Just think a little bit here...........
U are sick, u pray, and either god has a plan for u to be sick, or to be cured. Lets say god has a plan for u to be sick – u just don't understand or like the reason. U can pray or not pray, and u will be sick. SO PRAYING DID NOTHING. Lets say god has a plan for u to NOT be sick – (again begging the question of why u are sick in the first place). U pray, and u get better, thinking that prayer worked. U don't pray and since god has a NOT SICK plan, u get better thinking that your doctors are good. BUT AGAIN, PRAYING DID NOTHING.
Odd isn't it?
Concerned: Yes, "Thy will be done..." "Please, please, please, Lord, please do what you're going to do anyway"...???
Sorry for the random posts. They block the full quote from Hitchens but allow parts. Figures from a belief blog. Wouldnt want the athiest to have too much ammo.
McCluck - by all means, experiment away... and please let us know your results. I have typed several comments which just don't appear, with NO clue to what's wrong. Try to resubmit, and it says "duplicate post". It's very frustrating, to say the least.
Yes indeed: there is a peculiarly 'random' some might say 'edited' approach which belies any notion of freedom of expression. Dispiriting and moronic really, but then the Barron group are now truly discredited and lliving up to their name. Pitiful and obnoxious as this posting is by Barron it is indicative of how low the Catholic church has fallen; and just how piety can errode fair play.
Rev. Robert Barron is a "fracking" idiot to think his god is permitting Mr. Hitchens to "have" esophageal cancer. But then the Rev. Barron believes that some simple preacher man named Jesus died for his and our sins which is beyond the grasp of any intelligent being. And the RCC wonders why we stopped believing!!! The Rev. Barron is just another nail in RCC's coffin.
No, the Church is not wondering why you stopped believing….
It is easy to see which voice you listen to. It is your free will, do with it as you will.
So CatholicMom, you actually believe your god is permitting Mr. Hitchens to have this cancer?
Once again, as per the famous, contemporary, Catholic theologian, Edward Schillebeeckx, God is not omniscient. Please read, pause and contemplate the following:
Church: The Human Story of God,
Crossroad, 1993, p.91 (softcover)
"Christians (et al) must give up a perverse, unhealthy and inhuman doctrine of predestination without in so doing making God the great scapegoat of history."
"Nothing is determined in advance: in nature there is chance and determinism; in the world of human activity there is possibility of free choices.
Therefore the historical future is not known even to God, otherwise we and our history would be merely a puppet show in which God holds the strings.
For God, too, history is an adventure, an open history for and of men and women."
i.e. No one, not even God can prophesy or permit anything since that would violate the God-given gifts of Free Will and Future.
I think if you read closer that he says certain people will say its God punishing him but he never says he agrees with this. He mentions a lot of different things people may be thinking will considering C. Hitchens' illness. I think he's trying to make the point to send your well wishes to someone no matter how badly your disagree with them. If your version of well wishes is praying go ahead and do it no matter that Mr. Hitchens would not send well wishes in that way.
Reality,
"...some simple preacher man named Jesus died for his and our sins which is beyond the grasp of any intelligent being."
It is truly amazing, is it not? Someone taking my place to die the death my sinful life deserves and giving me His right standing with the Creator God which only His perfect life deserves. WOW! Please let me offer something that helped me. A university professor of a previous generation explained it like this: "A man can eat his dinner without understanding exactly how food nourishes him. A man can accept what [Jesus] Christ has done without knowing how it works: indeed, he certainly would not know how it works until he has accepted it."
As for the assertion that "No one, not even God can prophesy or permit anything since that would violate the God-given gifts of Free Will and Future." Would you be willing to consider this: Suppose for moment that God is powerful enough to permit all things, then would He not be powerful enough to determine HOW things are to happen (e.g. through humans' free will)? (Please do not misunderstand me, God cannot CAUSE evil or go against the gift of human free will that He has given.)
Reality, it seems from your posts that you like to read and search through different perspectives; may I urge you to think these things through for yourself? On the authority of God's Word, the Bible, if you humbly ask God to show Himself to you in the pages of Scripture, He will. Pick up a modern version like the ESV or NIV and start in the Gospel of John or Mark. Be prepared, though, when He reveals Himself you must be willing to obey...May God bless you!
RDM,
Been there, done that and concluded that the contemporary NT exegetes/experts are correct. Jesus was a simple preacher man who was raised to deity status by Paul et al. Also, bottom line, Christianity revolves not only on the myths and embellishments of Paul et al but one other "necessary accessory", one Pontius Pilate unless you believe that Pilate had no choice in the matter? But he did and could have just as easily sent Jesus to some Roman salt mines i.e.Christianity should historically be called "Pauletal and Pilatianity".
Reality,
"Jesus was a simple preacher man who was raised to deity status by Paul et al." The Jesus revealed in the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John made His own claims to deity in various ways. The Epistles (Paul, et al) do not reveal Jesus as the Son of God (Jesus already did that in His claims, character, and resurrection as recorded in the Gospels) but rather explain Jesus. As an aside, why would someone such as Paul go from persecuting the first followers of Christ (Christians) to glorifying Him as Lord and Saviour which ultimately lead Paul to his death?
As for "...one other 'necessary accessory', one Pontius Pilate unless you believe that Pilate had no choice in the matter? But he did and could have just as easily sent Jesus to some Roman salt mines..." So why did Pilate not choose differently?
If Jesus Christ is not Who He says He is then all these articles about Christianity and posts and the time and effort they represent are a complete waste. But if He is the Son of God and the only Saviour as He Himself plainly states then each one of us must come face to face with His claims and make a decision to be with Him or against Him. We cannot both be right. May God grant us mercy to choose Him.
RDM, You noted: "If Jesus Christ is not Who He says He is then all these articles about Christianity and posts and the time and effort they represent are a complete waste." Yes, they are. 21st century reviews of the Christian bible basically concludes that a better name for Christianity is "Mythianity".
Reality-
A person's heart – the combination of the mind, will and emotions – can only be changed by that person and the Lord God. No one else can do it.
You have made it clear in the posts from this article, as well as other articles in which you have posted, what other people have to say about the Christian faith, the Bible, and the claims of Christ. It is plain to see you have really given this much searching and thought. Eventually, though, as alluded to in the comment about a man accepting Christ, we have to either accept Him or reject Him whether we understand exactly how it works. When God shows us our current position and our need of Him in Christ it is critical to receive His gift – He may not give us another opportunity.
Given this, it is my earnest plea that when you are brought to the place where God reveals His love and mercy towards you that you settle this matter for yourself – between you and God alone. This is not just an intellectual issue, and definitely not an emotional one only, but one that takes the whole person. Our eternal destiny depends on what or who we rely while on this earth. May you know His love and peace that passes all understanding.
RDM
to try and deny the same to others
Christopher Hitchens,
How can you say you distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason but you respect inquiry, open-mindedness and the pursuit of ideas? Anything that is an ‘inquiry’ or is a pursuit of an idea would be distrusted by you just because science has not YET supplied you with a Truth that fits your ‘idea’ of Truth…and so you would deem it ‘outrageous reason’.
In 1978 Jastrow released NASA’s definitive report, shocking the public with his announcement that the open model was probably correct. On June 25 of that year, Jastrow released his findings to the New York Times Magazine:
“This is an exceedingly strange development, unexpected by all but the theologians. They have always accepted the word of the Bible: In the beginning God created heaven and earth… [But] for the scientist who has lived by his faith in the power of reason, the story ends like a bad dream. He has scaled the mountains of ignorance; he is about to conquer the highest peak; [and] as he pulls himself over the final rock, he is greeted by a band of theologians who have been sitting there for centuries.”
Good to see you quoting people again rather than coming up with your own opinions. Nothing seems to change. Mr. Jastrow now falls into the category of scientists that flies in the face of the very basis of his job. Scientists from around the globe reject the idea of ID in an overwhelming majority in the 90-95% range due to its lack of evidence, non-functioning testable thesis, its inability to make predictions and pseudo-science foundation. He is not considered a reliable resource on the topic by his peers. As for Mr. Hitchens, he is not a scientists, but falls into more of the philosopher bin. He has the backing of the world's leading scientists specializing in biology, evolutionary biology, theoretical physics and astronomy. Mr. Jastrow, regarding his ID claims, does not.
Added information:
Professor Jastrow attracted criticism due to some of his statements which have been picked up and championed by the intelligent design movement to support their cause. His expressed views on Creation were that although he was an "agnostic, and not a believer",[1] it seems to him that "the curtain drawn over the mystery of creation will never be raised by human efforts, at least in the foreseeable future"[1] due to "the circumstances of the big bang-the fiery holocaust that destroyed the record of the past".[1]
Hmmm, Jastrow, an agnostic and non-believer, dabbling in the unknown up to his time i.e. 1978? But now we know more as evolution of the mind pushes us to the reality of it all as we "speed" to our own fiery end in a few billion years or sooner if nuclear war breaks out or some wayward astroid takes aim all with the permission of some god according to the Rev. Barron.
Long story short...because if something contradicts science and outrages reason then this means there is evidence that this something is wrong. So we dont trust it. Without evidence saying why we should trust it anyway, it makes no sense to believe it. This shouldnt change anything for anyone though since the religous have the concept of faith.
CatholicMom,
Some added information on your "hero":
Professor Jastrow attracted criticism due to some of his statements which have been picked up and championed by the intelligent design movement to support their cause. His expressed views on Creation were that although he was an "agnostic, and not a believer", it seems to him that "the curtain drawn over the mystery of creation will never be raised by human efforts, at least in the foreseeable future" due to "the circumstances of the big bang-the fiery holocaust that destroyed the record of the past.
Fortunately, the human mind continues to evolve and Professor Jastrow's agnosticism and non-belief becomes more relevant in 2010 vs.1978 as we speed to our own fiery end in a few billion years.
CatholicMom,
Fortunately, the human mind continues to evolve and Professor Jastrow's agnosticism and non-belief becomes more relevant in 2010 vs.1978 as we speed to our own fiery end in a few billion years.
And furthermore, CatholicMom, I think a very simple quote you should be able to understand rejects your post. "That which can be asserted without evidence, can be dismissed without evidence." Ironically enough, Mr. Hitchens made it famous.
Your screename says it all. You might as well call yourself "DelusionalMom"
"I try to deny myself any Illusions or delusions,
Hitchens uses logic to fight the problem that is religion. He is a hero in my book. Implying that he must be religious because he likes Dylan is a load of it.-must the religious always claim atheists have faith as they do? I don’t blame the religious for hating this guy though. I would be quite upset if someone reduced my arguments to rubble with ease. He fights a good fight, one aimed at eliminating the ridiculous, influence that religion has on everyone's life.
"Our belief is not a belief. Our principles are not a faith. We do not rely solely upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason. We may differ on many things, but what we respect is free inquiry, open-mindedness, and the pursuit of ideas for their own sake."
— Christopher Hitchens
and I think that this perhaps
"I try to deny myself any Illusions or delusions, and I think that this perhaps ent!tles me to try and deny the same to others, at least as long as they refuse to keep their fantasies to themselves." – Christopher Hitchens
PRAY what for? praying does not work thanking god does no good be real there is nothing that people can do to with prayer.there is no supernatural being that controls peoples lives. NOTHING ,NADA,NENDE. just use your eyes and ears to do whats right. remember you die and thats it . no more thoughts no more awareness,no spirt or ghost. read about after death in bible. it tells you there is nothing.
Since prayer or praying exists, how do you explain it? Why is there such a thing as praying? If it doesn’t ‘apply’, how can it exist? Do you have a conscience or does it not exist? Notice that the word conscience is the word ‘science’ with ‘con’ in front of it. We use our CONscience to try to deny GOoD, and that is why it is called 'fighting with our conscience'. You hear people say they never pray, and yet when they hear news of a catastrophic illness striking their health, they have been known to say [pray],‘Oh, my God’…….
Catholic mom – check out my prayer proof under Bernard a little way down the list here.
Let's clarify the etymology and meaning of the word "conscience". It has little to do with scientific research, as implied above. Instead, science here refers to knowledge, specifically knowledge of oneself.
Catholicmom ~ I saw an article where people prayed for the oil spill to stop in the Gulf. What is the difference between that and sacrificing chickens?
Robert Barron describes Hitch as employing 'specious insinuation and sometimes , plain smear -tactics to undermine religion'. He admonishes his religious cohorts {Hitchens} 'ought to be opposed , vigorously with counter-argument and clarification of fact.' I would suggest to Barron that he do just that. He's going to find the clarity of fact quite difficult in describing his defence of the supernatural I would have thought. Clearly, he has no trouble making sweeping criticisms of Hitchens' desire for just such an engagemen,t but as usual, is unable to oblige. Now, I wonder why that is? I would suggest that just possibly Barron has only specious insinuation and sometimes, plain smear- tactics to undermine the wholly rational and anti-theist view of our evolution.
Hear! Hear! Beautifully said and exactly right.
I was "with" Fr Barron until that very passage. Anyone who has read Hitchens' work knows very well that his arguments are in no way "specious" nor does he stoop to "smearing". The evidence and the truth and their own actions "smear" the extremely religious with sickening regularity already – no need for anyone to make anything up.
Thank you for this reply. I wanted to post something similar regarding the use of 'facts' in this argument. If this be the basis of the rules, then Hitch wins the 'religious' argument before it even begins. Also, good father, keep your prayers to yourself - it woefully displays your sense of superiority over all those who don't happen to agree with you and besides, all studies have shown that they're useless. They serve only to inflate the ego of the one saying the prayer. I'm really awaiting the day when the fully 15% of the North American population professing to be of no religious faith stand up for themselves as a group and demand some respect from these self-righteous child molesters.
When we suffer illness or pain we can either cry ‘woe is me’ or join our suffering with Jesus on the Cross and ask Him to take our suffering and use it for GOOD. Remember, Jesus suffered the greatest evil a person could ever suffer, willingly, and turned it into the greatest GOOD for us! When we suffer we can ask God to use it for GOOD also.
I will pray for ‘CHRISTopher;’ may he be able to accept and find peace in his illness; may he find it in his heart to offer it up to God for the good of the world-perhaps for atheists they will come to know God. May he receive the miracle he is praying for.
Chris is not praying. He is undergoing chemotheray. You should try reading his books and articles in Vanity Fair.
You don’t know that he is NOT praying……….did he tell you this? He can pray without anyone knowing except God will know and that is all that matters.
If I ever get through reading all my subscriptions to OUR SUNDAY VISITOR, The Catholic Answer, and my diocese newspaper, The Northern Cross, and a book…’the quotable Fulton Sheen’, I may have time to look into your suggestion………..
Because I've taken the time to read and analyze his many works on thought, reason and humanity. I have digested his rationality in his attacks on religion and know very well what he thinks about religion. You have not and merely make foundation-less assumptions about a man you know little to nothing about, not unlike many of the topics you debate on these boards.
God carved the ten commandments in stone, the technology of the time, so why doesn't he keep up the tradition? With the internet almost universally available, he could keep is informed simultaneously in writing and end all dispute about his word.
Thats exactly the problem. Put the religious propaganda down and read something relevant to actual human experience. I promise its not evil and Jesus will not cry for your soul if you open your mind and read a Hitchens book. I'm not in the thrall of the devil (you want to say so, I know), I was raised very strict Catholic and I know all the propaganda. My dear, there is no God as you think of him. However there is an energy that breathes life into the universe, and your whole life's purpose is to become one with this energy. And then you die.
"suffered the greatest evil ever"? Jesus (if he existed) got off light compared to many others. Getting nailed to a tree is a picnic compared to what people in my family have suffered.
Seems rather snotty or egotistical to have to "announce" that superior, all knowing, and benevolent christians "pray" for some one. If you feel that someone should receive a prayer- DO IT ON YOUR OWN. Don't announce it, don't blow your trumpet, more importantly- DON'T INFORM THE PERSON.
It's cr4p like this that really give christianity a bad name. You assume that someone needs and or would benefit from your beliefs so you INFORM them that you will pray for them. This accomplishes a few things VITAL to the christian mindset- 1. It tells the person that you are "praying" for that they are inferior to you. 2. It informs the person being "prayed" for that according to YOUR belief system that they REALLY need it. 3. It feeds the christian superiority complex / ego.
Want to pray for some one? Fine- Don't announce it to the world. Your ego doesn't need anymore bloating.
@Luke: There is no point in trying to reason with CatholicMom. She's too far down the rabbit hole.
I don't ever want to attend a picnic where people are being nailed to trees! My people had it worse.
seaswept – I know. My goal is not to convince her. However, I aim in proving points to those that read our banter, displaying all too easy it to pull the carpet out from underneath someone as delusional as CatholicMom. Maybe, just maybe, someone on the fence that has been questioning religion for years but afraid to admit it will realize that they are not alone. I can be their voice until their footing is grounded.
Priests molest young boys, what do you do? Nothing
Catholics kill protestants in Northern Ireland, what do you do? Nothing
Catholic anti abortion activists bomb, threaten and even kill, what do you do? Nothing
Someone disagrees with your belief, and you jump around screaming look at me! Mine is the one true path!
Fix your own house and leave atheists to not believe in PEACE.
@ Luke/CatholicMom
This is why the problem continues, and will continue until the next "BIG BANG" (for Luke) or "THE RAPTURE" (for CatholicMom). For starters, you are attacking character not issues. Both of you want to argue your sides and simply excuse the other's opinions. Luke, you claim that you have done your own investigation and try to criticize Mom for not doing enough searching. While mom says she reads her material and will get to yours "if she has a chance"... It is hard to fully understand something until you delve into BOTH sides of an argument. When you only read into one side, of course you are going to believe ONLY that side... By doing some searching, you might take away a new perspective on the matter. Before settling on your narrow views, try expanding your minds by looking into something you might not be comfortable with, instead of attacking another person's character. I think you both are the "child with their fingers in their ears".
@SelfishGene
Oh Gene.... I love when people take things out of context (which I have seen alot of atheist do to try bolstering there arguments). Human nature is human nature. People screw up, but to make it appear only religious people screw up is absurd... so here you go (compliments of yahoo.com):
Pol Pot, a devote ATHEIST and leader of the Khmer Rouge 1976-1979, a mass-murder of at least 7 million people. What did you do? Nothing
Joseph Stalin: Soviet leader who attend an Orthpdox Seminary as a young man yet later in life called Christanity a religion for the weak in mind, who murdered 70 MILLION PEOPLE as an ATHEIST. What did you do? Nothing
Mao Zedong: Extreme DEVOUT ATHEIST, who murdered 100 million people. What did you do? Nothing
I am not Christian, but I prefer to investigate BOTH sides of arguments and make informed decisions for myself. Taking your few cases and generalizing the whole Christian religion (or any religion for that matter) is ignorant. That would be like saying just because a few whites are racist, all whites are racist. It is illogical. I am not saying you are ignorant, but as a logical person (which I am assuming you are) can you really make that general of a statement based on a few cases? The debate of whether a God exists will always be around. It is only at our deaths that we will truly know the answer. I bet no one is wholly right!
@BTFU (on the comment about the "Big Bang" and "the Rapture"
Just wanted to inform you that the Big Bang theory originates from a Roman Catholic priest named Georges Lemaitre. And it squares up with Christianity in a way most people take for granted. Why? Because God is the uncaused cause. Great to see this most prevalent scientific theory for the origins of the universe is rooted in Christian Dogma.
And associating the Rapture with CatholicMom is also ironically wrong. The Rapture is not biblically based and is a recent theological phenomena based on fallible Protestant interpretations of Scripture. So, I think CatholicMom would agree with me by saying that associating this Eschatological view with her makes no sense (just as relating the Big Bang theory with Luke who I guess is an atheist).
Cheers and God love you all!
BTFU – with all due respect, you listed things that occured before SelfishGene's birth...so what was he supposed to do? SelfishGene mentioned things that have occured during CatholicMom's lifetime...and there are many more instances that could be talked about in which christians – by and large – appear to care to do nothing. Poverty, Homelessness, Starvation, Genocides, abuse, neglect, the list goes on...and the most vocal of christians, seem to care most about Gays & Abortions? I would hardly think that the death of a child not even born yet is far more important than the death of living breathing children? Yet, thats not what your most vocal leaders talk about...so we have to conclude that majority of christians are not true christians, or the true christians just dont want to rock the boat like Jesus.
@David, CA, You have wisdom beyond your years as does anyone that tells the truth about religious zealots. They have always been condescending and arrogant.
It’s about time others like Mr. Hitchens speak out and let religion know that not everyone listens to fairytales.
I’m tired of inane people blessing me and wanting to pray for me. Whether I live to be a hundred or die tomorrow it will not change my beliefs and those who think they know better can keep it to themselves.
I do not need SAVING and I do have compassion and morals that guide me without the need to pretend some made up overlord controls my behavior.
Thom Hartmann
It amazes me when people say they want God to give them a sign (or tell us what is happening on the internet). What would it take to make you believe in him? "A sign?" "A miracle?" A message on the internet? Why would God do something so useless when you have no intention of listening to him? He already gave the world prophets, written words (Bible), and a miracle worker who came back from the dead (Jesus). But, you don't believe any of them. Would feel differently if he spoke to you directly on the internet or would you start searching for the person who messed with your computer. I would be willing to bet God has even sent several people to you to talk about him. DId you listen to them? Maybe he sent me to try to reason with you....
lozeerose,
You are so right about the rapture being a protestant idea started by a man in 1830. His name was Nelson, I think. Thank you for helping keep watch………..
I have a feeling, after reading most of Mr. Hitchen's works, that he doesn't want your prayers. He, however, is a humanist and would likely accept your well wishes and best regards. As a fan, I personally wished him all my support on his personal site and on his youtube channell.
Where do you think you got ‘that feeling’? What does science offer you about where ‘feelings’ come from? My faith tells me I have 3 ‘voices’ [feelings] I can listen to……my voice which I can manipulate into believing whatever will fit what I want at the moment; satan’s voice which will tell you ‘go ahead, it is the ‘new age’, everyone who thinks is doing it..and it is GOOD, or you can listen to the voice of the Holy Spirit who will tell you the Truth.
You remind me of a child that sticks his fingers in his ears when his parents explain why we don't stick forks in electrical sockets. I'll humor you. My feelings come from analyzing the evidence spelled out in his books, articles, debates and documentaries. I read them (you didn't), watched them (you didn't), digested the data (you didn't) and reached a rational conclusion (you have not).
CatholicMom, I think it might be best if you STOPPED listening to all of those voices. They have medication and therapy for that.
Oh CatholicMom, where to begin? Your faith 'tells' you, and you accept it blindly. Well I guess that's what faith is all about. However having 'feelings' is a human condition (even some animals have exhibited emotions) that comes with sentience, reasoning and our own instinctual base emotions. People who do not believe in god, or who believe wholeheartedly in a different god than you, also have (surprise!) feelings.
hey Catholic mom! these people needed your prayers all along not reasoning..all of their reasoning are walls built up to keep your ideas out..the only way to assail those walls is to pray for them..which is what ought to have been doing for the man before he got sick..perhaps people have been praying for him before this sickness happened to him....they are the ones obeying God..it's easy now that he is fallen to begin to pray for him now in the sight of all men cause that's what you're "supposed to do"... which is just another form of hypocrisy....Jesus didn't say to pray for your enemies after they get into trouble..but he did say to rejoice and be exceeding glad when you come into persecution for righteous sake...sorry didn't mean to be so long winded..:)
I've had the opportunity to see Mr. Hitchens speak and even share a brief hello. Through dumb luck, I know people who are on quite friendly terms with him. I have learned from them that it's fair to say that my impression of him appears to be true. For all of his various hangups (don't we all have them?) he is a thoughtful and charming man. As a Christian, I find myself disagreeing with him on several things. But I am quite thankful for the difficult questions he has raised. It has served to deepen my faith in many ways.
I would encourage anyone who wishes to pray for Mr. Hitchens to do so. I would encourage those who wish to take his illness as a sign from a vengeful God, to pray for themselves.
Beautifully said.
PERFECTLY said. I immediately said a prayer for Mr. Hitchens upon hearing the news of his cancer. I've also believed him to be engaging and thought-provoking. His disbelief never once threatened my knowledge of God's existence. I was never afraid that by listening to him or reading that I would not believe. If anything, I felt sadness for him as someone who was searching for "proof" of something greater, but never having the true capacity of believing.
Steve Dave – Well said.
@Lynde – Do you understand how offensive it is when you say you feel sorry for him? Just because someone doesnt share your belief in God it doesnt mean that they are in some way lost or need your pity. How would you feel if I said I felt sorry for you because you believe in God.....rightly offended I would think.
You just don't get how offensive it is to pray for people who don't believe in god. We don't need your prayers, we don't need your condescension and we don't need your pity. Instead of insulting this man, perhaps you should be donating money/time to cancer research. Now THAT would help...and it would be more "Christian" to boot.
Might it be that people get ill without God making them ill? Your article paints God as some sort of malevolent egomaniac; "I'll make you die unless enough people pray to me and I am in a good mood!". Pray all you want. In fact pray that CH becomes a Christian. You will soon see that God is not very powerful as he cannot change anyones mind.
You will do with your 'free will' as you so please. If you are inclined to listen to satan and all his lies you will go down that wide path; if you are inclined to listen to the Holy Spirit you will take the narrow path which leads to Life Everlasting instead of the wide path that will lead to death of your soul. It is your choice............
CatholicMom – LOL. Wut?
"Might it be that people get ill without God making them ill? Your article paints God as some sort of malevolent egomaniac; "I'll make you die unless enough people pray to me and I am in a good mood!". Pray all you want. In fact pray that CH becomes a Christian. You will soon see that God is not very powerful as he cannot change anyones mind."
Father Barron is not implying that God is "making" Hitchens ill. Rather, God, in his Goodness, allows our free will (which sets into motion an entire series of choices, all of which effect all of creation and humanity as a cohesive whole) and permits situations that might appear to be "evil" from a limited human perspective in order that He might bring about a greater good with our cooperation in His will. Otherwise, like you said, he would be a malevolent egolomaniac. True power does not lie in forcing one's will upon another. That is a false definition. God forcibly changing someone's mind is a misdirected understanding of power. As Christians, we pray for Christopher Hitchens' conversion not for our sake or for God's, but for Christopher's full flourishing. We do this, not in a self-righteous, egotisical way, because we pray the same prayer for ourselves and for other Christians. We are all in need of conversion.
oops. I meant "egomaniac"
Are you saying that GOD causes everything in the known and unknown universe both, if GOD takes the credit for healing your broken leg then he MUST take the blame for breaking it in the first place, don't you think?
No. There is a distinct difference between the terms "causes" and "allows/permits."– He is Goodness, itself, so everything that participates or demonstrates goodness is a reflection of God. However, evil, being a privation of good, is not something for which God takes blame. He can work through it to bring about good in cooperation with our free will, but he is not the cause of evil.
RC – but he created the evil! He created everything including the evil, the potential for evil, the ability to choose evil. It is like a parent handing a child a loaded gun, and giving said child total permission to go outside and play with his friends, with just one warning – "Be careful jamie, choose wisely." Now when "Jamie who has got a gun" (remember that song) blows your kids brains out, just who are the good christians going to blame? Jamie?
I think not! U see, if there is some god outside of this process we call the universe, this said god really has no preference to good or evil. It would be impartial to either, since it created both in its infinite wisdom, and would not be threatened at all by either. MAN cares about good and evil, because man is effected by good-humans and bad-humans in noticeable ways. IT THE GOD could care less – assuming there is an IT THE GOD somewhere.
RCarter... you are clearly thinking of everything in black and white/right and wrong terms in which the world exists according to your narrow point of view. very few things are black and white and almost no one agrees 100 percent on anything. your 'light side / dark side of the force' argument is immature and ridiculous.
There have been multiple scientific studies that show that prayer does not have any impact on whether someone is cured of a serious illness. It's time christians just stopped worrying about people that don't believe in their sky god. Atheists don't care if you pray for them, your god does not exist.
RCarter said: "However, evil, being a privation of good, is not something for which God takes blame."
No offense, but that's a total cop out. if God created the universe, he created flowers and butterflies and kittens, but he also created earthquakes, famine and cancer. If he created good, he also created evil. Being omnipotent, God has the power to prevent tidal waves, plane crashes and murders before they happen but he doesn't. If you knew that someone that was about to be killed and you did nothing to prevent it happening, you would be partially morally culpable for the outcome.
God has the power to prevent all suffering in the world but chooses not to. If God gets the credit for the good things, he also gets the blame for the bad things. It is his universe, after all.
God CAN change hearts and minds... I have seen it first-hand in the lives of people around me. The problem is too many Christians think they can change people, when that simply isn't the case... I am one that would probably fall under the spirtual not religious group. Growing up in a christian home let me see first hand the backwardness of many religious organizations. BUT with that said, non-religious people have just as much evil (if you will) in them. This is human nature. No christian will ever try to tell you they are without greed/hate/etc. because if they do they do not truly understand anything about what Jesus taught. And whether or not you believe in his divinity, Jesus WAS a real man and was a good moral teacher. I would challenge people to instead of sprewing hatred, do there own investigations. Form your OWN opinions, by actively seeking answers to life's toughest questions. Too many times I see believers, and non-believers alike, regurgitate what media outlets say without any deeper investigation. The bottom line is this: power and position can cause any man (or woman) to fall victim to greed, hate, lust, etc., but to simply blame religion for the world's trouble is absurd. The extremist on both sides (religious side and atheist side) are the ones that prolferate the building hatred. (I am not a textbook "Christian", and am still coninually seeking answers, so don't attack me, give me your opinions)
RCarter -
God, in his Goodness, allows our free will (which sets into motion an entire series of choices, all of which effect all of creation and humanity as a cohesive whole) and permits situations that might appear to be "evil" from a limited human perspective in order that He might bring about a greater good with our cooperation in His will.
That is false. Not just it implies God's existence, which we still have zero credible proof of. The problem is also that free will doesn't exist – we are obviously a product of our genes and environment, which we do not control. As Sam Harris puts it in "The End of Faith":
"The problem of vindicating an omnipotent and omniscient God in the face of evil (the problem of theodicy) is insurmountable. Those who claim to have surmounted it, by recourse to notions of free will and other incoherencies, have merely heaped bad philosophy onto bad ethics."
Note to that, explaining why free will is not real: "Free will is actually more (or less) than an illusion in that it cannot even be rendered coherent conceptually, as no one has ever described a manner in which mental and physical events could arise that would attest to its existence... What most people overlook is that free will does not even correspond to any subjective fact about us. Consequently, even rigorous introspection soon grows as hostile to the idea of free will as the equations of physics have, because apparent acts of volition merely arise, spontaneously (whether caused, uncaused or probabilistically inclined, it makes no difference), and cannot be traced to a point of origin in the stream of consciousness. A moment or two of serious self-scrutiny and the reader might observe that he no more authors the next thought he thinks than the next thought I write."
For the sake of discussion, lets say God is the cause of evil or laid the framework of our world which allows evil to happen. I'm making an assumption that we all agree on what is good and what is evil (yikes, I know) but just go with it for a minute. If God allows it though, then we must ask why he would allow it. What purpose could it serve? The concept of a God is an omnipotent, omniscient being. What does a being like that stand to gain from our good, evil, or even our existence in general? My answer is glory. He would/could only have created us/the world to magnify his glory because he certainly doesn't need us for anything else. So the next question in this line of thinking is: How do we glorify him? The best way I can think of is to choose him using the power of free will. I submit that God is far more glorified when we have the power to choose something else but choose him instead, than he would be if we physically saw him and spoke to him face to face everyday and chose him because of the obvious. I'd compare it to how we want to be liked for who we are, not for what we have to offer. Evil comes about as the product of this free will, the other choice, and if the world is indeed 'fallen' as a result of humanities free will (thanks Adam and Eve), then evil becomes necessary for the glory of God. God explicitly states that not everyone will choose him, even though he longs for them to do so. He created us for worship, but you can see his love for us in the way he created us and those close to us. This is my opinion, and I've been pleasantly surprised reading through these posts at the number of articulate opinions presented on both sides of the issue, and the mutual respect that has been shown (similar to what the author of the article prescribes). Lets keep it up, it's better for all of us.
Did you read the article, apparently not, because the author raised a myriad of possibilities surrounding Mr. Hitchen's illness. Your rapid uniformed response just goes to show how folks like to take bits of information and twist it for their purposes much the same way Richard Dawkins takes quotes from the internet regarding religious critique and bases the vast majority of his arguments on them. I think a true atheist should have some understanding of theology, this may assist him or her with making their case against the existence of God. So many atheists are knee jerk responders who look at the world in which they live (human failings and all) and say, "oh there is no God!" Yet, I doubt any (or to be fair very few) have read scripture or studied some of the great theologians, who have wrestled with issues like that of "Free Will = St. Augustine, or Human Suffering and a loving God (Deidrich Bonhoffer) and a host of others who have walked this earth, and faced all the trials and tribulations associated with the human condition. Faith is defined as the assurance of things hoped for, and the conviction of things not seen (Hebrews 11:1). In other words, it is the acknowledgment that I am a finite human being here for a limited time only (as Mr. Hitchens is finding out), it is knowing that in the grand scheme of things I am but dust, and there is no possible way that I purport to know everything and especially state definitively that there is no God. What atheists fail to realize (purposely or otherwise) is that for true people of faith, it is not about religious doctrines and dogmas, it is about a personal relationship and experience with the "Holy" with the transcendental; that which cannot be measured by science, nor seen with the human eye, but with the heart and with the spirit. Thus, it is because of my faith in a loving God, I realize that I am more than dust and that this world as imperfect in many ways, and "mysteriously perfect" in others is more than an accident, I exist more than for just myself, I exist for God, I exist because of God. I exist to love and that includes Mr. Hitchens.
Turn The Other Cheek, there is an inherent problem with that argument, would it not make more sense to just create a perfect world? I'm not talking about the horrific things people do to other people but things people have no "free will" over. Hurricanes, Floods, Diseases, Droughts, and the like. Also the idea of the "original Sin" is hard for me to get my mind around, GOD is punishing all of humanity for the mistakes of one man, also what was the mistake (gaining knowledge). See the issues these things raise, at least to some of us?
he changed my mind ..that is God did...and he can change yours ..he can even make you want him to change your mind...:)
CH doesn't need prayer, he needs medical technology. Christians are so hypocritical; they're always praying when they want or need something. When science steps in and makes things right, they're all screaming "it's a miracle," or, "my faith saved me."
Thanks to Christians, God is dead.
BTFU – God doesnt change anyones hearts or minds, humans do – individually we make our own choices based on the information we have (or choose to ignore). So, if you heart or mind changed, its because you did that...no one else but you. Not god, not satan, not santa claus....just you. Otherwise, what is free will?
CMom – sorry to inform you there is no satan. have you ANY evidence whatsoever? nope – just a book.
other believers – pray with a thousand million prayers that your god can change my mind or chistophers mind. it just doesn't work. we are more powerful than your god.
God is NOT the problem ...... people that use GODs' perfect name and his enemy is to blame. Yes and false images,rules....ect. ALL coming from mans ' greediness,lies...ect that have controlled people on any level at any time.....using guilt,fear,shame messages and YES GODS' name have misguided and distorted Gods' message. God did NOT lie when he said that would happen..... everything God has said has come to pass and because he does NOT lie will come to pass......
There is one thing that I don't think Mr. Hitchens ever answered or even asked in any writings or debates, maybe it is only a question that an idiot like me would ask. As a non believer I am at a lost, everyone is using the term GOD as if everybody knows what everybody else means by it. That only makes sense if, everybody that believes in GOD believes that same thing about GOD and that is clearly not the case. Jews, Muslims, Christians, all believe in the same GOD (so I have read), and they believe that there is only one GOD (at least now there is only one GOD left). The issue is that, all three groups believe in different things and that only makes sense if there is more than one GOD or there is no GOD. Logically, no one can say that one group is right or wrong since the same rules when applied to all groups yields that same answer. Do I have that right?
I grew up christian – catholic grade school, hi school, and college. I luv the writings of the 4-horsemen of the New Atheism. In fact, I have written my own book about growing up christian and how brain washing and indoctrinating it is. So by all current measurements, I would be considered an atheist. But since no one can define god, or prove that he exists, or has met god, it would seem that u are crazy if u are NOT an atheist.
However, DO NOT mix believing in god with spirituality. god-believers are seldom spiritual, yet spiritual people will often express there sensitivity to the wholeness of our universe using religious symbols, myths and language. I would consider this to be the situation with Dylan/Waugh. Expressing spirituality via language, art, song, myths usually results in being categorized into one of the religious baskets.
I am very spiritual, more than any christian I have personally met. My views on spirituality could probably be cast into one of the religious baskets – for those who need a religious basket as the author does. However, that does not make me religious.
Hitchens magnificently writes about the destructive non-spiritual nature of organized religion. Basically, he points out how NON-spiritual most religious people are, and how anti-spiritual religious orgs are. Religious orgs only accept their brand of spirituality, thus excluding the magnificent variety of spirituality in this universe. Religious orgs are just companies trying to capture the spiritual product onto their product list.
AMEN
JohnQuest – I agree with u 100%.........So many people say they believe in god, yet have never met him, cannot prove he exists, cannot even define him once a discussion begins. The reason for lack of definition is quite understandable. As soon as any person or group defines god, it becomes trivial to shoot the definition down. Obviously, as u point out, it is simple to find another person or group that disagrees with the definition, or the definition becomes so UNcomplete and irrational and trivial upon discussion.
I have never heard a discussion, or read a book about god, that basically could not be summed up at the end as follows. NO ONE knows what god is. It appears that we humans associate the unknown with a god who can explain this unknown. Humans need a beginning point defined, so god is the beginning. Basically, as far as I can tell, god is a holding place for future knowledge and wisdom that will explain what we don't know or understand. I am A-OK with this. Take it any further, and as Hitchens points out, fighting and killing and fear and religious hacks and charlatans will arise. This is when it all goes wrong.
ConcernedPerson, or any one, have you read "American Gods". I finished it about a month ago, I highly recommend it, especially for believers. I think it shows how we have become a more secular society.
Thank u Jessica, clearly u are that loving christian we all have come to know. Lots of children will never read it because their parents fear any opinion different from their own, particularly a well thought out opinion seasoned by years of immersion and final escape from the same indoctrination that the parents require of their children.
As an atheist, I find it objectionable that anyone should feel the right to pray for me because I don't believe as they do. That's as bad as that idiot church who thinks its a good idea to baptist dead Jews or protest at military funerals. It's the worst kind of pandering.
Concerned Person: I was merely speaking of the educational horror you would envoke with your writing skills, but you do seem a little paranoid. Tell me, do you not notice the judgment and stereotypical comments in your banter? I was under the impression that we Christians were ridiculed for judging. You don't seem to have a problem dishing it out. Also, my children are extremely intelligent, well-cultured individuals. I will absolutely teach them and train them in the matter I feel is correct, but I will never shove my beliefs down their throat. I trust that they ARE intelligent enough, loved enough, and trained enough to know to stay away from a the likes of a person who begins their sentences with "lots".
Babtist church marquee: "If humans evolved from monkeys, then why are there still monkeys?" If this passes for logic, we are all doomed. This country so is overrun by religious zealots who are so ignorant to the realities of science that they are seen as intelligent for posing such an idiotic question. Hopefully this mode of thinking will die with the older generations.
Bertina—As a Christian, I often pray for my friends who possess different beliefs or none at all. In my mind, it's less pandering and more like offering your help in a situation. Similar to when your friend recommends a certain medicine or solution to a problem you are having, they are not forcing you to take their opinion just offering their two-cents. Even when the problem isn't one in my mind, I just listen to their suggestion despite my disagreements.
But thanks for sharing your opinion, it really helps me to understand the other side of the issue!
Aside from your atrocious grammar, you make some good points. You might want to go back and brush up a little on your communication skills. Science is opening up many vistas that have previously been invisible to us. It dispels myths that we once assumed were absolute truths. On the other hand, we may run the risk of elevating science as a mythological idol if we are not careful to acknowledge its limits.
I recognize that all religions have created problems in this world. They have imposed dogmas on whole societies and raised the specter of terrorism of one stripe or another in the name of God. Children have suffered at the hands of priests that were entrusted with their care. The faithful have given everything they have, only to find that the shepherds of their souls abused their charity. Others have labeled as heretics, separated from loved ones, suffered persecution and put to death for slightest deviance from accepted dogma or accepted practice. All of these charges can be made against most, if not all, religions.
It may seem unbelievable, but the same charges can be leveled against atheists who have ascended to powerful positions. All one has to do is look back at the recent history of atheist states such as Albania, the Soviet Union and China. Go back to the last half of the 20th Century, and you will find that people of faith in these societies, not just Christians, were persecuted beyond measure. The ultimate goal of these campaigns was to exterminate religion. It didn't work, and religions emerged stronger than ever after these closed societies opened up.
God cannot be touched by science. That may be one of the reasons that atheists cannot respect those who believe in a God. It's interesting to note, however, that scientists are not universally atheists. By the way, God is neither man nor woman, but I will use "he and him," because I am conditioned to use that pronoun to think of him/her. I will not us it, because God, according to most religions, is a person. If the truth be know, the concept of God transcends all genders and species, and it idolatry to think that God is a man. In fact, the Bible states many times that God is not a man, unless of course you believe that he became a man in the form of his Son, Jesus Christ.
I recognize that there is not a shred of undeniable proof for God. I am also willing to be thought of as a child who believes in fairy tales. In fact, God might just be a fairy tale, but I choose to believe in God anyway. Even though I have nothing that cannot be argued down as an accident of nature to point to God, I see that God can indeed have been the first cause of everything that exists. Evil is not a problem with me either. It would exist in any scheme you one could imagine for any number of reasons. I do not claim to know God, but I believe that He knows me. Yes, that might just be a fairy tale, but I'd rather be considered a blithering idiot for my faith than to be considered a genius who was too myopic to see that something or someone could exist beyond his senses or science.
In the end, the concept of God is not unreasonable. The only thing that is unreasonable is to construct a human idol around that concept and to marginalize those who do not see things your way. The same can be said for atheism.
Oops! I need to indicate the person to whom I addressed my reply. It was ConcernedPerson, who replied to Candy.
God is a myth. There is no God outside of the imagination of men. Thousands of deities have been invented by man since Prehistory. The images of the gods were used to inspire fear, obedience, and demand service from the masses. Nothing has changed.
If Emperor Constantine had not proclaimed Christianity as the official religion of the Roman Empire, our gods would be Jupiter, Mars, etc. The sooner we accept that life is finite and that if there is going to be a paradise, this planet will have to do, the better for mankind.
There are things about nature and our origins which we do not understand yet. However inventing a supernatural being to "explain" our unknowns is childish and only serves the purposes of the unscrupulous trying to control society.
JohnQuest –
With regard to your comment on how 3 religions believe in the same 'God' w/ different properties, i put it to you like this (and hope i'm not hopelessly messing it up): The Jews and Muslims are descendents of the same 'father', Abraham. He had two sons (well, more than that, but these two are my focus), Isaac and Ishmael. The jews are from Isaac and Muslims are from Ishmael. Ishmael was a child of perdition due to Abraham not being faithful to God. (per the Bible, I am not referencing other books). So you have the struggle between those two peoples. For Christians, again, it is definitely the same God as the Jews, but the Christian believes that Jesus is the promised Messiah, and that He came as a suffering servant first, and will come again as a conquering king. For the Jew, messiah was to be the conquering king, sent to free them from oppression. Now, for the Christian, if there is no Jesus, they are out of luck b/c then they are not 'grafted in' to the kingdom. Whereas the Jew still has sacrifice to appease God. This is the basic thought of who is right: Jesus is messiah, He is descendent of David, who is descendent of Abraham, and had Abraham been faithful to God, would have been the creation of the Jewish people. Instead, there is an offshoot of God's people that became Islam. My background: conservative christian, and i believe Jesus to be the Son of God, and the only true way to heaven. However, I would like to here from anyone else there interpretation from an Islamic/Atheist/Other background. (don't mean to offend anyone w/ the Other line, just want to encourage everyone to examine what they believe, and why they believe it) And yes, pray for Mr. Hitchens. My father died of cancer and he always said 'i would not wish this on my worst enemy', and he was a conservative Christian as well. Blessings! AMW
@ Jessica Please stop Jessica. You are the one being overly judgmental, poking at pointless things such as grammar instead of coming up with any valid points or arguments.
I am a believer in God, and when people like you claim to be a Christian and write such silly dribble you really make all believers look bad.
What a hateful article this is! Why not keep your mouth shut about this poor man's illness?
@Not convinced that God does not exist
You are my hero.
Perfectly stated. If everyone could accept the viewpoint you just laid out in words, I think we might just be able to put all aggression against belief in God, as well as atheism behind us for good.
Your not alone in your viewpoint. Keep spreading it!!
but god made man in his own image and all is gods will.....if man lies god lies and approves of it.
There is no god or afterlife of any kind!
Time to move on.
Searching For Answers, Thank you for a very well thought out response. Now I am even more confused (assuming you got this right), why are you not a Muslim? If Ishmael was the righteous one (profoundly indignant at his father for not being faithful to GOD), then that tells me that Ishmael and his followers\decedents are the true followers and faithful of GOD.
Can god make a rock so heavy he can not lift it? Or is he not powerful enough to do either?
Not Convinced..... I am not sure what ur point is but......
I have no problem with u choosing to be a blithering idiot(your words, not mine) – excellent choice, really pushes man forward on the quest for knowledge and wisdom. However, I am in no way myopic. I would be the first to acknowledge that we have only scratched the surface of the infinite mysteries and processes occurring in our wondrous, god-created?, universe. I am the first to admit that there could be a god, BUT, to date no one knows, and there is ZERO evidence that one exists, and NO ONE (sane at least) has ever been contacted by this said god. So to kill and destroy over some particular unprovable flavor of belief is crazy. I think that is the point.
Believe what u want, u at leasty seem to know (unlike others) it is just a personal belief, kind of like santa claus for adults. I don't think that it is a leap to argue that NOT believing in a god due to lack of evidence is a little more sane than believing in a god in spite of the lack of evidence – just my opinion! And by the way, science can know god. Science tries to explain how this universe works. If god created this universe, as u believe, then science is succeeding at "knowing" god far better than any religious endeavor to date!
And when did I ever say that atheists were exempt from cruelty. No human is exempt from cruelty! But that is the whole point here – religious people preach goodness, and luv, and etc. and yet are the first to kill, destroy and ruin other humans FOR A BELIEF cause. Hitchens whole point is that christianity, and all religions, are more destructive than productive because they try to control BELIEFS, as though BELIEFS are hard known facts.
Scott
So if only god can decide what is right and wrong then killing your son is right, si is burning people at the stake, genocide...etc
not much of a moral code if you ask me.
Rev. Barron's main point is right on target. As Christians, we should, indeed, pray for and love those who oppose, ridicule and even persecute us. However, Rev. Barron states and uses as his basis for praying for Mr. Hitchens that Hitchens is "a child of God". For a reverend, a ministry founder, a host of a religious program and a religion professor, I am astounded at Rev. Barron's ignorance of the Bible. According to the Bible, as an atheist, Mr. Hitchens is NOT a "child of God". That description is reserved for only those who receive and believe in Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord (John 1:12). Further, Rev. Barron states that the model of how Christians should treat their opponents is to "laugh and drink with them". I think I know why Mr. Hitchens - and many others like him - are atheists. They see no difference between self-proclaimed followers of Jesus Christ and the world. Therefore, to an atheist, our God is phony. Christianity is not intended to be reduced to a debate, mere articulation or explanations. Christianity is meant to be LIVED OUT through an intimate relationship with Jesus. The saying "I would rather see a sermon than hear one" seems very appropriate here. Rev. Barron does not represent Christianity. Unfortunately, he only represents human philosophy masquerading as man-made religion - "having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof" (2 Tim 3:5). How sad that, in the end, Rev. Barron is no better than Mr. Hitchens.
Fro you concerndperson I testify to you that I have proof of God. but it is for me only..I'm sorry you were indoctrinated..After my grandmother died, my parents did not push me, and i rejected God; rather going to church because of my grandmother's death.. but I picked up a bible at the age of 23 and read it; the new testament that is..it was the living bible and the woreds came alive and were refreshing... I read the whole new testament..one day at work a new employee asked me if I had received the holy Ghost..Well after reading the new testament at least three times at that point I couldn't even say that I had saw anything in it about the Holy Spirit..Amazing God i suspect had hid those words from my mind as I read them..anyway because of that guy , I received the Holy Spirit as it is described by Jesus in John 7;37-39....if you or anybody want proof of God there it is..Get yourself baptized in Jesus' name as prescribed in Acts chapter two....after you have come out of the water stretch out your hands towards heaven look up and say out loud.... THANK YOU JESUS!!!!!!. repeat it till he come..Do it as many days as it takes...I believe it took me at least three times before he came and did what he did ....The holy Spirit is supernatural , which means not of this world...He is truly alien to the Human race...he will lead you to the straight and narrow gate...because he is so rare among most of Christianity so many mistakes have been made since the martyrs of Jesus ie.. the first three centuries...
I agree with you coach p...the man we are praying for is a child of the devil ..as we all were once before salvation when we were translated into the kingdom of Jesus Christ...therefore we are not of this world
but coach P
god created man to is own image....so according to the bible he is a child of god....rememebr all is gods will.
"One of the greatest Catholic apologists of all time, G.K. Chesterton, debated the agnostic George Bernard Shaw up and down England, and their arguments were often pointed and aggressive; but after the debates, the two friends could be seen drinking and laughing together. That’s a model of how a Christian treats his intellectual opponents."
Isn't this also a model of how an agnostic, in this case Shaw, treats his opponents?
JohnQuest
I believe that Ishmael is a 'son of perdition'. That is to say that Ishmael was, in a sense, cursed from the get go. Isaac is (at that time) God's chosen, and that was God's plan (abraham was 100 when isaac was born, Ishmael was conceived w/ Abraham's maid servant b/c Abraham thought his wife was barren despite God's Promise) Ishmael and his descendents will push against the decendents of Isaac as a result of Abraham's unfaithfullness. So, i am not a muslim because i believe that Ishmael is not the chosen son as God intended, but rather that Isaac was/is the correct fulfillment of God's Will. This is an interesting example of God giving us free will, but yet still asking us to follow His will. It seems very paradoxical at times, and really, is something that takes a lot of thought and patience to even begin to get at God, religion, the bible, etc. It doesn't seem fair that Ishmael should suffer as a result of Abrahams decision, but those paralells are all throughout the bible, which is why fathers taking leadership (not dictatorship) in the home is important in God's eyes. Nice thing about Jesus is everyone can get into the kingdom if they accept Him. God doesn't look at what you have done, but rather do you rely on him for forgiveness, correction, and direction.
Not convinced that God does not exist:
Consider that we, meaning the planet Earth, are not even the size of an atom in relation to the size of the Universe. There are over one hundred billion billion galaxies and each with billions upon billions of stars and planets. There are more stars in the Universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches in the world put together. Anything that happens on this planet has nothing to do with anything and has no more effect on the Universe than even a black hole the sucks up vast numbers of stars. Our existence is not even a nano-second in relation to the age of the Universe so to think there is some sort of intelligent design behind things is a bit short sighted.
Now since we are sentient beings we like to think there is more to existence than just living and dying like ants. So in most peoples cases it helps to believe there is a God. This makes people feel better about themselves and gives them some sort of purpose in life. If believing in a God makes people better human beings then good for them and everyone else, but it is my experience that most "religious" people are the ones who cause the most problems in this world and are the ones who are most intolerant. As an example and not to start a whole new debate, but merely as an example "gay marriage".. if there really was a Jesus and he really was the son of God, do you think for one second he would be against gay marriage? Yet it is the religious people in this world who persecute gay people in the name of God, as opposed to being the ones who should be tolerant of them.
Religion is a good concept but so are superheros like Superman and Batman.... I wonder if historians a 1000 years from now who dig up a superman comic book will think we believed that Superman was one of our Gods? Treating people like you would want to be treated yourself is not Godly, its just plain old decency and common sense.
Hey Jessica...are you a Christian? You must be...I mean who else can be that mean and patronizing? Please, please Jessica...keep up the good work and push us farther and farther away...I love you for it.
I have studied some philosophy of metaphysics over the years. Aristotle and other philosophers talk in terms of existence from a very logical standpoint. They refer to a supreme being, and go on to reason the existence of 'moved movers' and the 'unmoved mover'. It is very fascinating. Everything is moved (created or came from) by something/someone else, and they in turn move or create life, or cause things to happen throughout the world/universe. There has to be an 'unmoved mover' AKA God, that always existed (at infinitum), was never moved or created, that moved/created everything (all moved movers), and holds the existence of all things, including laws of the universe.
It is easy to see why the New Atheism came about because of the human condition and thus anger toward religions of the world, however I think it is better to believe in something that is no born out of hatred or anger, and question things with the absence of anger/hate...and not thus not have fear towards religions nor be partial against them because of the human condition in them. In the midst of all the madness inherent in some parts of religions, you might just find there is truth in there (unchanged/unmoved), which was the original reason the religion formed, but got lost along the way.
WOW, Coach and Jonathan... you guys make me laugh. You take what the Bible says literally when it was written at least 100 years after the death of Jesus. Think about how we get information wrong today with modern technology and you trust information that was passed via word of mouth for the first 100 years? The Bible has not more historical accuracy than Star Wars.. and don't forget that over the years it was edited by Kings and Popes who didn't agree with some of the books.
God did not make man in his image, man made god to fit the image needed. All religions are basically the same. It's pretty much the same set of rules, with different cultural and social influences. Each religion is as different as the culture it came from, and yet they all have similarities. It keeps people in order, if we could "really" talk to god, most people would fuss at him, all those Earthquakes, floods, etc.. If god was proven to exist, he would be useless. It is the fear of the unknown that keep people in line. No one man can be the ruler of all men, that's why they invented the gods, all the good of man without the weaknesses. How can you fight that which can not be seen, and is not even alive. You can't, and that's where they get you. Religion had the possibility to be the greatest thing in the world, but man has turned it into the most destructive. If GOD is so good why have so many been killed in his name? Man can not escape the evil inside, some men have chosen to use religion as a cover up for that evil. But Evil even in the name of GOD is still evil. Oh and by the way if GOD did exist, it would be both male and female. It takes a woman to create all the beauty, and love on this earth, but it takes a man to create the platypus.
Ugh!
Try reading Pascal's Penses, focus on his Wager. Then regardless of whether you believe or do not believe, let it guide how you behave and live. Then you will stand to lose nothing – whether there is or isn't a God. If there isn't it doesn't matter anyway, but if there is – do you really want to take that chance?
And to those who are offended by my praying for you – get over it! Know that now, I'm going to do so everyday.
And to Fr. Barron – "Bravo" well written.
Keep up the good work, thank you for following your vocation. Know there are many among the masses who are In Fide.
God bless.
For Jessica,
It's obvious that Concerned Person, in these particular postings, does not demonstrate a lot of respect for the language as is evidenced by his shortcuts. Hopefully, he made a more rigorous effort at proper language in the book he wrote. As a live-and-let-live guy, I certainly don't have a visceral feeling about CP just because he's a little lazy with his writing. I see lazy communication everyday, but rarely invest myself emotionally to the point of defending the intelligence and education of my family members. Criticizing people’s language errors would become a full-time preoccupation.
What could have elicited this emotionally charged, seemingly irrelevant, harsh criticism? Could it have been that CP contradicted your religious beliefs? I would submit that, like most of us, you hear or read compromises in proper language usage quite regularly. And yet, I strongly suspect that you rarely go to the trouble of criticizing these errors – especially in personal terms.
We have just witnessed the planting of a seed of a religious war. Jessica – you gave birth to anger and hatred just because you felt your particular god was dissed. (“Dissed” is short for “disrespected”, and is often associated with the godless pagans who take evil shortcuts with their language. ed.) Congratulations! You are certainly a good Christian.
Leaving religion out of it for a moment: Christopher Hitchens is one of the most unpleasant human beings to ever live. And one of the best writers. Whenever I read his books I'm simultaneously stunned by his clarity and focus, and repelled by the thought than anyone could be so completely devoid of common decency. For example, in "The Missionary Position" he devotes an entire book to complaining that Mother Theresa "didn't do enough" for the poor of Calcutta. This coming from a man who, buy his own admission, has never done ANYTHING charitable for ANYONE.
God is real. I have my own testimony. Most people would think I'm crazy. About a year and a half ago. I was feeling depressed, hopeless and helpless. One night I cried out to God and ask Him to come and take control of my life because I couldn't go on any longer. At that moment, the Holy Spirit came into me and live inside of me from that moment on. Some verses that I never read just came to me. Some biblical knowledge was given to me that I didn't have before. I didn't read it or hear it anywhere. It wasn't my own effort. So it must be from God. I started to have growing thirst for God's words. God gave me the desire to study His words and live a godly life which was totally opposite of my character. The Holy Spirit also gave me the knowledge that I was adopted to God's kingdom which is heaven. I've been filled with peace and joy ever since. Without the Holy Spirit, you will not go to heaven. I also have a new desire to minister to others. I didn't make this up. It really happened. It was the moment of my conversion, also known as salvation.
WOW (can I use WOW?), everyone, my deepest apologies for any shortcuts or misspellings or grammatical errors. Truly, I do repent. I used shortcuts only in haste and the desire to consume fewer bytes. This was actually silly of me since I am so wordy anyway – what is a few more bytes? So I am sorry for u = you, ur = your, luv = love, FU = -– -, lol = laughing on line, WOW = ???. Me book has ben editted and with god as my wytness it is impekkabull in its gramar, spelin and all that stuf.
Jessica-shut up..please. Idea, how abouut you volunteer to be the spelling police for everyone? You can go around these forums and arrest all who mistakenly or purposly mis-spell words...And do not forget about content filtering....
@JohnQuest
From your post:
"The issue is that, all three groups believe in different things and that only makes sense if there is more than one GOD or there is no GOD. Logically, no one can say that one group is right or wrong since the same rules when applied to all groups yields that same answer. Do I have that right?"
I think you are on the right track, but your logic is not fully developed. All three groups do indeed claim that there is one God and that theirs is the true one. But, the two outcomes you propose (no God or many Gods) are not collectively exhaustive possibilities. The outcomes are these, as I see it: 1) one of the three are right, their God is the only God, and the others are wrong; 2) all three are wrong, none of their Gods are the one God, there is some other God (or Gods) different from thieirs; 3) there are many Gods, and some or all of the Gods of the groups listed are real; 4) there is no God or Gods.
If anyone has any other insight on this, I would appreciate it.
the worst part about this? The reason i am anti religion, the reason i refuse to believe in anything created by man... The fact that the man says what Christians shoulds do, thats the problem, the division of the people on the earth into sects is whats wrong, the fact that every religion feels the others is wrong is the problem.
Religion has caused more pain in this world than it has cured.
To JohnQuest the answer is no. There are other possibilities as well. Consider that multiple people can observe the samething and describe it differently or the obverse that multiple people can look at different things and describe them all the same. Also people tend to focus on aspects as if they are totalities. Examples would be for the first conversation of what happened at an event, like an accident, of the second people talking about race, the third is like the story of the blind men describing an elephant some say its like the mighty oak others say its like a snake.
Not convinced that God does not exist,
I find it totally ironic that you refer to someone's grammar being horrible when you have a double negative plain as day.
On the other hand, I have sooo many comments that I am just holding to myself because from experience I know that you can not convince someone of something they firmly believe in (whether you are an atheist or a christian). However, I will say this, I am a Christian because of the way I was raised. Also, because of the region in which I was born. Christianity is something I believe in because of my parents. However, I also believe that God just wants you to believe in something other than yourself. I think he wants you to know that you are not solely responsible for health and fortunes. I believe that God will hold you to your religion and beliefs when judgment time comes. So, if you are a Muslim, then those are the standards he will hold you to. If you believe in Judaism, those are the standards you will be held to, and so on.
Now being a history buff, it makes me wonder about a lot of things. One, how can black people be so religious when Christianity was forced among their people? Christianity isn't something they would have participated in if they stayed in there respective countries in Africa. Slavery introduced them to Christianity. Another thing, how can someone believe so blindly in something that was translated by King James? I'll give you a little history on King James (then you can go do your own research) but King James became King before he could speak. His father died at an early age and the people threw his mother in jail so that she wouldn't have an impression on his life. They were able to raise a king just the way they wanted him. With that said, the same people who raised him are the same people who gave him his moral standards and education. What gives King James the accreditation to go by his translation of the Bible?
I'm a Muslim and I have nothing against Mr. Hitchens as a Muslim American. He has every right to say and believe whatever he wants. Bertina is absolutely right. It's insulting for someone to pray for you because you don't believe what they believe or how they believe. I would also think that the priest, Robert Barron, a Catholic priest would have plenty of people to pray for with all of the pedophiles in the Catholic priesthood. He shouldn't even have the time to pray for someone else.
I have to admit that I deserve at least some of the criticism I received above, because I didn't proofread my own writing thoroughly before I posted. I found at least two typos after reviewing it just seconds ago. Unfortunately, I was in a hurry and on my way out to see my doctor. I apologize to ConcernedPerson for coming across so smug and nasty. That was mean spirited of me. I'd like to say that it wasn't intentional, but even that would be a lie. I acted on my volition. On the other hand, I stand exactly by what I said in the words that followed that needless criticism with one caveat. I did not aim those comments specifically at ConcernedPerson. I directed them to everyone. I should also have made that abundantly clear and I apologize for that as well. ConcernedPerson, I can appreciate what you've been through in your life. Please do not understand my words as a personal criticism directed to you. Everyone deserves an audience, and it's not fair to dismiss anyone's point of view lightly. Have a nice day.
Not Convinced.....
Well thank you very much, your apology was totally not needed, but eloquently stated and welcomed. To be honest, I do not think I would have been so gracious. May all of we contributors(bad grammar intended) sit some day and have a wine or beer or joint together. It is this type of discourse that elevates all of us in understanding other opinions, thus elevating humanity. It is this type of discourse that god or NOgod intended. The battle for opinion space can get heated, but this battle is a very noble human endeavor. Actually, I appreciate CNN for providing some space for my worthless bytes.
Like someone else is better and supposedly right to judge anyone else like him. God, Christians and all other religion is stupid once you know the real history behind it all. I bet if they didn't mention hell you wouldn't believe. Religion is the need to fill in gaps of unknown in one's life. Period. Everyone though at one time everything revolved around Earth. Then it was God who killed most of Europe not the black plague from microscopic organisms. The more we find out about science the less God will become. Once you step back and see all the sillyness of it, it's truly ridiculous. What a waste of time. Everyone screaming I'm right and your wrong and one one even saw God. If he is truly prowerful enough to make everything in the universe why does he make anyone suffer. What insecure petty emotions does God really have? We have to suffer to make him happy? ooooo everything is a mystery. If he was really there in this time of age, just show yourself and say hey, we all know humans are going to lie, here are the things you need to do by my word. But of course that will never happen. I still can't believe how people with a shred of common sense can believe in something so stupid. It's actually just embarrassing. And what I love most of all is the people who try and judge me. They broke so many rules that are clearly "unforgiveable" that no matter what according to your book, your going to your hell. So if you believe your bible, sorry you have to believe every word, not what just fits your liking. Just prove how many lemmings and idiots are in this world. Dumb people far out weigh smart people.
Why is it that when a famous atheist gets sick with cancer, the only thing that the religious talk about is "Oh, is this a punishment from the god of my religion?" or "let's pray that this was intended to help the man convert to my religion!"
It says a lot that the atheists are the only ones here who acknowledge the cancer's impact purely on the man, and express the unstrained condolence that ought to be decently accorded it – while the religious can only think about the disease's relevance to their religion, whether it will gain them a convert (Of course not. You don't understand Hitchens if you are "praying for that) and how much self-pitying, condescending drivel they can summon up for their religion while they pretend to "show they care". Yes, about their religion.
It really does say a lot about what is truly important to "those who pray".
This is to "Not convinced that God does not exist" -Thankyou thankyou thankyou for being the true example of a what a christian is meant to be..(If you don't minnd me saying) I read your response and was inspired and couldn't agree more with everything you said. Just like somebody else had said..you are not alone in this way of thinking. I thankyou for putting your thoughts out there. Peace be to you and may God be with you. =) (btw may I put out there that I think it's a little beside the point and unnecessary for others to point out other people's grammar. I think we can all get the point of what someones trying to say even without the grammatical corrections can't we
) Let's all give it a rest and grow up huh?
Sadly, instead of respecting HIM, they mock him with prayer which shows a total lack of respect for someone who has a differing point of view. These same people would go to India with a bag of beef jerky and contemptuously snack on it in the presence of Hindu's or invite an Orthodox Jew over for dinner and serve pork ...fried rice. Praying for someone who doesn't believe in prayer is an offensive act toward that person, saying the commandment by your god ursurps common decency and respect. Once the same book you find teason to pray, also commanded the stoning of disobedient children, condoned the resolution of rape with a few silver coins, and encouraged copulation by relatives as a solution for infertility. We have done away with adhering to certain laws of the bible because we have determined them to be, wrong. I hope the California ruling overturning Prop 8 is the beginning of a secular wave of logic and reason to combat the insanity of religion attempting to control the lives of Americans, and the beginning of respect for the beliefs of others.