 |
|
|
|
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)« Previous 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 
why will no one ever admit.....that they just don't know.
If you have faith....great......its all you really have right?.....cause you just don't know........if you don't have faith....great.....cause you just don't know.......no one ever admits that.....and its the only truth....no one really knows.
uhh, don't you mean dylan thomas? bob dylan was a great songwriter, not really relgious, (listen to "with god on their side", and dylan thomas, which is where zimmerman got his name, was.
God is imaginary, just like every other imaginary being made up by humans for millennia.
The concept of god is dangerous to rational thinking because it creates opportunity for atrocities to be committed on its behalf, and the dogma pretends to be immune to rational thinking, so the result can be as significant as genocide. History has shown this time and time again, as most wars are justified by some form of theology or another.
If God is imaginary, why do so many scientists (rational people driven by reason and logic) believe in God?
I will repeat myself for the sake of clarity mrrealtime: what religion did Hitler espouse when he killed 6M Jews, or slaughtered thousands of gays and gypsies; not Christianity – he was an occultist. That was the single most deadly war in history and still is. No, wars are not fought because of religion but religion is used as the excuse. I completely disagree with any war fought over beliefs of any kind. But if you check the numbers, more people have died in wars fought over political issues in the 20th century that ALL OF THE WARS (including the Crusades) fought thoughout history. The scientist who invented the atomic bomb were not Christian and those who started using chemical and biological weapons did not do so in the name of faith but politics.
Good, what "lack of religion" did Stalin espouse? He killed 10x more people than Hitler.
What "lack of religion" did Mao Zedong espouse?
Pol Pot?
Hmmm, seems when you pit atheism vs. religion on which is worse, atheism wins hands-down.
@GoodNatured. The words "Gott Mitt Uns" were emblazened on every Nazi belt buckle, but that is another issue. Regardless of what any person has ever taught, throughout history, the fact remains. God is imaginary. Pretend. That includes Zeus, Allah, Jehovah, and the Flying spaghetti monster. Hitler was a pathological, delusional psychopath who was worshipped by his followers, and never questioned. Questioning Hitler resulted in death. Doubting Hitler resulted in death. Debating Hitler resulted in death. See the pattern? Whenever you throw out debate, and adhere to a dogma in spite of evidence to the contrary, you can commit atrocities. Religion is the act of holding to a dogma regardless of any new evidence to the contrary. The more evidence to the contrary, in fact, the more faith is required for the dogma. Faith is therefore a willful and carefully practiced "discepline" of ignoring the facts, and holding to a belief. For example, its a fact that God is invisible. Faith, in spite of this most basic evidence to the contrary, holds that he exists. So by this line of thinking Faith is a delusion, and theism is, in the strictest sense, a mental disorder, that is treatable with education.
@danburkhead wrong. Stalin, Hitler, and Pol Pot simply replaced god with themselves. That is still religion. The problem was the religious devotion to one leader or one set of dogmatic rules – where debate, skepticism, and accountability to the public were not allowed, rather punished by death. Most mainstream religions are the same in that doubt, apostasy, disobedience, disloyalty, and skepticism are all met with severe punishments. THAT is the issue. Hitler basically made himself god of his own religion – nazism. He, like all evangelical christians, may have been atheistic toward all other religions, but he was the head of his own.
Atheism is not a religion, it is the absence of religion. Absence of any kind of god. So with atheists, everything is subject to new discoveries, new evidence, and new knowledge. With religion, NOTHING is subject to new evidence. God is god is god, no matter what science says, or what other religions say. That is the root of the problem, and why prayer is not only a waste of time, but a manifestation of mass delusion. Theism is a mental disorder that CAN lead to intolerance, bigotry, technophobia, paranoia, violence, and even war. If by theism you include the deification of a person, then yes, you can blame every major atrocity in history on Theism. All of them.
No one has ever abused anyone in the name atheism. Atheism promotes no action, no creed, no goal. Leaders that espoused atheism did not do so in the name of atheism, they did so to politically remove churches from competing for power. So totalitarianism is your enemy, not atheism.
Hitchens' rhetorical style may be a bit grating, but "pray for him" is laughably condescending. Unless you intent is ironic, of course - in which case, bravo.
I don't think it's condescending for someone who believes in God to offer up prayers for others, whether the one being prayed for believes or not. The person praying believes it may help save someone's soul or bring them peace in some way, so it's an act of love on the part of the believer to pray, not an intent to insult anyone.
I believe it's far more condescending of someone to attempt to come off as intellectually superior by denigrating believers as "dumb" and "gullible" for actually believing the "supernatural" or "fantasy" of their religion.
So far as I know, praying for someone's soul has never done any harm to the person prayed for.
Never done any harm? Tell that to the fanatics who won't receive medical aid because they believe illness is providence and prayer is the only legitimate medicine.
I'm just talking about prayer itself, Christopher. Like I said, prayer hasn't harmed anyone that I know of. Failure to seek proper medical care isn't the same thing as praying - they aren't mutually inclusive or exclusive issues. Of course there are extremes, both religious and non, who refuse medical treatment for one reason or another.
I agree, prayer doesn't do physical damage, but it's hardly a sign of respect and honor to an atheist or anyone else really. It's just a masturbatory response that may feel good to those who practice it, but doesn't help society or contribute to the solution of any issue and may very well get in the way of real action.
Its always thesame thing with believers. When ever anything cannot be explained, the direct conclusion is that God intends for it to be so. Its just like in Africa. Anytime somebody dies, and relatives can´t explain what killed him, the direct answer that somebody did it. And they will look for a culprit until they find one...and kill him. That is what believe in stupid supernatural stories does with people. It makes them stupid and in many cases really evil, as they try to defend their belief.
Christopher Hitchens is my hero and an especially courageous man to take on religion in a place like the US, where religious fanatics commit some of the worse crimes possible, and their numbers are growing by the day. Tons of psychotic groups springing up everywhere with some idiots calling themselves exorcists. People acting schizophrenic because they "possessed". And it becomming trend. All politicians even have to pretend to be religious and belive in the junk written in the bible , just so they even get a chance of being elected.
Religious is for the feable minded, has always been, and will always be. Take a good look at africa....nigeria to be more specific, where people donate more to the church than they keep for their families. Religion makes people stupid. Talking abou the virgin mary...common...gimme a break.....she just didn´t want to say which man nailed her....as it wasn´t her husband!
What a bunch of whackos. Hey catholicmom, did you know catholic spelled backwards is pedophile? And as for praying......all the praying in the world won't help anyone through anything, just ask the millions of starving people and the millions of amputees. You all need to get a grip on life. god is simply a concept, nothing more, nothing less. Rumor has it that the tooth fairy has more clout than these gods you clowns keep conjuring up. Hitch is gonna do just fine. When he finally closes his eyes for the last time, he'll be rid of all that turkey gobble, gobble, gobble. Take care Hitch.
ricker2: What an intelligent rebuttle. Bashing a women of belief and blaming God for the starving and amptees plight; what a real man! What gets me most about this trail of nonsense is that most of the replies are just plain insults; "yea...well so's you mamma" kindergarden type crap. Try to come up with an intelligent and rational response or leave the room.
I think that he is not be put in suffering because his absence of faith, but for his suport to George W. Bush.
God knows what wich ones deserve...
I am sad to see such a debate going on in this forum by the uninformed on both sides. First, without the Christian religion there would be no hospitals (a concept developed by the Hospitaler Knights) or education (saved by loss by monks in the middel ages). Christians give more money to distasters, the poor and the needy than any other group in the world. It wasn't Christianity that prompted Hitler to kill the sick , mentally ill or the crippled or the Soviets to imprission and kill millions. No, religion is not the greatest enemy of mankind; we all are – our Mono-Meistic view. We are each others worse enemy. And by the way, the planet is not overpopulated and we are now in a demographic winter; more farm land goes unused every year – more food is destroyed because it cannot reach the people who need it...open your eyes! The population of the planet is falling every year. Soon there will be more elderly people needing assistance that people who work to suppor them. Who will take care of the elderly in years to come, the Athiests? I think not. Believe or don't, but don't malign what you don't understand. It only shows your ignorance.
Every forum has to have at least one hippy to take the conversation off into la-la land. Thank you, Good Natured contributor, for being that person.
Every statement you just made is patently false. You are merely parroting what other Faithheads have been saying in defense of the indefensible. Until quite recently in history, being a non-believer was simply not an option. Professing non-belief, skepticism, or doubt would bring about torture and death. Even today, such doubts about the veracity of religious claims would make you ineligible for public office in a country that was built upon a secular foundation.
Are you counting donations to the Red Cross and Salvation Army? I'm an atheist and I donate to both as I'm sure many others do based on their humanitarian work and because they have established channels of operation and not because of any religious affiliation.
After Father Barron's rave review of Hitch-22, and his surprise at discovering the author's literary tastes, I fell once again on a line from Flannery O'Connor (who constantly, in imitation of the Creator, peopled her stories with improbable "angels"):"From the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of Heaven suffers violence, and the violent bear it away." (Matthew 11:12 King James). It just means, I think, that the uncouth and those who bash themselves against the wall of religion, often find that they have a surprising reward from a God who loves them. But the prissy smug ones – of either persuasion, atheism or some religion, find themselves quite bereft. At any rate, that is how O'Connor called it, down the Bible Belt.
I'll just offer up a prayer to Blessed Teresa of Calcutta, and testify to a miracle if Hitch is saved. Not that he'll thank her, but her sainthood would indeed dog him for the rest of his life. Apparently, she had problems with belief as well.
I hardly think Mother Thereasa is who you should be praying to if you feel the overwhelming need to pray to someone.
The sooner we grow out of the 12th century belief in god and religion, the sooner we will be able to live and work together without hate and animosity, for all religions preach that they are right and others are wrong. We live on a very small planet in a very indifferent universe and if we are to make something of ourselves, it will not be through religion, but thru cooperation and humanity. Humanism is not derived from religion but in the realization that we are alone and we are alll we have to rely on. You can argue with the facts and believe in fairy tales if you need to, but this route will not build a civilization which can advance to the stars from our small beginnings on this planet. Most wars have been about and because of religion. Especially for you Catholics-if you truly are all sinners, just because the pope absolves you, does not make it so.
So what is the answer for your sins?
Why do you need an "answer" for sins, CatholicMom? Are you so weak?
Do your really believe that getting rid of God and religion will solve the worlds problems? That this will bring peace to all people on earth? Peace, acceptance of good morals, forgiveness of those who cause you harm, these are all values of real religion. What the world needs now, is good people to really live their faith, to love their faith, to know their faith and to pass all this love to all people so they can do the same (to love the world they live in, and to love and show compassion to all people they contact). No, we need more God not less, because God is love and that love can save the world when it is sincere and applied correctly.
To 'nothanks':
I did not know that you were so clean!! We pray to God not because he needs our prayers, sacrifice etc. We pray because we see our own darkness, our own imperfection, our own inequities. We pray to God because we need him and we depend on him to help us and because of this, we give our very being, our very existence to serve a God who is love, so that we ourselves can be a people of love for the world.
WSJ, no – getting rid of religion and god will hardly solve the world's problems. In a nutshell, life itself is defined as a struggle that is only quelled by death. But to answer your question – growing past the need for a daddy figure and his varied sets of rules is a sign of maturity, something that we need to cope with our future of a small planet, a population that grows by leaps and bounds and our possession of weapons that could destroy it all in the wink of an eye. We need to see that all our problems are the same ones and to stop making up these insane quibbles that send us perilously close to that wink.
To Kate:
I understand what you are saying and It makes good sense, however, we (society) have tried the "live on your own" method you hint toward and unfortunately we lack the maturity to do this properly and I don't know that we can ever get there. We are no better on our own. Religion will help those who want to find a path to 'holiness' and understanding which is what I call maturity of faith. Religions teachings and dogma are good, for the love of the wold.
As a Catholic-Christian , I see the world we live in, it is a world already without God, and it is failing. We lie, cheat, there are thieves, homeless, drug abuse, spousal abuse, racism (mostly in other parts of the world), genocide, murder without reason... Religion is there to help those who need find peace, true peace, the kind of peace that I can not even explain. (I could go on but I am sleepy, perhaps tomorrow). Goodnight
Yes life is a struggle, but if you understand it properly, that is the nature of life. Life that doesn't struggle must be dead. Personally I cannot find peace in pretending that someone will come to save me from the realities of life. I would rather live life, it is far more interesting.
Life can be a struggle, I choose to turn all this struggle to God so He can help "lighten the load". I have never been disappointed. Others don't and they struggle even more, some can handle it very well, others rather die and commit suicide, many try to hide behind drugs and alcohol and escape (which is a growing trend by the way).
I have faith that there is a god because no one has yet proven to me that there is not a god (remember I used to not believe). I have faith because I have seen those who don't, and I do not want to be with them they are not good people. I choose to live in society to help change the world, to care for those who have lost all hope and to get them to turn their struggle to God who I affirm is a God of love who can help and walk that struggle with you.
Have you ever seen a man who abused his wife, lost all his money and kids, lives under a bridge where temperatures go down to -40 and has nothing to eat because he lives on drugs and booze to "ease" the pain finally talk to someone who tells them about a God who knows his pain, who wants to help, who wants you to depend on Him and talk to him to give all your troubles to him and help walk your life? This man is now a much better person because he listened and turned to God and found the hope he so desperately needed.
I know I won't be able to convince you of anything, that is not why I am responding to your thoughts. Unless you have seen what I have seen, you are not going to see it my way. I am just trying to let you know that we believers know that God is always present, He does not act on his own but through people; people who turn to Him in their time of need, who have faith without seeing. Like that man I spoke of, I believe that God worked through him that day and he no longer lives in a ditch but proclaims a new message, a message of love.
@Aaron. I took your dare, searched my heart, and found muscle and blood. I looked for my soul, but it turns out that's not real. Now I've got one for you. There's a small pink hairy gay fairy living in your liver. You can only find him if you really dig around. Good luck.
Well, I'm not watching... (eeewww)
Strange article even for CNN.. on a side note get well soon dude.
We can always have hope for CNN, too!
I really love this line: "I confess I began to wonder whether, despite his brassy atheism, Mr. Hitchens didn’t have a good deal of sensitivity to things religious." Why is it that religious people think that a good attack on atheists is to accuse them of being religious. It's almost never true. Why would a religious person pretend to be atheist? What's to gain from that? It's like the religious are saying, "Ha Ha, You're just as stupid as we are!" How is that good for your case religious people?
We can always hope and pray that every person will see the Light eventually. Perhaps we read into someone's faith with too much enthusiasm; that is love for you!!
That section bothered me too–its as if the author thinks that atheists can't appreciate beauty (especially in religious phenomena/texts/etc.). Is he joking, or really that naive?
I'm sorry CM, but neener neener does not say 'I Love you' to me.
Trying to understand something as infinite as the concept of god or God with a finite mind is one of the most thrilling wastes of time I've ever enjoyed. Look this up; Deuteronomy 4:29 Give it a try, I triple-dog dare you.
RE: "Religion teaches intolerance, persecution, and adherence to bad ideals." Oh you must mean things like "I give you a new commandment: love one another" and "do good to those who hate you" and "pray for those who persecute you" and all that, right?
"Thou shalt have no other god before me".
Back when I was a history major, I was privileged to see a draft copy of the 10 Commandments, with pencilled notations in God's own handwriting in the margins. Seems the Big Guy was undecided until the very last moment whether to go with "Thou shalt treat women and dark-skinned people as equals." but finally decided to devote that particular slot to the vexatious and insidious problem of graven images.
Hey Mr. Barron keep praying in vain because "god" doesn't exist. At least 75% of the world's population don't believe in your god. Also I don't understand why religious people try to label us atheists as evil or dangerous, when most atheist people are down to earth people with more moral values and intelligence than religious people. BTW religious fanatics are far more agressive than the "new atheism."
I have to ask, are REAL religious people not down to earth, good people? I'm sorry your not convincing me. Here is a thought I truly believe, I feel that those who don't believe in God are irrational, they have a very closed mind. Many don't actually listen to what religion actually preaches and close the door to their mind of exploration.
I'm having a hard time describing people who don't believe something when there is no evidence for it as irrational. How many things do you have time to believe in to negate irrationality sir? It must take up a prodigious amount of your time.
Hey Kate, a few things I could suggest,
Well, I used to think exactly like you before when I was younger (now, in my defence I am less then 25 years of age). Your thoughts are very common and often stumbled upon by many theists when trying to answer but here are some thoughts if you were hoping for a response...
You could say this is the same as a $1 000 bill (CAD), now, they have been widely available and you are still able to get them if you ask (although I don't think the banks regularly stock them and good luck in the grocery store with getting change). Am I to assume that because I personally have never seen such a note that they simply do not exist? That would be a poor assumption and a big mistake. Another, (which I can not take credit for) is about your brain. Have you ever seen your brain? Have you ever touched, smelled your brain? If your answer is "no", then simply speaking, your brain must not exist!!
Now, I'm not trying to offend anyone, the point I am tying to make is that just because you are not able to define something in human terms does not negate its existence. If God worked in such terms, under the constraints of what we as humans can use to define, that would indicate that God is something I can probably manipulate even control. If this were the case to hell with God because that is not a God I would want to believe in.
True faith is believing in something which your own eyes can not see. I know God exists just as I know that gravity exists yet you can not see either and neither can be fully explained by science. Now, you could say, "you can easily drop a ball and gravity is 'revealed' in a more human way, however I say that God also has revealed himself through Jesus (but that is for another time)
One more thing... Although I am steadfast in what I believe, it is important to mention that when we all die, we will all know the answers to our questions about God. Until that time comes, I will continue to explore, define and even challenge my own views as in the end, I will be stronger for it.
No one has reported verifiable evidence of your god. No one has reported verifiable evidence of any god. No one has reported verifiable evidence of a million billion different possibilities that might exist. I ask you again – how many do you feel the need to constantly entertain the possibility of to irradiate irrationality in your life? I feel I don't have the time for the one more than you limit yourself to since life's realities are most engrossing as it is. I fail to see why that makes me more irrational than you.
And unfortunately, I also fail to see why dying will surely get you more information than you have now. After all, your god if he exists might not feel he has to inform you any more at the point than he has at this one.
Perhaps, just perhaps, religion needs some more public enemies.
Organized religion has done more to harm humans, than any other single thing I can think of. Religion teaches intolerance, persecution, and adherence to bad ideals. For instance, today, when we are on the edge of overpopulating the planet, to the point where it no longer can support humans (or anything else, of course), the Catholic Church still refuses to acknowledge the situation, and they still encourage their flock to not only disregard birth control, they actually forbid birth control in the religion.
So, I will come out and say, organized religion, is to me, one of the worst things that can have happened to humans, because it will lead to their own self-destruction, through overpopulation.
Organized religion is in serious need, of re-examining all of their own teachings.......as most of them are NOT kind, and not generous, and are NOT honest! Organized religion, early on, was centered around wealth and power......and they behave that way, even today.
Not being open to life is what would put the world at risk. It is already happening in countries which only allow one child; they are already feeling the ill effects of such a policy
Rick McDaniel and the rest: I am sad to see such a debate going on in this forum by the uninformed on both sides. First, without the Christian religion there would be no hospitals (a concept developed by the Hospitaler Knights) or education (saved by loss by monks in the middel ages). Christians give more money to distasters, the poor and the needy than any other group in the world. It wasn't Christianity that prompted Hitler to kill the sick , mentally ill or the crippled or the Soviets to imprission and kill millions. No, religion is not the greatest enemy of mankind; we all are – our Mono-Meistic view. We are each others worse enemy. And by the way, the planet is not overpopulated and we are now in a demographic winter; more farm land goes unused every year – more food is destroyed because it cannot reach the people who need it...open your eyes! The population of the planet is falling every year. Soon there will be more elderly people needing assistance that people who work to suppor them. Who will take care of the elderly in years to come, the Athiests? I think not. Believe or don't, but don't malign what you don't understand. It only shows your ignorance.
GoodNatured: "It wasn't Christianity that prompted Hitler to kill..." - Are you so sure of this? He was raised as a Christian... a Catholic, in fact... who are taught that they are BETTER than everyone else. He maniacally ran with that belief right into Aryan Supremacy.
Uh without the Christians there would be no Hospitals? Hardly. Not to mention hospitals run by religious orders are filled with atheists performing as doctors, nurses and other staff. Pretty much the other way around. Without atheists, there would be no Christian hospitals.
By the way dear, most atheists contribute to religious charities, but less do now that religion has become more and more abusive to atheists and others. There are plenty of secular charities, the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders to name a couple. The standard practice of the nonreligious I think is that social supporting of the poor, the afflicted and the public response to disasters are best handled by governments who do a more effective job of it, but certainly there is a place for both.
@ verify Hitler was not a Catholic but an ex-Catholic; he renounced his baptism.
Wow! I don't know what to say to this. I can't help thinking that Stalin, Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, et. al, had solutions to the over population "problem" also. 4, 000 unborn babies being slaughtered everyday will also help your problem. Over population was so 1970's. Get back to the Global Warming hysteria before it passes into the category of the latest chic crisis. The fact of the matter is that humans are capable of great and incredible Evil, and yes it does exist. It seems to me that religion helps us to be cognizant of the best and worst of human nature, something we need because by ourselves we see that our track record is less than stellar.
Just finished reading "God is not great" for the second time.
No doubt I will read it again, and again...
I feel saddened by C. Hitchens medical state.
But I am grateful for his courage in getting this book published.
I am quite sure that in time, he will be considered to be not anti-religion, but on the contrary, a forceful
eye (soul?) opener to the basis and strength of our faith(s).
Numerous fellow believers would welcome the opportunity to raise questions pertinent to
their beliefs and dogmas, especially now when our world is exploding with an unparallel amount or
new discoveries in all fields, AND the means to converse and debate across most of our planet.
Sadly, many believers are afraid to raise deep questions...
And religions in many cases back up that fear with words such as "Unbeliever, evil, trouble maker, and
on and on, and much worse...".
We need to become more tolerant towards all our fellow men.
The fact that one does not totally believe one dogma is not a sign of failure or unbelief, but an expression
of interest and deep search.
It is indeed positive, and we should all rejoice.
It is how Humanity advances in many many fields such as medecine, technology,
arts, music, literature (!) etc, etc.
To question God is not, in my view, a sin...!
It may lead one to the realization that we are not alone .
And that is revolutionary!
Good post. Looks like someone did capture the spirit (pun intended) of the article.
I can not help but roll my eyes at Rev. Robert Barron's smear artical on atheism, tho I am not at all suprised (slightly suprised by CNN however). I can imagine that many here will no doubt share his proud ignorance.
The Bible is a book. It's a book. A Book.
A book.
Science encompasses physics, quantum theory, evolution, biology, modern medicine, cosmology, plate-tectonics, computer science, mathematics....and the list goes on and on and on. Science, in the words of Carl Sagan "is a Candle in the dark". It's the best thing we have ever invented for understanding what we are part all of. I can't see how religion could ever progress from its incular view of creation since it's just......a book. There is not going to be a second coming of Jesus, simply because there is no such thing as magic (refer to science).
Do your selves, and all humans, a favour and join the enlightenment – It started a few hundred years ago and gave us the modern world. Else, keep read your bible to yourselves, cause there ain't no relivant points you can really make to anyone with a grounded concept of the world since the bible is just a book........a BOOK. period.
Nothing is taken away when you stop believing in god.....quite the oppisite; you are given back your life, and the entire universe.
I am not a Christian and I don't see any smear in this article. It's respectful, slightly witty and suggests a very good message – the existence of God is an interesting debate that can be carried out rationally and respectfully.
Phooey, how silly to say we invented science! ‘Science’ is just a word to describe hundreds of fields of study in search of the Truth. Man has given many words to things so we understand the much larger picture.
No Catholic Mom – Science is a well defined method for discerning how things work. It is the same exact method in every field of scientific study there is.
If you don't understand this, you don't understand science at all.
Everyone should try to take away the most important points from this article. First, Bob Dylan is a great poet. Second, believers, atheists and agnostics should all be able to debate their points of view with respect and open mind. But from the comments, it looks like both points have been missed, or dismissed. Shame.
Oh? That's not what I gathered were the main points. Maybe I read it wrong?
1) Hitchens is an excellent writer, debater, and a famed atheist.
2) Hitchens enjoys Bob Dylan and Evelyn Waugh.
3) Their works are religious, therefore it is plausible to imply Hitchens is secretly a believer or has some religious inclination.
4) He has contracted cancer of the esophogus.
5) This is God's plan for him to contract a fatal condition, and therefore it is acceptable to assume he might have a sick/death bed conversion.
6) Catholic commentators displayed "transparent sincerity" when they called for prayer for a man who considers the practice of prayer meaningless, and the reader is supposed to take this as a sign of respect and not an insult.
7) Hitchens uses smear tactics and is a dishonest debator.
Did I summarize the main points correctly? Let me know. Do you see any problems with these points? Do you see why perhaps some people may be *gasp* offended by someone who at first praises his tenacity and at the end of the article accuses him of falsehood?
Do you think perhaps it's a little insulting that the author beleives a life-long atheist will immediatly begin yuyulating to a deity when a fatal disease hits them?
Don't you think this warrants the use of the word "cretinous" when describing this article? If so, doesn't that warrant a strong and plainly stated response?
Interesting questions.
To answer ...
No. Yes. Yes. No. No. No. No. No.
It's mostly about Dylan and respect. The rest is made up of adorning literary devices.
H_Warren exactly explained the points as I understood them. I'm not sure what you meant by the yes's and no's. If you disagreed, perhaps you might correct the points and converse about them as you yourself suggested.