First Comes Being and Then Comes Nothingness (Not!)
See below for my letter this morning (5/22/2011) to the Editor of Vanity Fair, where Christopher Hitchens is an editor and regular columnist.
Editors: Even if you don't print this email, will you please forward it to Christopher Hitchens?
From what I've read, Christopher Hitchens' take on the massive campaign to pray for his conversion seems to be that those who are praying for him expect that the prospect of death might drive him to accepting Christianity out of a craven fear of hell.
He seems to believe that to face death without capitulating to Christianity would a heroic act. In that, he echoes Jean Paul Satre's existentialist stance, that the atheist has to be brave enough to accept the doctrine that the universe and his own life within it is meaningless. First comes Being, and then comes Nothingness.
I am one of those who pray for Hitchens from time to time.
I want to explain that our prayers are not that he fold out of fear. But that he be given the gift of faith. And that he comes to what St. Paul wrote is the "surpassing knowledge" of God's love for him.
I was converted at 18 to the religion of atheism from Catholicism, convinced by the dynamic duo Satre and Simone de Beauvoir and by other atheists that religion was a crutch.
Then in my mid-30s, I was given the gift of faith, which led me back eventually to the Catholic Church. Somebody prayed for me, I could feel the prayers, and I am grateful for the effects. And so I want to pass it on, to Hitchens and anyone else who hasn't received such a priceless gift.
True religion is not a crutch, even though it is a comfort. I believe in Catholic doctrine because I tried on just about everything else there was to try, and the alternative belief systems are seriously flawed. For one example, it surely is illogical (and self-evidently ridiculous) to hold as an article of faith (as atheists do) that this universe that works according to marvelous laws and is filled with awesome wonders came into being somehow without any cause out of nothing.
As a parting thought, I wonder if Christopher knows that there is a Catholic holy card you can buy for 25 cents at this web site. A jpeg of the holy card back and front is attached to this email.
The Christopher means "Christ Bearer." I pray that with the love and prayers of many people who pray for him as one who despitefully uses us, may it be so.
Roseanne Sullivan
Posted @ 5/22/2011 09:08:00 AM
4 Comments
4 Comments:
Roseanne,
Your comments about atheists hold, as an article of faith, that the universe came to be "without any cause, from nothing".
This is a common missconseption. You really ought to educate yourself a bit better, so as to avoid showing your ignorance.
Have you heard of the "large hadron collider"? Do you know what the scientists are searching for?
The idea that something came from nothing is proposterous statement, that no intelligent person would think, nor believe. Just because our (humans) current knowledge is far above your comprehension does not mean that it is deserving of your mindless reductions.
Educate yourself, for you are baring your simpleness before the world!
@Anonymous. Thanks for your anonymous comment. (Why not give your name when you are accusing me of ignorance?) I am not ignorant. When I was an atheist, I never heard any explanation of the creation except for the Big Bang (Big Bag of Baloney) Theory. I emphasize the word theory, since nothing is proven and you all believe these false theories on faith. Your religion starts with an article of faith, that there is no God, and you close your eyes and ears to any proofs of His existence.
None of the village atheists who dominated the university mind space when I was a student bothered to explain how the big bang came about without any Agent. All the atheists I've ever know or read were satisfied with vague guesses about the origins of the universe.
So you think I should catch up on the latest theory that atheists have concocted to account for a universe that they believe came into being without God. Thanks, but I'll pass.
My teachers in atheism had impeccable credentials. I was led into atheism by Brandeis professors and world class thinkers, enticed by the carrot of intellectual superiority. Lots of brainwashing is done of the young, trying to convince them that faith in God is weakness.
After fully exploring the dead ends of attempting to live by the theories of unbelievers, I came back to faith. It is not a crutch but it is a deep comfort.
One of the main things I discovered in my attempt to lead the atheist lifestyle to the full is that intelligence does not make people good. Look at Jean Paul Satre and Simone de Beauvoir mocking between themselves the many women that Satre kept on the string, just for one example. To them without traditional morality as revealed to us by God, any behavior that suited them would do. Then we have godless Communism and the murder of millions as another example.
The reality is that God exists and created everything. To believe otherwise is madness because it is a denial of reality.
"For from the greatness and the beauty of created things their original author, by analogy, is seen."(Wisdom 13:5)
@Rosseanne
To say that the big bang has no current explanation does not count against science, it is a sign of honesty. We don't know yet is a reasonable response, you people always want to say that "god did it" instead of "I don't know", but every single time we have assumed a supernatural explanation for a phenomena, we have been dead wrong. Diseases are caused by demons... wrong, animals were created in their current form... wrong, and the list goes on and on.
I would like to address your emphasis on the word theory, because I think you might be under a grave misapprehension (I will operate under the assumption you are not being deliberately deceitful). A theory in the scientific sense is not the same as its colloquial use, which actually describes conjecture or (if the claim could be falsified) hypothesis. The scientific use of the word theory denotes an area of study, a concept which explains all observable evidence. The best example to illustrate the different meaning of the terms is with gravity:
The law of gravity- matter attracts matter
The theory of gravity- how matter attracts matter
the fact of gravity- observed instances of matter attracting matter
This is how the terms actually work, theory is the label reserved for the best supported areas of research, so the big bang theory would be the theory, and the facts that support it is that we can show the universe was compressed into a single spot and began expanding. What began that expansion is unknown, however attributing it to god accomplishes nothing
Respectfully,
ShouldersofGiants
Dear ShouldersofGiants: "[A]ttributing it to [G]od accomplishes nothing." Attributing the creation of the universe to God accomplishes a lot. It puts us in right relationship to our Creator. Realizing that there is Wisdom and a source of awe that exists outside of our petty human understanding gives us a healthy humility. "God made us to know Him, love Him, and serve Him on this earth and to be happy with Him forever in heaven." [Baltimore Catechism]. On the other hand, searching avidly for another explanation for existence, when there is none, accomplishes nothing. You are right in your charitable assumption, I am not being deceitful. I am just amazed at the way that atheists can look at a universe whose laws and actions are so perfect, whose grandeur is so immense, and whose origins are unfathomable to reason alone, and deny God. I cannot prove God exists to you, but to me it seems your eyes are blind. On the other hand, although you cannot prove God does not exist, you believe in His non-existence as an article of your faith.
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home