Bishop Barron on Why I Loved to Listen to Christopher Hitchens
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 30 сен 2024
- Another part of a video series from Wordonfire.org. Bishop Barron will be commenting on subjects from modern day culture. For more visit www.wordonfire....
Why must everyone descend into ad hominem attacks? Can't we just stay with argument? I do indeed say that without God, we slide very easily into moral relativism, for the only truly firm foundation for morals is thereby lost. I'm more than willing to have an argument about that.
I am sorry to point out the obvious but to state that Christopher Hitchens was "profundity religious", in any sense regardless, is as oxymoronic as stating that a Christian Pope is in fact an atheist. Heaven is filled in with hypocrites. The world is better off without this religious nonsense.
@@mariocoroa6800 Yes, when a manuscript like the Bible can't pass the common sense test and does more harm than good, what good is the manuscript? When people need interpreters to explain things and you get several interpretations it's no wonder there are so many sects that disagree with all the other sects. Want to be confused? Read the Bible!
Absolutely agree with you about ad hominems. Never acceptable under any circumstances. I hasten to add that, as an atheist, it's not God that keeps me from descending into them, but, rather, strong moral values instilled in me by my atheist lapsed Catholic parents.
@@mariocoroa6800 Christians view God as Justice and CH sought Justice - I don't see what the oxymoron is.
@@mortensimonsen1645 you just have to read the bible objectively and in its integrity to find out my answer.
The only reason why there are so many believers in the world today, is because very few of them actually red the bible.
It is - you'll see for yourself - a bronze-aged, man-made work of literacy. And it shows, very clearly.
I like this guy. I don't agree with him on a lot of things, but I admire him, kind of.
You can tell by the way he talks that he is extremely intelligent. And I like that he can have respect and admire someone who disagrees with him. That is a very good thing. I wish more people were like this, not only religious people, but everyone.
God bless you.
Bishop Robert Barron Have a good Christmas, Robert!
Have a good life :)
cool username bro i like red pandas as well
I like the random, radical positivity you are spreading in a RUclips comment section. Keep up the good work Andrew
Roger Man, tell me about the perks! I must be missing out on something.
Thanks for perfectly demonstrating the problem with scientism. You've just dismissed, with a wave of your hand, Plato, Aristotle, Socrates, Pythagoras, Augustine, Aquinas, Dante, Shakespeare, Bach, Newman, T.S. Eliot, Heidegger, Wittgenstein, etc. etc. They're all just "useless, meaningless, and subjectivistic." Friend, do you see how indefensible your position is?
Who are you talking to?
More so than the brilliance in your commentary, the grace and kindness in your demeanor speaks yards into your convictions. God bless you Father. Thank you.
Amen.
Here's the problem. No matter how attentive we are to injustice here below and no matter how effective we are in dealing with it, we will never utterly achieve justice. But our wills are ordered precisely toward a properly unconditioned justice. "God" is simply another name for unconditioned justice. Now you can see why we should never drive a wedge between a profound passion for rectitude in this world and a desire for complete justice through God's grace in a world to come.
I really have to say this. Father Robert strikes me not so much for his intelligent answers and his politeness in his videos but more for his effort and sacrifice he puts in answering all the questions on his videos!
Patient, kind, intelligent. He really does something I have never seen do before by other youtubers. .
Thank you Robert
God bless you.
Agree. Thanks
Agree. Thanks
Real talk.
I fully admit I am an atheist and I enjoy listening to you talk. I disagree with you, adamantly so, but I like to hear you comment on various things. Yes I am a "secret Herod"
You're always welcome to listen!
Let me ask you my friend. Do you know what we serious religious people mean when we say GOD? Do you believe in Justice and goodness? If you do, then, as Fr. Robert said, you've been found by a trascendent reality. Furthermore, ask yourself this: Why am I here rather than not here? You are someone beautiful in God's eyes.
Jonathan Swires You vastly overestimate everything Jonathan. Being intellectual means keeping your enemies close and knowing how they fight. You don't win unless you know your opponents next move.
I for one am puzzled as to why atheists and agnostics don't take the evidence for a Holographic Universe and its philosophical implications more seriously. My dad was a lifelong agnostic before he considered this, and is now a Deist of sort, that is, he cannot deny there is a "Supreme Programer", but remains, unfortunately, skeptical about that Programer being more then an observer, as if our existence was nothing more then an experiment. Nevertheless, it leads serious consideration to Galileo's assertion that "Mathematics is the language in which God has Written the Universe."
+achilleshoplite You seem to be referring to "The Art of War", but in my experience, atheists are rarely able to "know their enemies" as one thing or another seems to hobble your ability, as the good Father states, to have the slightest idea about what Believers usually mean by GOD. If you don't know that, then you don't really know us, and therefore cannot defeat us. A key self-hobble-ment that I have observed, & to which some atheists even admit, is a keen desire for there to NOT be a God of of any sort, a Satan-like misconception that worship is some sort of bondage. Indeed, if such people were presented with convincing proof of God, & remained philosophically consistent, becoming a satanist would seem likely. Both positions are based on the same fallacy, that a God with Rules is a "tyrant". No, His Rules give us Purpose, & free us from the tyranny of meaningless existence. Without God, existence is Hell, & the best we could hope for is life in Limbo, which is just "painless" hell.
Mary loved Jesus more than anyone, and she "pondered these things in her heart." Never be proud of your stupidity!
Father, just as Padmé Amidala loved more Luke Skywalker than anyone. And you're totally right, stupidity is something that nobody should ever be proud of. Amen, May Luke Skywalker be with you and stir away from the temptation of the Dark Side.
@nestarpal How about a counter-argument and not just ad hominem name-calling. I lay out precisely how and why I think Hitchens was interested in God. Tell me where I'm wrong.
Joel, the sneering attitude doesn't help...
I'm not defending pantheism, and God is not "the sum total of existence." God is the reason why the universe as such exists. He is "ipsum esse" or the sheer act of being itself. The universe is just the totality of contingent things.
Bishop Barron, I am a long-time fan of your videos. Catholic family - direct relative* of a somewhat recent pope actually - but admittedly not very religious myself. I doubt you’ll see this, but I was hoping you might be able to give me some insight on this... why is it that the universe itself can’t be non contingent? If God is non contingent then that proves such a thing is possible, so why not skip a step? You might say that since God’s very essence is being, but even still... why can’t the same be said for the universe itself? I just don’t really think the cosmological argument in any form is especially convincing.
The truth is, a large part of the reason I watch your videos is that I would love to be proven wrong about this. You present the most sound & compelling contemporary theistic arguments I’ve found so far
@@imma5269 It's a fair question. Here's the answer. The conclusion of the demonstration is a non-contingent source of contingent existence. This reality must be pure act, utterly realized in being, since it cannot have any potentiality. "The universe" is just a catch-all term for the sum total of finite, material reality. Therefore, it is thoroughly marked by potentiality and contingency. Even if you appeal to an abstraction such as "matter" or "energy," you have to ask, "why is matter in this condition rather than that?" or "why has energy taken on this particular configuration?" In other words, you are acknowledging that both are caused and therefore contingent.
@@BishopBarron thank you very much for the response, I appreciate you taking the time to answer. I will have to contemplate this for a while.
I hope you have a great weekend, take care
I always though Christopher Hitchens was like Darth Vader. He seems tough and bitter on the outside, but he's soft-hearted inside
Crunchy outside, and a chewy center.
Did he also kill children?
@@OokamiKageGinGetsu Wait, no. chewy was the big hairy guy
I´m catholic therefore I believe in God and defense the Church. I disagreed with Hitchens (obviously) but I also liked listening to him. I appreciated his intelligence and sense of humor. Of all the "famous atheists" out there (dawkins, harris, etc), to me Hitchens was the only from whom I did not perceive hatred. I perceived anger or even wrath, but not hatred. (Can´t say the same about the others) When I learned about his death, I also said a prayer for him. Once in a while I still pray for him.
Good. Keep praying for him.
Fr. Robert Barron
I will do!
@@ThePassiveObserver I respect and appreciate your viewpoint. I can tell you personally the prayer of my friend not only helped but absolutely transformed my life. And I know many people like myself who have had their life completely transformed for the same reason.
This is what we call testimonies in Christianity .
I follow my religion not because anyone told me or convinced me but because I have seen the results in my own life and others I know.
From my own experience the thing that stops prayers from been answered is arrogance or pride.
When i think back to how i used to be I remember i was very arrogant. No matter what i went through asking God for help did not come on the list.
GOD had to completely brake me down and make me desperate and strip me off my arrogance before I could even seek his help.
When the time came to it I didn't even know how to pray.
I called my friend who was a very religious person (who is also a medical doctor). I told her what I was going through and if she can pray for me. She prayer with so much conviction and power for me that I will never forget that day. It was like she was demanding GOD changes my life.
What happened that day has profoundly changed my life.
And I will never forget what she did for me because I can say GOD completely answered all my prayers and my life took a new course.
After that moment prayer is my everything it's the biggest weapon I have.
The biggest obstical to prayer been answered arrogance, pride and disbelief.
Spirituality is completely different to physical life it's a completely different type of knowledge. And often very simple. Highly intelligent people will struggle to find it because it requirs different skills to get it.
I wasn't happy about his nonsense on Mother Theresa.
Hatred is more dangerous when you don't let it perceived by the people around you. Some kind of secret weapon. There just one kind of good Hitchinses_ those unde three yards of good earth.
We worship God because he is the fullness of being and goodness. I don't think it's the least bit "blind" to hold that a finite mind cannot fully understand the moves that an infinite being makes. As far as your characterization of God goes, I sincerely would recommend that you put Christopher Hitchens down for one moment and pick up a good book of Biblical hermeneutics.
I'm afraid you weren't paying very close attention. For Catholic theology, God is not one being among many; rather, he is the sheer act of being itself, or in Kant's language, the "unconditioned." The unconditioned can be directly experienced according to various modalities: goodness itself, truth itself, and beauty itself. It is eminently clear from his writings that Hitchens was in the grip of the good itself, under the aspect of justice. This indeed made him implicitly religious.
The unconditioned is the absolute, that which has no restrictions. Whether we like it or not, our wills long for this, which proves that, at least inchoately, we know unconditioned justice. But if it's truly unconditioned, then it cannot be simply an idea restricted to the mind, for that would render it conditioned. What religious people correctly sense is that their longings for absolute truth, goodness, and beauty have put them in touch with something eminently real.
@james7300 Oh come on! I admired Hitchens as a writer and rhetorician, but he was far from "an intellectual titan." And Dawkins is a popularizer who harbors an irrational hatred for religion. Go get Robert Spitzer's book on arguments for God's existence and watch a real intellectual heavy-weight at work--or watch some of William Lane Craig's videos.
I was raised as an atheist and at about 9 or 10 yrs of age all of my friends told me I was going to go to hell because I did not go to Church (standard practice in those days ) . I was devastated and cried “but I haven’t done anything bad “. So I decided that I would be the “goodest “ever. After much serious thinking I decided I would try be kind and do at least one kind thing everyday. Still living in the same environment it wasn’t too long before I said to my friends l”it doesn’t matter if there is a heaven or hell . If I do good on earth I will be in heaven already and if I don’t I will be already living in hell “. Very very simple . I grew up believing God existed for every one else , but never thought He existed for me . Fast forward many years .
I too loved listening to Christopher Hitchens. I think I recognized something of myself in him . I so wanted to talk to him to tell him God does exist . He exists within everyone if they try to be kind every day . Very very simple . (It is not an easy life, but I am 76 now and I have no regrets in having made the decision to be kind .)
Judy Connors-Holland I love your comment. You have found and lived the Kingdom of God without knowing who and what God is. You have made a heaven on earth, that is God’s purpose. You are ahead of multitudes who spend their entire life worship without experiencing God’s presence. ‘The Kingdom of God is within you”, Christ said. You have made the best and the “very simple” decision that we all should do, to do good and to be good towards others. You made the world a better place
:) Couldn't have said this more eloquently or succinctly myself. I was an atheist at one time, but became a believer from the profound truth that God is Love.
In the phone book, we have the same name!
I have to say that is good until you start foisting it upon someone.
When we say that Jesus is God, we don't mean that God has turned into a human being. We mean that the unconditioned reality has taken to itself a human nature. Jesus' humanity is indeed "a being." But God remains the unconditioned ground of being.
Really appreciate the balance and good-heartedness of that response!
That might be Zefferelli, but it's not the Gospel. Peter actually said, "Leave me Lord, I'm a sinful man."
You should listen to and befriend his brother Peter. He is diametrically opposite stances to on religion and politics to Christopher.
And shockingly, may have an even deeper voice than Christopher. Their father must of had the voice of a bass drum.
@Dick Fageroni Says you.
@Dick Fageroni HAHAHAHAHAHAHA,
My God, Dick, what a fantastic comment. Bless you
@Dick Fageroni Yeah, that debate with his brother found him in my opinion straining to defend his argument and I was left with the opinion that he was repressed by his brother from an early age, seems like
bruh the pic
Not that we're prejudiced or anything! The unconditioned ground of contingency must be in possession of every ontological perfection. Thus he must be omniscient. How that qualifies as incoherent or "childish" you'll have to explain to me. "Hell" is a symbol for the definitive state of having rejected the divine love. How is it "childish" to hold that such an act of freedom is possible?
Whatever is good and right in your prayer is God already praying in you. Take a look at St. Paul's reflection on the Holy Spirit praying within us through groans too deep for speech.
I agree: Hitchens was delusional about God, but I still liked to listen to him.
mr Barron,greetings from Croatia.I deliberately say mr,because consider no one should be called reverend or mostreverend and find that adressing as relic of monarchistic past where your antecedens were considered semigods or royalty.Even consider that noone,esoecially those who live rather good of promoting humblenees as way of life should like to be adressed in that manner.Catholic church in Croatia is strong and influence is in my opinion more powerfull than political forces regardless being left or right.God is deeply demanding entity regardlessof his unconditional LoveHe did not spare his only Son to be brutally murdered in order to reconciliate world witj him.One thing in H.itchens work that made me question my faith is his statetement that there is no choice.I personally nailed mad preacher and even trying to prevent that scenario would threaten my eternal salvation.Now once he won over death and resurrected, not wanting me to accept Him would lead me in eternal damnation.Are you aware of choice narrowing nature of that cenario,Iam born,raised and without any tipe of consent brougjt towards wall where not accepting complete obedience to fat bishops and hysterical nuns would lead me in eternal fire.You dont need to answer me if you consider this tone being impolite and rude but religion indoctrination and Im now 38 living witj mother oppressed my sexuality, narrowed freddom of my mind and made me abandon all my secular friendships because they sinfully look on women or say fuck now and then.Iwill not supress myself from such remarks Sincerely sinfull,MARIN.P,S.YOU DONT NEED TO ANSWER IF YOU FIND THIS COMMENT INSULTING,yes and one more thing.Bishops palace are biggest signs of notattachment to degenerating material goods.Like Vatican bank.Best wishes
@@marin938
The title of bishop is ecclesiastical authority.
Even Hitch said "fr"
Cut that edge around.
@Dgoosh1000 No! Nothing can be "evil itself," since evil is always a privation of the good and hence necessarily parasitic upon the good.
I am from the Philippines. And I must confess, sometimes, to truly understand Bp. Barron, i have to listen to him a couple or more times😂. Talk about language barrier? A new follower here from the Philippines. And... i am a Catholic. Thank you, Bishop! God bless you!
Friend, here's the fundamental problem with your position: how could a finite mind ever begin to determine that an infinite mind does not have sufficient justification for allowing certain evils? I mean, how would you know? It's like a little child insisting that his parents are utterly unjustified in allowing him to suffer in any way.
If one were accept rebirth, karma, and that we all are on the journey back to God, or whatever one want to call the power that illuminates all of existence, then it all makes sense. By the way, they say, that when one finds God, then one sees that one has never been without God. The kingdom of heaven lives in the heart of every person, if they only had eyes to see. JC
That which is most real is precisely that which we don't control, that which goes beyond our minds and our power: the unconditioned.
Nice words about Hitchens....
in spite of yourself, there is something powerfully atheistic about you.
I stumbled across you quite by accident, and am glad to have done so.
I'm a Catholic, albeit not a devout one in recent years. That wasn't always the case. In fact, after eight years of Benedictine education, I gave serious thought to leading a monastic life.
Your observations about Hitchens are similar to my feelings about Vonnegut, another self professed atheist. I actually attended a talk he gave at my university, after which he signed my copy of Slaughterhouse Five. It was a profound experience.
The phrase you use over and over, which I like, is "serious religious person". Unfortunately, serious people of any stripe (religious, political, moral, etc) seem to be in short supply.
I'm struck by the parable of the sower. Perhaps I'm simply discouraged by the volume of seeds that fall on rocky ground or that get choked out by thorny bushes.
Thank you for the content.
My favorite Hitchens recording is a brief lecture he gave on Mark Twain's skepticism. I found it accurate, as far as it went, yet also profoundly incomplete. Namely, he either obfuscated, or was unaware of how much Twain was of TWO minds on the subject of Faith and God. The extraordinary paradox of him writing his utterly contrary books, "the Biography of Joan of Ark", and "the Mysterious Stranger" at roughly THE SAME TIME couldn't have driven his internal, spiritual conflict more to the point. Hitchens never seems to address such conflicts, everyone was either a "foolish" believer, or a "rational" skeptic. I don't think he knew how to address someone so at war within himself as Mark Twain.
You renew my faith in Christianity. Wish there were more like you in the media instead of the nutters.
Thomas Aquinas says that God is not a just being, but rather justice itself, not a good being, but goodness itself, not a particular existent, but the sheer act of being itself. Yawheh is described in the Old Testament as the creator of all things. That is the Biblical way of making the same point, namely, that God is the pure act of to be as such, in which all finite things exist.
Oy vey. The argument from contingency demonstrates that there must exist some reality whose very nature is to be. Otherwise, we cannot adequately explain the existence of conditioned things. This is what Aquinas meant by calling God the sheer act of to be. This properly unconditioned reality must be marked by any and all ontological perfection.
I miss Christopher Hitchens, it was a great loss when he died. Christopher informed me on a great manner of ideas and issues. We can all learn a lot from Christopher, even besides his great Witt and intelligence, he gave us a great understanding of the dying process and how to die gracefully. I recommend highly Christopher's last book, "Mortality".
I'm always amazed by the comments of the detractors after Fr. Barron's videos. It seems like they spend a good deal of their time watching these videos and even more time writing negative comments. All of this time spent making uninformed arguments, but they won't take the time to delve deeper into the issues being discussed. Has imax1971 ever read Duns Scotus, has John Anthony ever even googled Augustine or Thomas Aquinas? The total lack of intellectual curiosity is frightening.
I'm a Baptist, and I liked Christopher Hitchens. I appreciated his passion and his wit, even if I didn't always agree with him.
Not at all! "Science" can't say a thing about the following questions: what makes an act good? What is the nature of justice? What is true love? Why is there something rather than nothing? What distinguishes authentic knowledge from mere opinion? etc. etc. Those are all properly philosophical or religious questions.
Well, whether it's "sad" or not is neither here nor there. All that matters is whether what I'm saying is true. My argument is that the unconditioned concern for justice (which Hitchens clearly demonstrated) is, implicitly, a passion for God, since God is nothing other than absolute or unconditioned justice.
Great video. I always loved Hitchens, and even now as a Christian (again, albeit a different kind than before, more along the lines of Joseph Campbell than of the literalist tradition I grew up with), I still love listening to him. Your work never disappoints Father, keep it up! Much appreciated.
10 years ago I was a militant atheist, so I discovered Hitchens. Watching Hitchens debate religoous scholars lead me to discovering the religious side of the argument which was something I'd never heard before. Hearing the religious side helped me to understand why all people have a truly infinite value no matter their circumstance, why people have rights (and precisely what a right is), and that objective good and evil must exist.
I'm not sure what I am now, but I know I cannot be an athiest. All thanks to Hitchens.
I'm only going by this one video but from the way the Fr. Bannon puts it, he should much rather become a Buddhist, or even more aptly, a Hindu
Because the Vedas predicate that God, or 'Bramhan', is all but reality itself and vice versa, i.e, 'reality is identical with divinity' and it also, as a matter of fact, says that justice or "Dharma" is identical with divinity - which is pretty much analogous to the Bishop's beliefs if you were go by this video - making him a pantheist, and not a Christian. Because Christian belief system does not believe in these aforementioned notions
Simply put, if you don't believe in "medieval mumbo jumbo" and "sky fairies" like the bishop says, you DO NOT get to be a Christian
@@nad1ax2Very astute point!
Former anti-theist, former lefty, pretty AltRight and a major Hitch now Jordan "Christian Atheist" fan - just stumbled on you. I strongly suspect I'll enjoy your content, or preaching if you will.
If you are actually "AltRight", Hitch and JP would both roundly denounce you.
The alt-right is explicitly ethno-nationalist. If you aren't a white supremacist, don't allow others to smear you and other conservatives/traditionalists with that epithet. Don't allow them to muddy the waters and confuse the language.
If you are a white supremacist, than you are part of the problem.
@@dfiala9890"Hitch and JP would both roundly denounce you." Impressive point, you're a real thinker. Assuming you're religious - how does it feel that virtually every single great religious thinker and leader would denounce you as a degenerate? Call you a sinner, or take issue with several things you believe and have done.
I'm not them nor do I have to worship them and their every word and thought. As to nationalist, I am one though more fittingly Alt-light. Anyway, their message of individualism, responsibility and rationalism is what resonates with me.
White nationalist does not equal white supremacist, most actual Nazi I've spoken with arent even more than separatists having a serious issue with Jews. I'd rather side with these rare people, than the numerous far lefties and actual communists.
Welcome to the club! 😄I feel you will enjoy listening to Bishop Barron too. I'm his fan as well as Jordan Peterson's. And btw! They just had a discussion recently!! Bishop released a commentary on it and JP is yet to release the full clip! So excited! 😊😊
Why in the world would a complete secularist think that all people are equal?! Aristotle certainly didn't think so, neither did Plato or Homer or Cicero? Ask yourself where this doctrine came from. Here's a hint: it's clearly laid out in the prologue to the Declaration of Independence.
Not at all! Rocks and pieces of toast are finite, conditioned things. God is infinite and unconditioned. There is a radical ontological separation between the Creator and creatures. To say that God is the "act" of existence is to say that his form of existence is utterly actualized.
I am an atheist, but I enjoy Barron's frank discussions, and I also agree with his passion for Hitchens' works. I enjoy listening to intelligent theists like Barron as well as intelligent atheists like Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris, et al. As Barron mentions, Hitchens wrote about many things besides religion, using his great wit and passionate writing, which also showed Hitchens had a rich 'life' outside the religion debate. To me, that is what makes Hitchens a much more interesting, well-rounded person, and definitely worth reading.
Love the Red Barron, that's how we refer to Bishop Barron. He is truly a warrior for GODS word, well-read, spoken and genuine.. you would be a closed minded fool not to listen to his words..God Bless this inspirational Man!!
Christopher Hitchens is very fortunate the he had you Fr. Barron to pray for his soul upon his death. What a great act of mercy and love! Please keep posting these inspiring videos!
Well, I represent the great both/and tradition of Catholicism. I don't think forgiveness contradicts justice at all. It goes beyond it, but it doesn't undermine it.
You're right, if by that you mean that I don't believe in the god that Hitchens didn't believe in. The problem is that Hitchens and his colleagues had no idea what serious Christians, Jews, and Muslims mean when they use the word "God."
I am a Catholic and an unflinching fan of Christopher Hitchens for almost all the same reasons Father Barron cites. Intellect and wit are indeed admirable qualities.
Christopher Hitchens is also a very compassionate, morally clear individual. You didn't mention that.
I am atheist man but i like this man
I love Fr. Barron's point on justice.
Hitchens was a man searching. I hope he found what he was searching for.
The properly unconditioned must be in possession of any and all ontological perfection. That is why we say that God is personal, intelligent, free, etc. So I'm not advocating any kind of Deism. My overall point is that people such as Hitchens, and I'm gathering, yourself are indeed implicitly religious in the measure that you have been seized by the power of the uncondidtioned. Of course, I would like to bring that implicit faith to explicit expression!
I liked Hitchens. I really like his brother, Peter. I was an atheist at one point in my life and listened to Hitchens, Dawkins, and Harris. I still like Harris. Though I disagree with him theologically, he is an independent thinker who doesn't just jump on popular bandwagons.
Hi Father!
I was a big fan of his too in spite of being Catholic. I have a strong feeling his anger was more directed at Religious Organizations not the notion of the existence of God. .He was furious at the violence committed over centuries in the name of Organized Religion and continues today! ISIS for example would have him boiling. He had empathy for his fellow man.Otherwise known as love. I believe God knows that. His fierce convictions didn't come from his studies or intellect but a "Spirit" inside him. A quite voice!! I wonder wonder who that was? Bill Murphy
I applaud B. Barron for his charitable view of Hitchens.
God gave us free will.
God also gave us his 10 commandments, one of which says "You shall not murder".
And what do some people do with their free will? What do they use their free will for? They kill other people. Then maybe some other come and blame the God. Is it God's fault if your misusing your free will by killing people? I ask you: exactly how many murders annualy would there be if every one of us were to obey the God's command? I want the exact number.
Listening to the bishop defining god makes me miss Hitch even more.
Father, I left atheism two to three years ago by having the access to some of the saint Thomas Aquinas works, and with that said, I think I deeply understand your point of view on Hitchens, Hitchens while he is not anymore the kind of guy I'd watch I have to confess how much I still admire and I think I always will admire him as a religious man, as a kind and generous persona. Since he spent incontable hours of his life fighting for others justice, this is the love of God, this is Justice with a capital letter, it's too sad that he passed away, but I believe he's now in heaven with God, the justice he spent incontable hours of his life looking for. Amém.
You can’t ignore Jesus’ words, “if you deny me I will deny you before my Father”. Hitchens was an enfant terrible who worked hard to drag a lot of souls to hell. All these encomiums have nothing to do with his Judgment. I wouldn’t bet that Hitchens is in heaven.
Good works dont save you, especially if you blaspheme God and try to destroy his church/children. I wont say where he is, but we should all be praying for him.
@@unkownoflife5959
I agree. I said that I would not bet that Hitchens is in heaven, but that doesn’t mean that I don’t hope that he is. I do hope that all persons go to heaven.
@@sliglusamelius8578 Then pray for his salvation, and for all in hades.
I believe the greatest punishment that any sentient conscientiousness can endure, is the unobscured, indefensible, knowledge that our truth is not THE truth. My prayer for Christopher Hitchens is the same as my prayer for Robert Barron, and for the father I lost a few months ago. I pray that when the limited perspective of flesh is shed, and consciousness expands, the individual is not overcome by the knowledge that his or her truth…was not truth at all. I pray that this revelation humbles them, and sends them, overwhelmed, and sincerely penitent, before their Creator, to earnestly seek His forgiveness, IF that is what’s required of them. When I pass over, I pray the same for myself. And though I do have an amoebic understanding of absoluteness, I simply do not have the perspective necessary to grasp that which cannot be contained within a three spatial dimension space.
Even my philosophical mind is limited to three spatial dimensions, because that is what my cave wall is comprised of. I have no reference for what exists outside the cave of my universe. Everything I know - is contained within a finite realm that depends on something more than what my five senses can perceive, for its existence. I understand the atheist perspective. I was one for a good deal of my life. I was an atheist because God could not be adequately explained. It’s difficult to define something that’s unexplainable. And I probably would have remained an unbeliever had it not been for a motorcycle accident in 1992. My eyes were opened after that, albeit very slowly. I was a stiff necked sort. Eventually I began asking the question: “Why is there SOMETHING rather than NOTHING?” Like Bishop Barron, I found the scientific explanations inadequate. I understood the concept of absolute nothing, and likened it to an immovable object. The absoluteness of SOMETHING became like an irresistible force that could not be contained, understood, or defined.
For years I fought God off. I read the scientific theories, looking for something that made sense. Nothing did. And then I began looking at myself, my life, my creations, and my achievements. After that, I began looking at the human race, and what we’ve really accomplished. I can’t seem to help myself from looking at everything the way a detective looks at a crime scene. I start at the end, or the present in this case, and work my way back. If you look at a song, you think it began in the creative mind of it’s composer. But the composer didn’t create the notes, he or she simply arranged what already existed. That is what we do! We’re arrangers! Architects do it with geometry, artists do it with canvas, clay, or stone. And scientists do it with the finished art, working their way back to the beginning.
But no matter how clever a scientist, or detective is, they can’t escape the canvas itself. The art is simply a reaction to the artist, and the artist is a reaction to the genes that came together to form him. Those genes were a reaction to another action. It’s like the begats in the bible. If you follow it back far enough, you come to the beginning. But is the beginning just the first drop of paint on the canvas? And does the process begin again once you reach it? Perhaps many beginnings must be reached before the truth is found, like the fractal art style of a picture within a picture, within a picture. Eventually, however, you must come to THE beginning; one that has no beginning, in and of itself; something that simply IS. And we will never discover the truth until we do.
Phenomenal writing and thought. I thank you for articulating such spiritual richness.
Out of all those popular atheists, who would tell a believer to not pray for them, Hitchens was ok with prayers being said for him.......
He even gave his blessings for it
No other atheist in his caliber like him........much respect may he rest in peace
@DonRico333 - Our understanding of justice and justice itself are two different things entirely. Human interpretation of justice is doomed to faulty conclusions, but what justice *is* cannot change. This is why we need an authoritative guide to lead us toward that proper understanding.
You cannot maintain that justice is relative and that infanticide is unjust. Either infanticide is always unjust, or it is only unjust "for now." Which do you assert?
I'm an athiest. I like this guy...admittedly I do like Hitchens more, but I do find it refreshing when intelligent religious folk have respect and admiration for people who detest religion...and vice versa
Fr. Barron, this is absolutely so true! Atheists talk about something different than us when they say God. I might even say that I agree with their arguments! The god they describe does not exist. And then they claim that we believe in that god that doesn't exist. But they are absolutely unwilling to address what we mean by God.
Not true.
kurt smith oh yes? how? Spell it out. What do you mean by the word "god"? I'm pretty sure you are addressing something totally different to what we are addressing.
Hitchens addressed the bible.what the bible says. The bible says the word is God. The bible says some horrible and crazy things. You have no proof of this character you call god. Go ahead and explain.
kurt smith do you want me to present to you the whole book one of St. Thomas Aquina "Summa contra Gentiles"? I suggest you go over the first 13 chapters of it which most probably will address many of your current doubts regarding God. Here I leave it for you www.basilica.org/pages/ebooks/St.%20Thomas%20Aquinas-The%20Summa%20Contra%20Gentiles.pdf It starts on page 17. This I leave to you just in case you are really interested in knowing what we are talking about when we say God. What Hitchens says is not what we are talking about, simply as that. His oponent is a strawman, not real believers. I bet you will be surprised just by going though the first 13 chapters.
Ya I've read Thomas Aquinas and his "proofs" . Richard Dawkins also addressed those. I've heard these arguments. None are good. As I said the bible is the issue. This gods demands and commandments are the trouble. I'm not arguing against a God but this God you guys believe in. When you say God who are you talking about? Krishna? Zues? Allah? Yahweh? These are all man made gods. You assume that god is your specific God.
very beautifully said. God is not an item among many in the universe, that is true, god is truth itself, being itself. I agree.
You know, that's what I really greatly admire about you, Fr. Robert Barron. You always see the good in the darkest areas, and what could be darker than attacks on our precious Church. You really inspire me to be a better person, a better Catholic, and in having a more intimate walk with Christ Jesus. Thank God for you and your work, the world really needs you!!!!!
5:37 This has been my experience as well; God is everything in the universe. God doesn't retreat as science advances; science advances toward a greater understanding of God.
I've found myself led to that magnificent and unquantifiable conclusion as well.
I went to Catholic school and have known quite a few Catholics. Barron is different. He is the first of his tribe to cheerfully engage with the Hitchenses, Harrises, Marxes, etc., from a place of calm abiding in God, it seems to me, rather than out of the usual puritanical, patronizing, superstitious fear. Barron recognizes that it is all part of God's garden. I hope to learn of many more such Catholics. Too bad I only find out about him now, at the end of his tenure in Beautiful Flowers (my stomping grounds).
Wow, thanks for this. It really got me thinking about my favorite atheist intellectuals and where their moral clarity comes from. I love Hitchens too, as well as his deeply religious and equally talented brother Peter. Ironically, I don't think I would believe in God at all if I hadn't discovered Christopher Hitchens in my childhood. I studied evolutionary biology and my parents raised me without religion whatsoever, so my first serious exposure to religion came from watching my father's colleague co-debate with Richard Dawkins. As an American, I had seen fundamentalist evangelicals in the news and heard the dumb, narrow-minded things they said, so I had no interest in picking apart their beliefs. I never had much of an interest in religion at all until I came upon the intense passion and verve of the brilliant people militating against it. Their passions became mine, but in the course of things I developed a profound interest in all this stuff I considered just fantastical bronze age gibberish, the philosophy and theology that so many of us, including many who claim to be Christian, dismiss out of hand today.
It was through that interest, purely academic though it initially was, that I was eventually drawn into the Catholic Church. So, I praise God for my time spent as a condescending, aggressive atheist, and for leading me to the "spiritual" directors who introduced me to Christ, including Sam Harris, Richard Dawkins, Stephen Fry, and especially Christopher Hitchens, among many others. I still have the utmost love and respect and best wishes for all of them, except for a few who I think are truly malign influences with an intentional and unmitigated disregard for the truth, like Daniel Dennett and PZ Myers.
Bishop Barron: I have to say, having followed Christopher Hitchens' work for all of my adult and adolescent life, I agree with your appraisal. Hitchens' upbringing left a mark on him just as it did on his brother - apparently a mark of God. Sam Harris would certainly argue that Hitchens' moral principles were logically formulated, of course. Just theorems derived from a set of axioms. If social scientists have one thing right, it's that human cultures' moral axioms are subjective. Not necessarily arbitrary, but clearly not absolute. Harris claims to have an objective moral standard predicated on human wellbeing, but we know that this is as ambiguous and ephemeral and transient a criterion for justice as any religious law. I seriously doubt whether anyone's internal conscience actually abides by such a moral standard.
Moral predispositions are almost certainly the subject of evolutionary psychology, but the amount of variation demonstrable in human populations proves that we cannot even agree on moral theorems by logic alone, let alone axioms like "maximize wellbeing for the most humans possible." Moreover, that axiom has a hard computability bug wrapped up in it. It's an optimization problem. Even if we were capable of quantifying wellbeing, we'd need to mathematically compute the amount of total wellbeing for every possible permutation and select the permutation with the highest total outcome... and do that for EVERY moral question. Which puts it just as far out of reach as cracking a modern encryption scheme. It's absurd.
But pretending we could do it, for the sake of argument - what happens if the best permutation, the one with the highest total wellbeing, is one that oppresses 99% of people for the benefit of the other 1%? What if instead of diminishing returns on wellbeing, it exponentially increases? Such that spreading the wellbeing out equally among all humans results in less total wellbeing than an abject imbalance? That wouldn't be surprising. After all, wealth seems to work this way. If you spread it out evenly, most people tend to squander it. If you give it to the most intelligent people, they tend to multiply it. Using such an axiom seems to imply that there's no problem with this situation. That we can't have a valid moral argument against oppression if it results in extreme wellbeing for the oppressors.
I don't mean to say that people like Sam Harris are immoral. I used to take his arguments on this matter seriously, myself, and I don't think I used to be immoral. I don't think I even changed morally. Instead, I think I *ALWAYS* had Christian moral precepts. I was ostensibly raised without religion, but I was raised in a cultural milieu that evolved for hundreds of years steeped in Christian tradition and moral law. I internalized the Christian axioms and my morals emerged from them by a rational process. I think this is the case for most of us in Western civilization. We may think we have good reasons for believing in our moral principles, but 1) we often mistake theorems for axioms, e.g., misjudging an opinion on abortion as being a fundamental/absolute value rather than an emergent expression of a deeper moral principle like the sanctity of life or the primacy of individual freedom and equality; and 2) humans can rarely ever explain where our axiomatic values come from. I would argue that they are usually below the level of conscious awareness.
So, it's not that I think Sam Harris is behaving immorally because of his nonsensical moral axiom. Rather, I don't think he is using this axiom as a moral rubric in the first place - because how could he? Even to answer a very simple question like "is killing in self-defense wrong?" with this axiom requires computational power far in excess of all human brains combined. I think he is operating on a fundamentally Judeochristian moral framework, and making post hoc rational arguments to justify his conclusions. After all, he's never shown his work. He just seems to take it for granted that reciprocal altruism and retaliator strategies produce the optimal moral outcomes. Coming from evolutionary psychology, I see this assumption at work all the time, and I see that I used to accept it at face value too. But it's never come close to being proven.
I agree with one of the implications that you made in this video, that someone who really burns with passion for morality and justice does so because of an experience, whether conscious or not, of the divine. Christopher Hitchens and his brother both share that quality of ethical passion. And I think their biggest difference is to whom or what they attribute that passion. Sam Harris ultimately attributes it to a level of logical processing that is ludicrous on its face. Even if that moral rubric is the optimal one, it requires calculating every possible outcome of every possible action, something that ONLY God could do.
And in that sense, it misses the point of so much of religion. One of the prime reasons we need God is precisely the inadequacy of the human mind to compute the ethical consequences of our actions. We need simple heuristics to govern our behavior precisely because we can't make split-second decisions like "to kill or not to kill" on the basis of the computing power of our puny, squishy gray matter. Hence, the commandments, the beatitudes, and so on.
Any human who thinks they have the mental facility necessary to DERIVE ideal morality as if it were a simple equation is either borrowing their conclusions from God, or is exactly the kind of person you don't want dictating morals to others. Of course, I'd place Hitchens on the "borrowing from God" side of the spectrum. I pray he finds his way to Heaven. I'm sure his failure to give credit to God for his moral genius is an affront to God, but I really hope God forgives him this.
This video was so great and so insightful, and really got me thinking. I appreciate these solo videos so much, but it seems like you don't do them as often anymore. Nothing against your collaborators but I love these short but really focused videos, for which you seem so prepared and on point. The other videos (which are more like 30 minutes long) are great too but I hope you'll do more of these highly polished miniature lectures. Without these I don't think I would believe in God either. Although I recently subscribed to Word on Fire, it was your RUclips videos that got me into this. I have been seriously considering pre-theological education at St John's because of these videos, and because I have read about a recent shortage of priests. There's so much pushing me in the opposite direction, but every time I watch your videos I feel reinvigorated and motivated to surrender my life to Christ and study His mysteries.
By the way, I just got my Word on Fire Bible, vol. 1. It is incredible, truly breathtaking. I was amazed at how quickly you guys shipped it. I just ordered it on Christmas day I think, and it arrived today. I wasn't expecting it to arrive until next week. Then I cracked it open and was just blown away. Even my dad was transfixed by it, especially all the thought that went into the sigil on the cover's front face. Really fabulous stuff. The glosses and art and commentary are perfect, and reassured me that I made the right choice in choosing the Catholic Church for its intellectual, artistic, and theological traditions, over any of the thousands of other claimants to divine authority. I have never been so gratified by a $60 purchase before. Can't wait for volume 2. I'll pray for victory in your mission and all your endeavors, and I hope some day soon I can contribute personally (I'm just down the road from your archdiocese, but I work in LA)
Amazing story! Praise be to God
Great testimony! Out of curiosity, why do you think Daniel Dennett and PZ Myers are worse than the others?
@@Nick-qf7vt I'm not the original commenter, but there is a well-known incident with PZ Myers when he used his influence to ask athiests to enter Catholic Churches to steal hosts, and then mail them to him. He then proceeded to profane them and post pictures online. Even the secular students of America reprimanded him for this. This behavior is a sign of someone with a deeply personal, rather than intellectual, gripe against God, not worthy of the tradition of Hitchens, Dawkins and Harris. This might be why.
@@cb6562 I didn't know that! That is very scummy. Glad other atheists called him out for that
Well said Fr. Barron. Once again said with clarity and love. People talk about "believing" in God, or "not believing" in God, but when you accept God into your life, you don't"believe" in Him, you "Know" Him. The relationship is much more intimate than "believing" or not!
Oooh, nice phrase. I'll be using this too, a 'Herod syndrome'... I have Herod syndrome towards Dawkins, Hitchens and also maybe the likes of Zizek or Vattimo. And equally I'm not a watcher of any religious or Catholic videos (unless you count comedy, aka Michael Voris). I'm super duper Catholic too! You atheist guys are missing out, come join our side! You can watch all the media you like
This is a brilliant, profound and even-handed look at HItchens... I totally disagreed with him on some matters of faith but always was ready to listen to his belief that justice is crucial to the peace of the world.
I actually didn’t like Hitchens. Very dodgy in his answers. To me, he didn’t really present any good arguments. Just some Jokes. My favorite of the New Atheist is Sam Harris. I agree with much of what he’s said. I think he beat WLC in debate. Never beat Jordan Peterson though.
I assume Father Barron and Mr. Hitchens never met. Can you imagine the ensuing debate? I, for one would have paid to see it!
Dan Crosby Much easier to debate Hitchens after he's dead...
as the above video demonstrates.
Roper122 Friend, I'm hardly "debating" him! I'm drawing out an implication of his position--and doing so in the most irenic way.
Fr. Robert Barron Exactly my point... you're having a one-sided debate.
Which is, as I said, much easier when the man himself isn't around to vehemently disagree with you.
Was in poor taste when you first did it, and still is. Had you simply said you appreciated much of what he did, it would have been quite a classy thing to do... unfortunately, you couldn't help yourself.
So no... not irenic at all.
Roper122 That's so much nonsense. You're trying to invent a quarrel.
Roper122 Sounds like Fr. Barron is just reminiscing, not debating.
Why is this on a Jake and Amir playlist?
Thank you for one of the best descriptions of God.. my kids tonight were asking me what God looks like... It was very cute, now I can try to explain
I'm only going by this one video but from the way the bishop puts it, he should much rather become a Buddhist, or even more aptly, a Hindu. Because the Vedas predicate that God, or 'Bramhan', is all but reality itself and vice versa, i.e, 'reality is identical with divinity' and it also, as a matter of fact, says that justice or "Dharma" is identical with divinity - which is pretty much analogous to the Bishop's beliefs if you were go by this video - making him a pantheist, and not a Christian. Because Christian belief system does not believe in these aforementioned notions
Simply put, if you don't believe in "medieval mumbo jumbo" and "sky fairies" like the bishop says, you DO NOT get to be a Christian
I never would have guessed that Bishop Barron subscribed to Vanity Fair. That made me laugh.
When you, with good intent and will, pray for someones well-being and you get back scorn and discontent, that for me proves that there is at least a devil. Which in turn proves the existence of God. lol. Have a nice day.
If they were sure atheism is right, then why would they be angry? Whereas the thing that atheists most need (and, dare I say, secretly wish for) to be taken care of is exactly their anger. In a sense, that barrage of hate was the most sincere and open moment for many of them.
They're angry because of the real-life consequences we see from religious fundamentalism. It's not exactly a mystery considering Hitchens went out of his way to point out the atrocities attributable to religion all the time. The fact that you chose to conveniently ignore this fact is rather telling. Your stance is rather childish, no offense.
@@MarijuanaFireFighter that common mark thrown against religion is in itself a flawed one that isn't well thought out. It's really directed at the worst aspects human behavior. Completely non-religious political or philosophical ideologies have and continue to be followed no matter their contradictions, failures, or whatnot. Dare I even speak of the violence and death perpetrated in the name of such non-religious ideologies. Where there are such high death tolls and suffering in such relatively short amounts of time since the ideology's existence, though by then their radical fire thankfully at least usually burns itself out. Others though, just keep remaking themselves in different forms throughout the years. Such is the case time and time again.
As a 24 year old convert to Catholicism, I can confirm this. Father Barron's videos had a huge effect on me and I am forever grateful for this.
Great work Bishop Robert Barron!!!
4:27 Excellent explanation of the difference between God and God of the gaps.
His explanation of God is just deepity after deepity. If God is everything then God is nothing.
I also felt the same way about Hitchens he had an amazing intellect, wit, and good humour but he was wrong in the final analysis even though it was really entertaining and I mourned his death. RIP
I love Barron more every day.
Who is the smartest person alive today? Who is the person with the highest intelligence quotient who is alive right now? For the sake of argument, let's assume that he is I.
Then: I am the smartest man alive, and I did not design my brain, and neither do I understand such fully. So, there must be Someone smarter than I, my Designer, my Manufacturer. I understand this One to be God, as defined by my beloved Catholic Church.
May 14, 2017
made no compelling arguments just talked in circles, everything he expressed were feelings no solid arguments, more mythical philosophical bs. come on show us prove, where is the hard evidence for the supernatural you claim
It's interesting that Bishop Barron has seen & read so much of Hitchens, but ultimately failed to realize that Hitchens has never spoken against the objective existence of God, or the objective nature of God. Hitchens has only ever spoken against what *people claim to know* about God's existence/nature/etc. I.e. the religions that people create, the doctrines people mandate, the rituals people invent, the institutions they build, etc. Hitchens has always spoken against *people* who pretend to have answers that they don't.
Now in response to some of Bishop Barron's claims in this video:
"God is the reason why there is something rather than nothing" - but why is there a God rather than nothing? Theism doesn't answer the question of why something exists rather than nothing. It simply replaces "something" with "God". Theism is simply an attempt to postpone/dodge the question.
"God is not a true thing, but truth itself" - the truth according to who? Who can claim to know?
"God is not a good thing among many, but goodness itself" - goodness according to who? Who can claim to know?
"God is not one just state of affairs, but justice itself" - justice according to who? Who can claim to know?
God may exist, God may be goodness, God may be truth, and God may be justice. None of these claims pose a challenge to Hitchens's stance. What Hitchens argued is how any *human being* can claim to know about God's existence, what God's goodness means, what God's truth means, and what God's justice means. These things require human interpretation, and there isn't a single logical reason to believe that any earthly religion holds the authoritative answers. If you have read this far, thank you for reading :)
Thank you. I think your philosophical outlook in this video is a lot like my own. I wouldn't call myself an atheist, but I have never been religious in the bible and church sense. However, I enjoyed your video. Looks like I'm one of the few because dam, your comment section is overflowing with angry, self-righteous people. I hope you don't let them put you off.
I'm an atheist and I loved this video. thankyou Father :)
Kind of a funny statement to end on. Just because Hitchens believed in the value of justice and fairness does not mean that those traits were divinely inspired within him. As you said, he was a staunch atheist.
I’ve just see this - and I am conscience stricken that I did not think more charitably about Christopher Hitchens, one of his virtues was that he was a fearless cigarette smoker.
Will Craig Lane put it well - arguments for the existence of God are deductive and not inductive.
Father, I enjoy so much of what you offer on RUclips, I sought you out for possible insights into Christopher Hitchens...to expand my charitable thoughts about Hitchens. Your kind presentation of his positive qualities has helped me. But in the balance, they do not lead me to want to hear or read more of Hitchens and his thinking. Respecting his legacy, I will not go into the many negative aspects of his message and personal delivery. I listened to and read him, and the breaking point for me came with his vitriolic attacks on Mother Teresa. Certainly, as all of us, she is not above critique. But he did not offer a critique encompassing the full nature of her work. It was a petty, vicious, childish rant that gained him an audience with mass media and ensured his place on the throne of anti-Christian theology. If he had truly cared about the plight of the poor she served, he had the time and resources to demonstrate this with his own personal mission work...and yet, he preferred verbally attacking the workers in the vineyard as he wined and dined with the rich and famous. What positive qualities he possessed were lost on me then...and now. Thank you for speaking in his defense.
As Gary Grant wrote you 3 years ago: ... the grace and kindness in your demeanor speaks yards into your convictions. God bless you Father.
This guy is a civilised man. I have a question for God, why didn't you model mankind on this priest? The world would be a richer place if he had.
Peter Travere because of original sin. We are wounded by sin, and that's why we are evil creatures. The reason why this is so it's because God, by making us in His image gave us freedom. Freedom to chose between good and evil. Some poeple choose the good most of the times, or sometimes, but all choose evil at some point of our lives. That's being free, being able to choose evil. And because many choose evil, the world is as it is.
God gives us Purpose, but He also gives us Free Will, which, in my view, requires a degree of rANdoMneSs. Not absolute randomness, which in a vast universe would inevitably interfere with the probability of existence, but not perfect purpose either, as we would be little more then flawless windup toys, pointless automatons. He wants us to love Him, but He wants us to CHOOSE to love Him, which requires, in turn, to have other options, and randomness diversifies options.
+Peter Travere He did far better. He modelled it on His Own Son. Ever read about him?
What He didn't have that all of us do is a wound - not a part of us.
Would the world really be a richer place, or would it be a world of clones? Without diversity who are we? Would you even be able to make the distinction between wisdom and foolishness, right or wrong, or good and evil, if we didn't struggle with choosing between the two. Even in the Garden, there was choice, and look how that turned out. There's a reason we're here, and a reason for our struggle between righteousness and irreverence. If you're a believer, trust God's plan, the truth will be revealed eventually. If you're an unbeliever, don't worry about things you don't believe in. Just don't close your mind to possibility. None of us knows the truth. We simply don't have enough information to prejudice ourselves against another belief. In the end, none of us will be right about what exists, or doesn't exist beyond the veil of death.
Mark Spencer
Jesuits and Dominicans are clones of each other?
Lord have mercy, I didn't know there was that much similarity between white and black!
It was wonderful lecture. I' m believe in God like a substantial part of well- educated people. Attacks against some believers are strongly related to our fears. Indeed, a lot of us don't believe in God, because we live in fear. It is much more easier to do immoral things, than you think that everything will be alright.
(4:35): Funny that believers are accused of filling in the gaps with God. It was the non-believers who filled in the great lacuna of Darwin with "the missing link."
Interesting. These people mentioned plainly just do not believe in God. I think that they are trying so hard to disprove that God exists they leave the door to finding God tightly locked, a door they do not dare to enter. However, they are interested in humanity and seek answers regarding humanity. I agree with you Bishop Barron, we are here for a reason and a purpose and these men need to look closer. I am 100% behind you in praying for Christopher Hitchens.
As a born again catholic, now i finally understand why father barron said Hitchens was a religious man. Before I respected his respect for Hitchens in some degree of disgust. Now I understand