I am saddened that Christopher Hitchens is gone. I emailed Christopher several times since his diagnosis, my last correspondence with him occurring the day after Thanksgiving. I expressed my prayers and concern for him, and offered help with a doctor I know at Sloan Kettering. He responded immediately and graciously, and even said he would “love to renew our debates.” That gave me hope he was recovering. When I responded that I would be pleased to do so and even find him additional debates and panel discussions with Christians, he said he wasn’t quite ready yet to reengage. Today all hope is gone.
There is no one with whom I disagreed more who I admired so much. I don’t see how anyone who knew Christopher Hitchens could think that a man with such admirable qualities and talents was nothing more than a collection of chemicals– the product of unexplained random processes. Christopher’s intellect, wit, courage, and passion are evidence to me of a Divine Being– a Divine Being who loves human freedom so much that He would even allow the gifts He bestows to be used against Him.
I am praying for Christopher’s family and friends, which Christopher graciously accepted while he was with us. I am blessed to have known him.
This is a great article. However, and forgive me for doing so, I can’t help but point out the irony that if Christopher could see this he’d be enraged to know that his death just furthered the idea of a divine being. That being said my prayers are with his family and his brother.
I also am praying for the Hitchens family and you Dr. Turek. I enjoyed watching your debates immensely. They helped me personally with witnessing to some of the atheist and agnostic people that I know. Whether he knew it or not God used Mr. Hitchens for His glory. God bless you and have a blessed Christmas season.
Hi Ugo,
Thanks for your comments. But I disagree that Christopher would be enraged that his death just furthered the idea of a Divine Being. His LIFE furthered the idea. If he were still here, he would debate that, but he wouldn’t be enraged that I thought he was evidence of God. Despite some terseness during the debates, he was always kind and respectful personally. He was too big of a man to begrudge a man his argument.
Blessings,
Frank
In light of the loss of this great man, I cant help but wonder why men and women graced by God with such talents, chose to be separated from God. There is no hope down that path. Who wants to live without hope? May God have mercy on Mr. Hitchens and may his family find peace.
Thank you for your thoughtful and respectful comments, Frank. Moreover, thank you for working so hard to show Mr. Hitchens the love and reality of Christ. Rest assured, it was never in vain, sir.
Despite Christopher’s virulent and vociferous diatribes against the one true God, I can say with integrity that I genuinely wept for this man on several occasions. For some reason, the Lord broke my heart for Christopher in specific. I cannot say that I have ever cried for Richard Dawkins or the other so-called “New Atheists.” Somehow, Hitchens seemed a tad more reasonable, approachable, and likable than the others.
My prayers are with Christopher’s family and friends, including you.
People like Hitchens make me ever more grateful to God Almighty that he gave me a humble knee to bow before Him, a Godly mother who guided me to Him, and Christ’s gift that I may not be separated from Him.
I was floored when I saw on the news this friday morning that Christopher Hitchens lost his battle with cancer. I prayed many times for him. “God desires that none should perish but that all should come to repentance.” His greatest question has finally been answered. May God have mercy on his soul.
[...] Frank Turek, “Christopher Hitchens: Evidence of a Divine Being” [...]
Yes when I heard on the radio of his death my first thought was now he knows the truth with dead certainty. And my second thought was Matthew 10:33. I feel bad for the man’s soul but worse for the seeking souls still here who will pick up his books and poison their minds with his godless philosophy perhaps to the point of the scales never falling from their eyes as was the case with Hitchens.
Dr Turek,
I would agree with Ugo, you do Mr Hitchens a great disservice by saying that you believe his life was evidence for a divine being. Christopher had done in his life more than most anyone (with very few exceptions) to erode the dogmatic world view to which those who believe in a god believe in. The best thing I can say about Christopher Hitchens is that in his life he opposed those who like you use mental gymnastics to prove that we are in spiritual bondage from above. His legacy along with his children are all the people he helped liberate from iron age superstition to which to many people so fervently cling. To end my tirade I will say it is good that you see that the world has lost a intellectual mountain which it was lucky to have, and who will be dearly missed. May he rest in peace, and my his life serve as an example to all of us that life without religion is a life worth living.
We should now realize the power of adversity as it was Mr. Hitchens that, in a way, sacrificed his life in order to challenge us in our quest for the truth and purpose of life on earth. For this I thank G-D and my prayers are also with Mr. Hitchens’ family and friends. May we all continue to express the same measure of courage for our faith as Mr. Hitchens did for his lack thereof. The Truth set him free so in his freedom now he knows the Truth. May G-D’s will be done in all our lives; in Jesus Name.
The cold and brutal fact remains that if his worldview is in fact true and there is no God then as Frank has stated we’re all just accidental byproducts of time, matter, and chance and our lives are ultimately meaningless – including the life of Mr. Hitchens. Love and courage and dedication are not real but just the result of chemical reactions in the brain. The only thing that gives Hitchens’ life meaning is if the God he so vigorously denied is in fact real. Otherwise a man has no more inherent value than a worm. Like laws of physics, laws of logic were here before humans appeared on the planet – we just discovered them. The greatest scientist of all time remains Issac Newton – born on Christmas day 1642 btw- and yet Dawkins and Hitchens would call him deluded – don’t think so.
Thanks for writing such a gracious article!
Frank, I’m not surprised, but thank you for responding with class. Your response models Christlikeness by being a “friend of sinners.”
Frank,
I just want to say that I know Mr. Hitchens was a friend of yours and that I am praying for you. Your work truly inspires me as a Christian and I enjoyed your debates with him.
Having known atheists, I have always had trouble when one passes. I appreciate your blog in response to Mr. Hitchens’ passing.
Frank,
Intellect, wit, courage, and passion are only evidence of intellect, wit, courage, and passion, they’re not evidence of where they came from. How do you know that these qualities you attribute to Hitchens are a positive indication of a divine being?
Hitchens is living (or used to be) proof that there is probably no god, and if there is, he is utterly incompetent. If such a being existed and cared about us believing in him, why wouldn’t he just create us with that belief installed in our head?
Why would he allow hundreds of religions and holy books with ever more dividing and violently conflicting sects to develop that are mutually exclusive to him?
Why would he create the world in a way such that only the few people living now who were able to access the apologist’s work would see the rational justification for him?
Why wouldn’t he make himself blatantly obvious or logically impossible to argue against? Why would he construct reality in a way that requires apologists to rely on misinformation and logical fallacies to conclude that he exists, such as:
-Big Bang cosmology asserts that EVERYTHING including nature came into existence, so the cause must be outside of nature.
-Life is so astronomically complex it must be designed. To think it happened naturally is akin to believing the Library of Congress is the result of an explosion in a printing factory.
-Text containing embarrassing comments about the author must be true.
Anyone with any basic understanding of science will immediately see right through these arguments. Thank you Christopher for fighting against the poisons cult that religion is and helping some of the people (like me) who believed this nonsense because we didn’t know any better and better understand reality, as apologists seek to do the opposite. You will always be remembered.
Hi Ugo and John,
I think you need to read a bit more of Mr Hitchens’ work before you start in on Frank Turek about doing “a great disservice” to the man.
In the free-thought contest of ideas, Christopher Hitchens didn’t seem to have any aversion to prosecuting his counter-apologetic positions with equal force against the living and the dead. (Was he doing a great disservice to Mother Theresa?)
That was basis of the grudging admiration he enjoyed from so many of his ideological opponents – a firm handshake, unflinching resolve, his yes meant yes and his no meant no. Would Christopher Hitchens expect anything less from the people with whom he enthusiastically engaged?
I think you are doing Mr Turek a disservice by suggesting that he ought to compromise HIS firmly held views that Christopher Hitchens’ intellectual capacity was anything other than “wonderfully made” . (Psalm 139:14) I found it a very thoughtful and respectful farewell commentary.
My gratitude to Mr Hitchens (and therefore to God) is for the enormous contribution people like he and Mr Dawkins have made to the huge resurgence in thought and discussion about God and the afterlife. For every one, “God is Not Great” book there are twenty “I Don’t Have Enough Faith To Be An Atheist” books written in response.
I can’t forget the 60 Minutes interview with Christopher Hitchens in which he responded to a question about the afterlife that he liked “surprises”.
I found that an unusual response.
Best regards – Lion (IRC)
Frank, only God knows the deep heart of a man – never say there’s no hope – because whenever we humans think hope runs out – thats where God is – maybe in the last hours or the last minutes or even the last seconds – a work of grace happened – just like the thief next to Christ – maybe – just maybe- you’ll see him in heaven at last. I dont’t know, but i do know that there’s no limit to the love and mercy of God.
Loved your eulogy, Frank. It represented Christ well, and Hitch, too.
Did anyone see the reports that Mr Hitchens, in his final days, was reading the biography of GK Chesterton – a great wordsmith and even greater Christian apologist?
I found that unusual.
…in a “pleasant surprise” kind of way.
Created in the “image of God” is so much more than colorful Hebrew rhetoric. We were formed, in physical appearance and personality, similar to our Maker. “We”, being all of us, athiest and Christian alike. Christopher Hitchens was made in the image of God. He is eternal, in body, soul and spirit just like all of us. His life was and is precious beyond our understanding.
I find it fascinating that the athiest passionately ascribes all of the terrible unfairness and cruelty of a fate fully chosen by the individual, to God. From my readings of Hitchens and in listening to his debates with Dr. Frank Turek, he, like all contemplative athiests, would at least admit the choice…the freedom of the will. The authentic athiest isn’t so much angry about a God that allows for free will, as he is over the loss of liberty arising from the choice. We are, after all and obviously, sinful. And none of us, Christian or athiest, if we’re honest, want to pay the due penalty for our sin. We don’t even want to be told we have done something wrong! So, at the end of all things we either face the judge alone and representing ourselves, or we call upon Christ for our defense. Christopher Hitchens was many things in his life. He was no coward. He would not call upon Christ in his earthly life. It seems unlikely he will do so facing God at the Great White Throne of Judgement. Like it or not, the Word of God is plain in this matter. “It is appointed unto man once to die, and then the judgement.” I am absolutely certain that even in Hell, if a man or woman would cry out for the mercy of Jesus, they would be saved. But I see no evidence that this possibility exists. Choices have consequences, in this life and the next. And while God is perfect love, He is also perfectly just. None who have or ever will live will be treated unjustly by God, in reward or punishment.
I do wonder what goes through the athiest mind when faced with death. I’m not talking about the universal knowledge that we will all someday die. I’m more curious about facing the grim spectre of a terrible diagnosis. I am familiar with this uncertainty…this fear. I have to admit that because of it, I want for God to be “real” with all of my being. But if that was the source of my faith it would be a pitiful faith indeed. Fiction is no comfort when falling from a cliff. A rope or parachute are. God is more real than any rope or parachute. He has given us all a way out. It is our choice to accept it or not.
C.S. Lewis has said such so more eloquently than I can:
“A damned soul is nearly nothing: it is shrunk, shut up in itself. Good beats upon the damned incessantly as sound waves beat on the ears of the deaf, but they cannot receive it. Their fists are clenched, their teeth are clenched, their eyes fast shut. First they will not, in the end they cannot, open their hands for gifts, or their mouths for food, or their eyes to see.”
“Then no one can ever reach them?”
“Only the Greatest of all can make Himself small enough to enter Hell. For the higher a thing is, the lower it can descend – a man can sympathise with a horse but a horse cannot sympathise with a rat. Only One has descended into Hell.”
“And will He ever do so again?”
“It was not once long ago that He did it. Time does not work that way once ye have left the earth. All moments that have been or shall be were, or are, present in the moment of His descending. There is no spirit in prison to whom He did not preach.”
While it is comfortable to entertain thoughts that perhaps God provides a second chance for the athiest even after his last breath, I think it this a dangerous consideration, and one not remotely suggested in the Word. No, we (Christians) must treat life as the only stage for evangelism. Any other thought allows for complacency. I am content to leave the afterlife to God.
I pray that these words in no way imply disrespect for Mr. Hitchens. No authentic Christian fails to be profoundly shaken at the death of an unbelieving friend or acquaintance. We do not witness and plead for Jesus because we are angry. We do it because we can scarcely entertain the thought of an eternity lived apart from God. Dr. Turek and all apologists engage those hostile to Christianity hoping to, as stated by Augustine, stop the mouths of the obstreperous. But realistic or not, it is also hoped that perhaps even the most obstreperous might somehow hear and be saved.
God richly bless you Frank (and all of you who have willingly taken up your cross in His service), for what you do every day.
It has been almost a half-year since Dr. Hitchens passed away; however, even though he is gone we can still enjoy his debates, interviews, and speeches on YouTube (and read his books, of course). Even if one disagreed with him on certain points, one had to greatly admire the way he expressed his positions. A better orator I have never seen in my life. His intellect and recall were really something to behold! Interestingly, I recently saw a video of him after his body had been ravaged by cancer treatments, and not only did he look nothing like his former self, his message had softened as well: I heard him tell a young girl at an award’s ceremony in Houston (which Richard Dawkins had arranged for him) that, “Love is the most important thing.” I was floored. Hitchens suddenly sounded like Jesus! Perhaps the suffering he endured so bravely the last year of his life had changed his perspective somewhat, or maybe beneath his combatant personality, he had been a loving human being all along (it showed, didn’t it?). Surely he was intelligent to realize that even though organized religion and the ancient writings of the Bible were worthy of criticism, the recent findings of 21st C. science (the fine-tuning of the universe, the complexity of the DNA code) lead many educated people to wonder if a higher power did, in fact, create the universe. Even if Humanism replaces Christianity this century, as Hitchens hoped, people will still wonder about the existence of God and what His true nature might be. I’m truly sorry that Dr. Hitchens won’t be around to interpret and eloquently comment upon whatever the latest findings in Physics might be in the next 20 years because I’m sure they’ll be NOBODY to replace him.
Nice post Janie, but why were you floored by Hitch saying: “Love is the most important thing”? That seems quite consistent with everything he said before he got ill. He was always a tireless fighter of tyranny, evil and hate.
I feel quite enraged by your continued insistence that Christopher Hitchens was no more than a mass of so many chemicals and molecules. He never said that himself in your two debates… He actually said “we are highly evolved beings…”
The fact is that you cannot justify any of the arguments you advanced at the debates from the Christian Bible. The Bible itself points to a God who is material. And the Genesis account of how the Universe came to being is totally irreconcilable with the Big Bang theory.
Dr. Turek only recognizes what all academic anti-theists must believe to sustain an intellectually sustainable, logically coherent explanation for life from non-life. That we are nothing more than an accidental cohesion of organic and inorganic compounds, bound together by chance, evolved from a single cell to a multi-celled organic machine, our every thought, word and deed determined by chemical reactions and external stimuli. In such a wholly naturalistic system, the origin, morality, meaning and destiny of all life is simply a pointless journey from dust to dust. Even were I an athiest, I would bristle at this thought. You should too. Far from agreeing with this sad athiest manifesto, Dr. Turek is insisting that humans are so very much more, in fact pleading for this consideration in the sobering shadow cast by the passing of Mr. Hitchens.
Regarding Genesis and the Big Bang, I think it of immediate value to highlight the word “theory.” For the “Big Bang” is indeed a theory, one that now has more than a dozen variations and counting. Many good Christian scientists find some version of the Big Bang wholly compatible with the Genesis account. I would hope that at least a few honest athiest scientists could acknowledge the possibility, even if attributed to unhappy chance. Some, like me, think the Big Bang has some credibility, but falls well short of a good explanation, especially if you remove God from the equation. Irregardless, when scientists of any faith start speaking about how it all started, it’s like paramecium commenting on Shakespeare. In the face of such a great unknown, every credible discussion ought to start with humility. That’s precisely why, in matters beyond all human understanding…matters that will for finite humans forever be shrouded in the theoretical, I start with God and the book of Genesis.
God bless.
That’s a very glass half full sort of statement. You could equally see it as our being very fortunate to be here. We hit a cosmic lottery. Why do you need humans to be “so very much more”? It’s homocentric vanity.
Let me ask you this: what can you do or think that isn’t a reaction to something else?
I don’t need for humans to be anything more than they are. If believing we are made in the image of God is “homocentric vanity”, then you have me pegged.
Regarding being the lucky winner of a cosmic lottery, statisticians disagree. Math tells us that many of the variables needed to produce life cannot have arisen by chance. But I guess there’s always the multiverse or some other clever theory to help with statistical absurdities….so long as its not God.
And no argument from me regarding every thought, word and deed finding their source in external stimuli. Our disagreement, if I am reading it rightly, is the ontology of those reactions. I believe our physical bodies were built to house spiritual/soulful entities with unique personalities. Corporeal substance cannot explain personality. Sure, we can and have identified a great many ways chemicals in our minds change according to our mood, and how some changes cause illness, but the former simply observes how the body responds to the soul/spirit and the latter how finely tuned the body must be to accommodate in full all that each of us were meant to be.
Try as we might with all of our scientific and technological prowess, we have not been, nor will we ever be, successful in combining all the compounds necessary to form a physical creature, and having done so then imbue it with life.
Life comes from God. And isn’t a gift freely given more precious than a gift acquired by gambling? If I am right about this, then Christianity encourages the greater appreciation and value of life.
“Life comes from God. And isn’t a gift freely given more precious than a gift acquired by gambling? If I am right about this, then Christianity encourages the greater appreciation and value of life.”
One could equally argue that a commodity in short supply is more valuable than one that is infinite. Therefore a finite lifespan makes our lives on earth more valuable than believing we will live eternally.
I had to think on this a bit. And I think we agree that whether you believe God exists or not, life is precious. But why is it precious? In the absence of God and eternity, it is precious only personally and presently, and athiestic explanations for personality and four-dimensional reality provide a poor defense, or none, for such preciousness. Its shortness and utter meaninglessness on a universal scale can scarcely be contemplated. Contemplation of such batters the minds of thinkers and has driven some mad. Now this is certainly no reason to adopt an irrational belief in a fictional God. It is simply brutal truth in a reality without God.
I can’t imagine anyone stating this more profoundly than Shakespeare (Macbeth): “Life’s but a walking shadow, a poor player that frets and struts his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more; it is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”
But what if life is eternal, God is real, and where you spend eternity is determined by your response to Him? What if?
Mark, your post actually reinforces my point that a short life is precious. Adding a God to the equation makes it no more precious in any way that you can explained.
If I have a dollar and you have a billion of the same, which of us is richer?
All life is precious. So precious in fact, that despite our sinfulness and disobedience, God made a way for us to have the perfect peace almost everyone hopes and dreams of, and to have it forever. Somehow, His method accomplishes a perfectly just selection process so that all who really want this may freely have it. By necessity, those who do not want this will not and cannot partake of it. Any sin allowed into heaven would turn it to hell there as surely as it is doing here.
“If I have a dollar and you have a billion of the same, which of us is richer?”
If we both have a dollar now, but you’re convinced you’re going to inherit a billion dollars next year, which of us will value our dollar more?
The analogy works only if a condition for inheriting the billion dollars is maintaining posession of the the initial dollar, and in addition multiplying it through wise investment, so as to present it and the profit as proof of my status as a legitimate heir (Luke 19:11-28).
No, the analogy works just fine. If you think this is the only life you’ll have, then you’ll value it pretty strongly. You value your own life too, that’s great. But I think you were arguing that making a life finite makes it LESS valuable. I disagree. If you still disagree back, then that’s fine. I guess we can only really state our position. In other words, you don’t really get to tell me how I should feel about my own life or how valuable it is.
I’m telling you it is so valuable that God became flesh, suffered, and died for your sin so that you could be forgiven and become His friend forever. I want that for you, me and for everyone. I am convinced that Jesus is the only way by many infallible proofs. And so I labor with what meager skills I have to give an excuse for the hope that is in me. All for Him.
“Math tells us that many of the variables needed to produce life cannot have arisen by chance.”
I guess that depends on who is interpreting the math.
“I believe our physical bodies were built to house spiritual/soulful entities with unique personalities. Corporeal substance cannot explain personality. Sure, we can and have identified a great many ways chemicals in our minds change according to our mood, and how some changes cause illness, but the former simply observes how the body responds to the soul/spirit and the latter how finely tuned the body must be to accommodate in full all that each of us were meant to be.”
Can you back up the second sentence with any kind of evidence? Frank, I’m sure, would repeat his line, “Where does love come from, the oxygen atom?” which is a gross over simplification disregarding larger more complex chemicals in the brain. If I asked you, “Do trees love rocks?” You’d shake your head and say, no, they aren’t as complex as us.” Which indicates that love or any emotion or thought is tied to our brains. If there is some external soul then where is it? Is it in heaven by default? Hell? Some other place? Positing a soul seems to offend Ockham. You’re needlessly piling things on. If we can effect how people think with a powerful magnet placed beside their head then why extrapolate beyond the physical to explain thought?
“I guess that depends on who is interpreting the math.” Indeed! Bias allows for all sorts of mischief, doesn’t it. But numbers provide formal truth, and they do so without bias for the honest inquirer. I am a little suprised by this defense. Most non-believers, including anti-theists, acknowledge the improbability of arriving at complex life forms…or for that matter simple proteins or amino acids, by chance. It is from the fertile the womb of chance that string theory and multiverse theory were birthed. So the athiest must bow the knee to chance as creator, a thing that has no ontic structure or being. Now there’s a false god if ever there was one.
And I think the more appropriate response must come from the athiest/anti-theist regarding the source of personality. When science can tell us how love, hate and all the complex emotions and thoughts in between, can be generated by chemicals and electricity, I’ll be more than happy to listen. If you believe in God, then believing He is the source of personality is no trouble at all. If you don’t believe in God, personality is still, at best, a frustrating mystery. And metaphors reign where mystery abounds. (Chuck Missler)
“Do trees love rocks?” I’d answer that scripture plainly says that only animals have “nephesh” meaning soul or more correctly, soulish life. But perhaps this is really just another way of saying “no, they aren’t as complex as us.” Personality is no more tethered to our physical brain than are melodious sounds to a piano. The one allows expression of the other. Both exist independently.
And so, it becomes obvious that physical things can impact the physical instrument. A smashed piano might silence the keys, but it has no bearing on the player.
This will seem to most a bit redundant by now, but the soul resides in the body so long as the body is capable of housing it. When anything imbued with “nephesh” dies, the soul is ushered into the next life. Where exactly, if I understand free will arightly, is completely up to the bearer of that soul.
Let’s apply Ockham’s razor to the more profuse stubble on the chin of chance. I’d argue that God is by far the most complete and realistic explanation for the reality in which we reside. C.S. Lewis agrees:
“Reality, in fact, is usually something you could not have guessed. That is one of the reasons I believe in Christianity. It is a religion you could not have guessed. If it offered us just the kind of universe we had always expected, I should feel we were making it up. But, in fact, it is not the sort of thing anyone would have made up. It has just that queer twist about it that real things have. So let us leave behind all these boys’ philosophies–these over simple answers. The problem is not simple and the answer is not going to be simple either.”
“This will seem to most a bit redundant by now, but the soul resides in the body so long as the body is capable of housing it.”
So the soul is spatial and temporal . . . why not take the next step and say it’s material?
And in addition, if God created us in ‘His own’ (or their own) image and likeness, doesn’t that make Him material too? How can someone or something that has an image and a likeness be immaterial?
That well summarizes the necessary condition if there is no Creator. But science can scarcely define the material, even these days, with all our technology-enhanced scrutiny. In fact, the closer we look, the more certain it is that our material universe is but a miniscule fragment of a larger unimaginable reality. Research by folks like Alain Aspect, David Bohm, Will Wright and Rich Terrile is casting a great shadow on what we think we know about our universe. It seems much of our smug certainty is fast becoming little more than arrogant illusion. Yet we refuse to let go, clinging to lies like Linus to his blanket.
Be certain, the answer to your simple, yet infinitely profound question, is in fact the most important decision anyone will ever make.
So place your faith in the One who can answer, the One who made you special and eternal, or strap on your god-helmet (Dr. Persinger) and comfort yourself.
“Research by folks like Alain Aspect, David Bohm, Will Wright and Rich Terrile is casting a great shadow on what we think we know about our universe.”
Yes, quite. Their asking questions that you wouldn’t even bother with because your stock answer is “God did it. Better get down on your knees and feel the love, ‘cuz he’s got so much love for you if you’d only just do it.”
“Unimaginable reality.” It’s only unimaginable if you fail to ask the questions.
You’re better than this. Brilliance isn’t restricted to the athiest. We’re all asking the same questions. We’re all looking at the same evidence. The fact that very intelligent men and women come to very different conclusion ought to have any serious thinker scratching his/her head.
And our universe becomes more unimaginable as knowledge increases. Every question we answer raises a dozen more. I wonder why.
The finite cannot grasp the infinite. -John Calvin
God is only unimaginable if you refuse to consider the evidence.
The only sure barrier to the acquisition of truth is the presumption that we already own it. -Chuck Missler
“Yet we refuse to let go, clinging to lies like Linus to his blanket.”
That is the exact definition of the religious argument. It is the religious guys who are willing to accept what are irrefutable lies or, at best, irreconcilable fallacies as explanations for reality.
The atheist will gladly concede, “I do not know”; the religious zealot will always give an answer, irrespective of how illogical it is.
why did he die? was it because god created cancer? could “god” have eliminated cancer from “his” creation. was cancer part of “god’s” intelligent design?