Skip to comments.Atheist Christopher Hitchens turns to evangelical Christian doctor in his fight against cancer
Posted on 03/28/2011 1:05:51 AM PDT by Ethan Clive Osgoode
The last person you might expect Christopher Hitchens, one of the worlds best known atheists, to turn to for help would be an evangelical Christian.
But a highly religious doctor might be the only individual who can help the author and journalist who is suffering from cancer.
Hitchens, author of God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything...
(Excerpt) Read more at dailymail.co.uk ...
What is the biggest problem for an atheist?
No one to talk to during an orgasm.
I pray the God grant Christopher Hitchens comfort and faith during these difficult times.
“What is the biggest problem for an atheist?
No one to talk to during an orgasm.”
Thanks for the chuckle.
I agree with you, in Jesus’ Holy Name, Amen.
they’re actually good friends and have appeared together in debates.
I wish him the best.
Maybe this is God’s way of getting his attention before it’s too late.
Hey, this might be God’s little humorous prod at Hitchens. Specially if the doctor cures him.
The salient word left out of this statement is Physician.
I doubt he chose the man for his religious views, but rather his training skill and success as a physician.
I find no hypocrisy here.
The thesis is completely deceptive—he’s consulting him as a doctor, not as a believer.
If Hitchens didn’t deal with this guy, he’d be called a bigot. He’s following his medical advice, and now people are trying to suggest he’s a hypocrite.
I hope he puts away the presuppositions which blind him to the truth of a loving God and fallen man in a sinful world.
Yeah dying of cancer is hilarious. That God-—what a prankster.
I told Chris one day in Washington DC as I was shaking his hand. He had just finished a speech about Bill Clinton’s worthless ways. I said, “God chooses the least likely among us to do his work.” I hope he still remembers that.
When he can do an instant rescue — who’s the joke on?
Me either. There are many athiest physicians, many agnostic, many Christian (and other religious) physicians.
The only one I would choose NOT to go to is one who performs frequent, late term aborions. And, if my life were in serious danger, I’d even accept their help.
Pretty soon we won’t have ANY doctors, if O-care doesn’t get stopped !
Yeah, that’s some joke. Hey, how about kids dying of cancer. Now that’s a real scream!
The issue generalizes to why the presence of death and decay at all in the creation?
Once that question is answered, all the specific issues are addressed too.
In the only realm that really matters, Hitchens is already dead. Continued prayers that he will awaken to real life before it is too late.
It will now be thoroughly impossible for him to ever refer to Christians as “stupid” without looking ridiculous.
That’s funny. I’d use my last remaining strength to strangle the murderer to death.
That is pretty bigoted of him, as there isn’t any proof that faith in the supernatural makes a person any less skilled to deal with the technical affairs of earthly existence. Even in the most hotly disputed area — many conventional evolutionary theory nonbelievers can regurgitate the theory with the “best” of them, but beg to disagree with it as a sufficient explanation for why there is life on earth or how it got where it is.
W.C Fields was an atheist... but not forever. Upon his death bed, a close frind walked in and caught WC reading the Bible... “Why” asked his friend... “Looking for loopholes”, was the answer.
Here in lies the irony, atheists require a God to deny.
Agnosticism troubles itself with neither good nor evil, God or devil.
I believe that many atheists will repent and know the Living God while many traditional church goers will be part of the great falling away. Traditional, meaning, social, not born again.
As for the some on this subject that are lampooning God for sickness in children, creation is full of death, Christ died and was resurrected to end this cycle. Their sarcasm is crueler than the child dying, for they would shut that same child out from the promise of hope in the new creation.
‘Athiests’ like to spout off and be ‘cool’ but when it comes down to the nitty gritty..
I can't recall noticing him since the Clinton years but wish him health.
Too often, atheists refer to lack of heaven on earth as “proof” for their position.
Others don’t believe “temptation” is “fair”.
The hypocrisy is that he talks about how religion is for fools, denies science, and poisons everything...yet when his life is on he line he is going to not just a Christian doctor but an evangelical one.
I understand the point that he chose him for being a doctor and not for being a Christian. The point you and others are missing is that his choice shows his contention that religion is for the uneducated masses is BS. At least when your life is on the line and you are not promoting a book.
Hopefully he will be saved in the way that matters.
Hitchens is an American citizen now.
Hitchens never went back to good old England with it's gummint medicine to find a a new cure for his cancer.
Is the converse also valid?
And I am sure he still believes that.
He was hiring a physician not a Pope.
I have no idea what religion my Cardiologist is, and it wouldn't matter anyway.
Results not religious beliefs is what we are all hiring when we hire a professional.
I see no hypocrisy.
Maybe Hitch has found his foxhole.
Hitchens does.....that's the irony.
It is as plain as day. Hitchens has not been shy about insisting that Christians are anti-science, stupid, anti-reality, etc. Being a good doctor involves application of scientific principles, coping carefully with reality accurately, and applying all of your intellect to the very best of your ability. By trusting in the intellect, skill and scientific knowledge of a professing Christian, Hitchens is guilty of rank hypocrisy. I pray it leads him to confront the contradictions in his life.
Agreed. But if you truly believed your Cardiologist was a fool, and then picked him to save your life. It would make you a liar or a hypocrite.
People who never give God a thought comes to prayer warriors when they run into trouble.
But God isn’t a respecter of persons. If the one who never thought of God comes to Him in repentance and sincerity of heart, God will hear his prayer, too.
Father God, I acknowledge your unwavering love for Christopher Hitchens. As I speak the name 'Christopher', I declare him to be a Christ-bearer. I ask that You reveal Yourself to him in fullness. I pray that he receive the height and depth of Your overpowering love. I ask that Christ invade his heart and soul, and that Your gracious restoration would take place in him. As far as east is from west, You remove us from our transgressions. I declare that Christopher 'Christ-Bearer' Hitchens will be healed, restored, and be a mighty witness for Your Kingdom here on Earth. As it is loosed in heaven, so let it be loosed here on earth. For all things work for good to those who love You and are called according to Your purpose. Lift him up, Lord. Change him, fill him with zeal, and make him a mighty warrior for your Kingdom. In Christ's precious name I pray, amen.
Again I say to you that if two of you agree on earth concerning anything that they ask, it will be done for them by My Father in heaven.
To have foolish beliefs or superstitions does not make one a fool.
Finding the best possible professional in the area of concern, that is unrelated to other disconcerting areas of knowledge or belief, is the rational pursuit of self interest not hypocrisy.
To your salient point: Hitchens clearly does not believe this physician is a fool, however he feels about his beliefs.
People are capable of being logical on some issues and illogical about others. If the guy has enough medical credentials to be considered an expert about cancer, rejecting his advice would be religious bigotry.
I know many of you happily post without reading the article upon which the thread is based, but you end up looking like fools. You commit a mistake common to us all, you assume based on past knowledge of the subject and in this case, as is often true, you assume wrong.
Hitchens has not changed his mind and he did not choose the doctor because of his Christianity. He and the doctor know each other well and have debated many times. They are friends. The doctor has been doing research on the human genome. He chose the doctor because the doctor has a new experimental cancer treatment which deals with the differences in the DNA of the healthy cells and the cancerous ones in a person’s body. Hitchens says he hopes the treatment works because if it doesn’t he doesn’t know where else to turn, but he has not changed his religious views.
Let's say Hitchens said 'population X' makes lousy plumbers. Then he hires someone from population X to do some plumbing. Explaining that his plumber has some new technique would not change the fact that Hitchens was a hypocrite.
Science is founded on the belief that nature obeys laws because there is a Lawgiver over nature. It has always been modernist atheists who are irrational regarding their beliefs about science; this is why postmodernist atheists are more consistent in denying the laws of nature, because they deny the Lawgiver.
From your reply I am assuming that Hitchens said Christians make lousy doctors. I have not been following him enough to know that. If he said there is a contradiction between Christianity and science then he is wrong. However, I don’t see that that makes him a hypocrite. It simply makes him wrong. I also don’t think that him going to a doctor who has an experimental treatment after all other treatments have failed makes him a hypocrite. The fact the doctor is a Christian is immaterial.
You may enjoy this thread:
New World Order, New Age Religion
My first comment is at post # 52. The thread is about 550 posts strong and counting.
Wouldn’t it be a wonderful blessing for the family that they can know that whatever happens, they will all be together again in Heaven? This must be very painful on all levels for his Christian loved ones.
I read the article.
but you end up looking like fools.
The only one looking like a fool is the person claiming others did not read an article when they have no idea if they did or not.
You commit a mistake common to us all, you assume based on past knowledge of the subject and in this case, as is often true, you assume wrong.
I assumed nothing. You are the one who admitted to not following him well enough to know the statements he has made in regards to Christians and science etc. As far as assuming...isn't that what you just did to me about whether I read the article or not? You assumed wrong.
Hitchens has not changed his mind and he did not choose the doctor because of his Christianity.
Show me where I said he choose the doctor because of his Christianity. As for changing his mind, I have no idea what you mean by that.
He and the doctor know each other well and have debated many times. They are friends. The doctor has been doing research on the human genome. He chose the doctor because the doctor has a new experimental cancer treatment which deals with the differences in the DNA of the healthy cells and the cancerous ones in a persons body.
None of which has anything to do with the point I made.
Hitchens says he hopes the treatment works because if it doesnt he doesnt know where else to turn, but he has not changed his religious views.
Show me where I said he changed his religious views or be more careful who you call a fool.
I think Lefties are fools when it comes to politics, but if I'm in need of the best Cardiologist in town who also happened to also be a leftie, I'd go to him. (I just wouldn't let him know I'm a 'heartless' conservative. ;~))
Take talent and skill where you can find it. IMHO, it is foolish to do otherwise.
Many people are wise or skilled in some things and all people are foolish or ignorant in many things. No one has it all and no one is even close to having it all.
After re-reading your posts, it is my understanding that your very narrow point is that Hitchens is a hypocrite. You base that, as I understand it, on his choosing a doctor who is a Christian. Is that correct so far?
We had a goofy leftist local talk show host, Kevin Lynn, who said that he wouldn’t go to a creationist doctor b/c he wouldn’t use “science”. What a fool! Bob