The passing of a legend - Christopher Hitchens

[Reg Martin]

A pity you didn't see it.Hitch re-affirmed his Marxist beliefs in the Dialetic and Historical Materialism.

Sounds like I may not have had a clue what he was talking about. Probably best I missed it.

 

[Smudger]

Not through personal experience yet ,though I think there is enough evidence around for all of us to avoid an unpleasant surprise after we do.

What evidence would that be then?

 

[Reg Martin]

Not sure you could accuse him of having a myoptic few of religion . He was a man for detail and research so he knew extensivly of what he critisied.Also he reviwed his own beliefs and changed them after consideration unlike many .

I used to be an atheist and am now a Christian so I certainly tick the box on your last point.
Where I would give credit to Hitchens on his atheism is that he was equally anti- Islam as anti-Christianity. Much of what passes for atheism is often knee-jerk anti-Christianity combined with spineless appeasement of Islam.
I'm sure many of his criticisms of religion were correct but advocates of creeds that specifically reject God have been just as bad arguably worse in their beahviour. So in my opinion the problem is not religion but human nature and the only answer to that is Christ's death for our sins. I think that all that matters to God is whether we individually have accepted or rejected Christ. The sins of others (believers and non-belivers alike) will be no excuse for us when we stand before God on Judgement Day.

 

[Reg Martin]

What evidence would that be then?

Creation. The Bible. Historical and archaeological accounts matching Biblical accounts. (The pros and cons of these as evidence have been discussed ad infinitum on various threads over the years on here and usually degenerate into a 'show my sources/references' ping-pong) so for me the most convincing argument is the changed lives of people past and present who became Christians including myself.

 

[osymandus]

I used to be an atheist and am now a Christian so I certainly tick the box on your last point.
Where I would give credit to Hitchens on his atheism is that he was equally anti- Islam as anti-Christianity. Much of what passes for atheism is often knee-jerk anti-Christianity combined with spineless appeasement of Islam.
I'm sure many of his criticisms of religion were correct but advocates of creeds that specifically reject God have been just as bad arguably worse in their beahviour. So in my opinion the problem is not religion but human nature and the only answer to that is Christ's death for our sins. I think that all that matters to God is whether we individually have accepted or rejected Christ. The sins of others (believers and non-belivers alike) will be no excuse for us when we stand before God on Judgement Day.

I think your generalising there . Simply as most atheists will tend to come from a rationalist back ground . Wild generalisations would not make a great deal of sense (im not saying the don't exist mind ;-)) .

Yes however in this case we are talking about Christopher Hitchens critique on religion and a more well versed and detailed one you may be hard pressed to find . That is entirely your right to believe that may occur . Mine as many other people on earth is different yet we share no desire to condemn nor force those with different faiths into an eternity of pain and damnation which seems as best myopic and at worst sadistic and down right "evil".

An empirical assertion must make reference to facts , anything else is opinion or faith . Your assertion that people have altered world views due to an acceptance of kristos is anecdotal and would not be considered a fact .

Also these experiences are not limited to the acceptance of jesus , but can be found in Hindu (meditative practice , yoga ,kundalini ) Buddhist (mantra and awaking ) as well as gnostic and other literature along with methods to achieve them (ive performed a few myself ).

 

[Smudger]

Creation. The Bible. Historical and archaeological accounts matching Biblical accounts. (The pros and cons of these as evidence have been discussed ad infinitum on various threads over the years on here and usually degenerate into a 'show my sources/references' ping-pong) so for me the most convincing argument is the changed lives of people past and present who became Christians including myself.

Well, it's inconvenient for you but "great claims require great proofs" (as a wise man once said.) The "evidence" that you raise is not evidence at all for any of the huge assumptions and other worldly predictions that you make. If you can't see that then you're hallucinating which is very nice for you but perhaps better kept to yourself and those who are similarly fearful of any other "truths" beyond their own neatly packaged, off the shelf versions.

The arrogance and aggression of your "judgement day" assertions - which basically boil down to "you had better believe what we tell you to believe or you and your families are screwed for eternity" makes me completely sick to the pit of my stomach. That's not love, it's pure unadulterated spite and you can keep it.

 

[pickledseal]

I've always been a fan of Pascal's Wager (another scientist too). It's not perfect, like any philosophical argument, but certainly rings true for me.

If you believe and heaven does exist = big win
If you believe and heaven doesn't exist = you won't know as you'll just be dead
If you don't believe and heaven does exist = big loss
If you don't believe and heaven doesn't exist = you also won't know as you'll just be dead

Therefore you have far more to gain by believing.

 

[Berrichonne shrimper]

I've always been a fan of Pascal's Wager (another scientist too). It's not perfect, like any philosophical argument, but certainly rings true for me.

If you believe and heaven does exist = big win
If you believe and heaven doesn't exist = you won't know as you'll just be dead
If you don't believe and heaven does exist = big loss
If you don't believe and heaven doesn't exist = you also won't know as you'll just be dead

Therefore you have far more to gain by believing.
Can you not see how narrow minded you are Andy,if i live a good and wholesome life doing good deeds and caring for my fellow humans and not fecking the arses off little children or hurting people but because i do not believe in YOUR heaven then hey ho i wont go there.
But if i whorship your god feck the arses off little children ruin countless lifes,drink smoke and be a rather bad egg as long as i say my hail marys and believe in YOUR heaven then heey presto im in.
And you teach children this shizzle,shame on you.

 

[osymandus]

I've always been a fan of Pascal's Wager (another scientist too). It's not perfect, like any philosophical argument, but certainly rings true for me.

If you believe and heaven does exist = big win
If you believe and heaven doesn't exist = you won't know as you'll just be dead
If you don't believe and heaven does exist = big loss
If you don't believe and heaven doesn't exist = you also won't know as you'll just be dead

Therefore you have far more to gain by believing.

Paxman did ask Hitchens this very question in the interview . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3zQzYIMEOs

 

[Smudger]

I've always been a fan of Pascal's Wager (another scientist too). It's not perfect, like any philosophical argument, but certainly rings true for me.

If you believe and heaven does exist = big win
If you believe and heaven doesn't exist = you won't know as you'll just be dead
If you don't believe and heaven does exist = big loss
If you don't believe and heaven doesn't exist = you also won't know as you'll just be dead

Therefore you have far more to gain by believing.

By the same token I may as well believe that Elvis is going to turn up at my house tonight and sing a few songs (just the hits, no album tracks...) What do I have to lose?

This kind of crap may work with your 11 year olds but I wouldn't bother telling the 13 year olds, they will have way too much life experience.

 

[osymandus]

In shock horror i agree with smudger. Archtypes are not useless modern ones show us and inspire us (Doctor Who ) sadly he will never appear and ask people to travel . But the seed of the idea the inspiration is what yhese are whst helps us. My relgion is based on yhe divinty of man the species the creator the images and ideas are there to inspire and to make us remember that it is us that make gods and lige.

 

[Tangled up in Blue]

Paxman did ask Hitchens this very question in the interview . http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S3zQzYIMEOs

And good old Hitch stuck to his guns.:thumbsup:

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

In shock horror i agree with smudger. Archtypes are not useless modern ones show us and inspire us (Doctor Who ) sadly he will never appear and ask people to travel . But the seed of the idea the inspiration is what yhese are whst helps us. My relgion is based on yhe divinty of man the species the creator the images and ideas are there to inspire and to make us remember that it is us that make gods and lige.

I'm not familiar with modern arch types, I'm more of a classical arch man myself. My favourite is probably Roman.

WTF are you on about again?

 

[osymandus]

I'm not familiar with modern arch types, I'm more of a classical arch man myself. My favourite is probably Roman.

WTF are you on about again?

Oh much hilarity ensued as the missing of one letter makes YB the archetype of being an arse .
What is this affected outrage at a missing word and if it offends you so much why ?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

Oh much hilarity ensued as the missing of one letter makes YB the archetype of being an arse .
What is this affected outrage at a missing word and if it offends you so much why ?

You are confusing outrage with bemusement.

 

[osymandus]

You are confusing outrage with bemusement.

In your case sir it is very hard to tell . i should also say to be read in mock victorian accent with a hat on eating a rump of badger and a side of tinsle tit :-). There now to throw anothet urchin in the cogs of a bell tower. (can you guess what i was watching ;-))

 

[Napster]

In your case sir it is very hard to tell . i should also say to be read in mock victorian accent with a hat on eating a rump of badger and a side of tinsle tit :-). There now to throw anothet urchin in the cogs of a bell tower. (can you guess what i was watching ;-))

I can guess. I managed 10 mins before switching off. Dirge.

 

[Reg Martin]

Well, it's inconvenient for you but "great claims require great proofs" (as a wise man once said.) The "evidence" that you raise is not evidence at all for any of the huge assumptions and other worldly predictions that you make. If you can't see that then you're hallucinating which is very nice for you but perhaps better kept to yourself and those who are similarly fearful of any other "truths" beyond their own neatly packaged, off the shelf versions.

The arrogance and aggression of your "judgement day" assertions - which basically boil down to "you had better believe what we tell you to believe or you and your families are screwed for eternity" makes me completely sick to the pit of my stomach. That's not love, it's pure unadulterated spite and you can keep it.

It may be inconvenient for you but we still live in a free country and I have no intention of keeping my opinions to myself no matter how offensive or hallucogenic you or others may find them.
As I've said on here before I used to be the type of angry, bitter atheist you appear to be from your post. I met someone who challenged my views and I used to argue with them until I was blue in the face, using many of the arguments people now use against me on here. It did open some of the closed doors in my mind and set me thinking and that eventually led to me becoming a Christian. I will post my views on here as long as I have the freedom to in the hope that they may set someone else on the same journey I took.
The message of Christianity is an offensive one in our politically correct culture as it's message is that all of us need to make a choice for or against Christ and there is an eternal consequence of that decision. I personally felt I could no longer reject God out of intellectual pride or because he didn't fit the nice fluffy 'everyone can believe what they want and it will be alright or your being offensive' mentality.
I will take you at your word about wanting proofs and there are a few books that are generally regarded as helpful:
'Who moved the stone' by Frank Morrison
'The case for Christ' by Lee Strobel
'Evidence that demands a verdict' by Josh McDowell
All of those books were written by atheists who set out to write books that would disprove all that Christian nonsense once and for all but all of them ended up as Christians as a result of their research in writing those books.

I mentioned yesterday that I think the best evidence of Christianity is lives changed for the better and a book that is worth reading is 'One Step Beyond' by Gram Seed. He is a former petty criminal, football hooligan, alcoholic and drug addict from Middlesbrough who ended up in a coma but his life has been transformed by becoming a Christian.

All the best and Happy CHRISTmas

 

[osymandus]

I can guess. I managed 10 mins before switching off. Dirge.

Not a fan of surrealist comedy ? The radio version ?

 

[Smudger]

It may be inconvenient for you but we still live in a free country and I have no intention of keeping my opinions to myself no matter how offensive or hallucogenic you or others may find them.
As I've said on here before I used to be the type of angry, bitter atheist you appear to be from your post. I met someone who challenged my views and I used to argue with them until I was blue in the face, using many of the arguments people now use against me on here. It did open some of the closed doors in my mind and set me thinking and that eventually led to me becoming a Christian. I will post my views on here as long as I have the freedom to in the hope that they may set someone else on the same journey I took.
The message of Christianity is an offensive one in our politically correct culture as it's message is that all of us need to make a choice for or against Christ and there is an eternal consequence of that decision. I personally felt I could no longer reject God out of intellectual pride or because he didn't fit the nice fluffy 'everyone can believe what they want and it will be alright or your being offensive' mentality.
I will take you at your word about wanting proofs and there are a few books that are generally regarded as helpful:
'Who moved the stone' by Frank Morrison
'The case for Christ' by Lee Strobel
'Evidence that demands a verdict' by Josh McDowell
All of those books were written by atheists who set out to write books that would disprove all that Christian nonsense once and for all but all of them ended up as Christians as a result of their research in writing those books.

I mentioned yesterday that I think the best evidence of Christianity is lives changed for the better and a book that is worth reading is 'One Step Beyond' by Gram Seed. He is a former petty criminal, football hooligan, alcoholic and drug addict from Middlesbrough who ended up in a coma but his life has been transformed by becoming a Christian.

All the best and Happy CHRISTmas

I'm not angry or bitter, I love my life and my family and friends, I just resent being told that we're all off to whatever you deem to be hell for not believing all the bronze age mythology that you believe in. I also don't think that the darker side of your beliefs which I take to be extremism by another name should be posted on football message boards that are read by children, even if it is your sincere belief and helped you out of some tough times. That's all really - Happy Christmas to you too.

* - and I'll try and take a look at those books by the way - check out some Dawkins and Hitchens when you get a chance and we'll come back for another round of this in 6 months no doubt :winking: