http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QQw9sNmNEeA&feature=related

Simply incredible refutation of christianity.

Who is this Hitchens guy? Never heard of him

=)

His debates with dinesh were some of his best. I will miss those.

But Hitches is dead.

His charges are all about, because there is evil, because God disposes of His creatures the way He sees fit, then God is evil, or can't be real... God doesn't owe us anything, but judgment.

Hitchens chose judgment. What do you chose?


[This message has been edited by Notafraid (edited 2/14/2012 7:52p).]

quote:

---

But Hitches is dead

---

…and to our great pleasure and entertainment, Hitchens is no doubt roasting on a spit in hades writhing in agony for all eternity. What a wonderful outcome

...and God never existed, so Hitchens still wins. See how easy this silly game is?

quote:

---

and to our great pleasure and entertainment, Hitchens is no doubt roasting on a spit in hades writhing in agony for all eternity. What a wonderful outcome

---

But he chose his fate. It's as if god came down to him in person and said hey I'm real and all the things you find abhorrent or unbelievable or unsubstantiated about me are true, so you best be believing or I'll torture you forever...but I love you.

1) Hitchens actually thinks Jesus might of actually lived From his perspective otherwise they wouldn't have had to lie about his place of the birth in the Gospels. If Jesus never existed they could of just made it all up into a neat story that does not contradict itself, as Hitchen claims

2) Shame he is gone, few more years, Hitch might of taken the next step and discovered the New Testament was written as it was claimed by devoted followers who believed because they actually saw it, because it actually happened!

3) Read the Gospels- Jesus speaks the truth- Be the Humble servant, serve others.

4) Today's message of World is a Lie "Get your unfair share", It is all about me!!" "Do what you want there are No Consequences or Rules to Live By".

5) You have been warned! Their is a Loving God, but there is also Justice. He knows what is in your heart. God uses both the Carrot and the Stick. I suggest taking the Carrot of Love.

Hitchens problem is that he has a good sounding offence, IF you ignore his own positions which defeat any meaning of the charges he brings against God. He believes in an impersonal universe where people living or dying is just insignificant matter changing forms. So, he has no basis to claim any of that is evil from the tenants of his own belief system. He must step into the Christian belief system about the nature of reality to even make any points about it, and so he uses aspects of what he already has a bad attitude about and disbelief about, in order to criticize it. How ridiculous is that? The guys is reasoning in a circle, and he is supposed to be the VERY BEST OF THE BEST here...

In the end, he defeats himself right out of the gate. These people in the audience are just taken in by his great and entertaining way of speaking, but his logic is absurd by his own standards.

[This message has been edited by Notafraid (edited 2/14/2012 8:10p).]

quote:

---

2) Shame he is gone, few more years, Hitch might of taken the next step and discovered the New Testament was written as it was claimed by devoted followers who believed because they actually saw it, because it actually happened!

---

I think you will find if you learn more about hitchens that he had far more of a problem with the totalitarian nature of god, the hell jesus preached, and god waiting around a few hundred thousand years before saying hello than the details of the NT.

The absence of any archeological evidence of the events of Exodus is particularly revealing about the fakery of the bible

quote:

---

I think you will find if you learn more about hitchens that he had far more of a problem with the totalitarian nature of god, the hell jesus preached, and god waiting around a few hundred thousand years before saying hello than the details of the NT.

---

Tell me, how do we measure something that is 200,000 years old? What is the objective standard that we use?

He's a moron. A dead moron.

Reading the criticism here of hitch is quite comical.

My main criticism of him is that he makes lousy fertilizer.

And let's be honest. The guy was a hateful ass.

You're right, he fought hate with contempt and tremendous disdain.

I have no problem with the people on this board denying God until they die. Heck the fireworks show at the end of time would be real dull without the mass of God rejectors heading for the Lake of Fire that they don't believe in.

Invest in asbestos my God denying friends! Oh and you don't need to worry about the cancer.

quote:

---

Tell me, how do we measure something that is 200,000 years old? What is the objective standard that we use?

---

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radiometric_dating

Nothing new, old stuff, refried anti-apolegetics.

quote:

---

The absence of any archeological evidence of the events of Exodus is particularly revealing about the fakery of the bible

---

1) This was 1400-1500 BC, not a lot of evidence out there for something that happened 3500 years ago. But yet we have one side of the story from the Jews. I am ignorant on all the historical documentation available in Egypt (today).

2) Archeology really began just in the last 75 years, with lots of discoveries and studies in the past 50. Recent discoveries of Dead Sea Scrolls (huge- shows Oral tradition was accurate when they compared these older text to the much newer ones they had), Diadache (first Catechism), Discovered historical evidence of Pontius Pilate, King David and some of the cultures the Jews battled in the Old Testament (which skeptics said did not exist).

3) My thoughts the Bible of Old Testament is accurate (does not mean every word, number, date are dead on). Purpose was to convey the primary message that God wanted to pass along to us.

4) When you look at Exodus story, you have to remember this is written from Jewish perspective. I am reading about Comanche and Texans battling (Empire of Summer Moon), just read about our very own Sul Ross and his descriptions of a great Indian battle. His description of what happened is different to what historians now think happened. The story Sul Ross told is mainly true, just slanted to his side of the battle, the Comanche’s saw it differently. I suspect the same thing happened in the Old Testament.
I have no doubt the Jews were in Egypt as slaves and they were able to leave with God's help. I don't know how many Egyptians died in the parting of the Sea (which could of just been a heavy wind causing sea to part), Maybe it wasn't a significant number? Do you think the Jews sat around and counted all the Egypt dead, or were they fleeing for their lives?

I really never understood how anyone took that guy seriously. In the first few minutes of the video, he said that "there is no reason at all to believe that Jesus ever existed" but that "it is plausible that Socrates existed."

The first claim, while utterly absurd on its own, is words-can't-properly-describe stupid when held in conjunction with the claim that it is plausible to believe that Socrates did exist. When defending this utterly incredible tandem of views, he rests his case on the fact that not much as at stake in the claim that Socrates existed. WHAT??!! HOW EXACTLY DOES THAT MATTER??!! EVIDENCE FOR THE TRUTH OF A CLAIM IS EVIDENCE FOR THE TRUTH OF A CLAIM, REGARDLESS OF HOW IMPORTANT OR INCONSEQUENTIAL THE CLAIM IN QUESTION.


I mean, really. The guy was honest-to-God irrational, and I don't say that about many people. I think there are lots of rational atheists. (The mistake of most atheists has nothing to do with reason or rationality).



[This message has been edited by Whistling For Flies (edited 2/15/2012 7:40a).]

Christopher Hitchens?!?!

You mean the hateful bigoted little troll of a man who actually WROTE IN HIS BOOK that Orthodox Jews are required to have sex through holes in the sheets? THAT Christopher Hitchens?

2 minutes on Google would have been enough to disabuse him of the "hole in the bedsheet" foolishness, but noooo. It was a way to criticize religion. Who needs to fact-check?

Yeah. He was an intellectual giant all right. No surprise that so many atheists find him so compelling.

quote:

---

A simple-minded credulous refutation of christianity.

---

fify.

[This message has been edited by Longstreet (edited 2/15/2012 10:37a).]

quote:

---

The absence of any archeological evidence of the events of Exodus is particularly revealing about the fakery of the bible

---

The logic (or lack of logic) by atheists always amazes me. Hitchens falls into the same category. Notafraid's summary of it was spot on. Atheism ultimately fails due to inconsistency. If there is no God, then nothing matters, and there is no such thing as good or evil. But even atheists think things matter and have a sense of right and wrong. Hitchens included.

quote:

---

Nothing new, old stuff, refried anti-apolegetics.

---

Yep.

quote:

---

Nothing new, old stuff, refried anti-apolegetics.

---

If you've read any of td's stuff on the Politics board...

quote:

---

there is no God, then nothing matters, and there is no such thing as good or evil

---

And as it has been pointed out a thousand times before on this thread, a cosmic morality is not necessary to develope a morality. It may bother you that it is subjective, but who cares what bothers you?

The person just pointed out they don't believe the bible since it doesn't jive with archaeology. You are saying they are foolish for not believing something unsupported by evidence because there is no more cosmic good and evil. What the hell does that have to do with the truth of the bible?

This makes no sense to me. First off, I don't believe you would no longer value your life if you found out there was no god. Second, I doubt you would abandon the concept of morality or societal law or your empathy for your fellow man. Third, none of that has a lick to do with reality.


[This message has been edited by Aggrad08 (edited 2/15/2012 12:05p).]

quote:

---

Nothing new, old stuff, refried anti-apolegetics.

---

Reminds me of refried beans... produces the same result.

For someone who is purported to be brilliant, he sure gets quite a bit wrong. He should have done his homework, for he demonstrates that he knows jack squat about what he believes he is refuting.

Atheists should thank christians for providing them a foundation on which they can build their meaningless lives. Not to mention the purpose they get from arguing against christian beliefs, I mean if it weren't for christians and their beliefs what would they have to save the world from?!

[This message has been edited by Mrs. Lovelight (edited 2/15/2012 1:53p).]

quote:

---

And as it has been pointed out a thousand times before on this thread, a cosmic morality is not necessary to develope a morality.

---

That one can construct (hallucinate?) something they call morality is quite unimpressive.

Morality is just the relative laws of a society/individual. Which one you choose to prioritize defines you. No need to make up a supernatural deity father figure to explain morals.

quote:

---

That one can construct (hallucinate?) something they call morality is quite unimpressive.

---

That one cannot think of a standard by which to run society or live by without pretending the rules are made up by someone they cannot see is quite unimpressive.

Christians scoffing at relativistic morals is extra funny considering the large number of them that reject OT law.

[This message has been edited by Aggrad08 (edited 2/15/2012 2:44p).]

quote:

---

Christians scoffing at relativistic morals is extra funny considering the large number of them that reject OT law.

---

Which OT law-the civil, the ceremonial, or the moral law?