Christopher Hitchens has died

Da Shins Kelly · 17-12-2011 04:39PM

Min wrote: »

Well his friend, Richard Dawkins says it is child abuse to have your child brought up with religion being a part of it.
Surely it is far worse to have an alcoholic father and a mother who puts carcinogens into the air that her child has to breathe.
Alcohol causes a lot of harm in society as do cigarettes, this man said he hated what his parents did with the drinking and smoking, yet he inflicted it on his own who had asked him to stop.
Selfish man, who couldn't even stop doing to his own children what he himself couldn't stand.
The man is such a hypocrite.

He put himself before his children, similar to how some in the church put the church before the victims of abuse.
No child wants an alcoholic father or have to breathe in the smoke of the cigarretes of their mother.

The Pope campaign by him was his last real high profile event, he achieved nothing, it was an utter failure that simply pandered to his worshippers and not the mainstream.
It failed to achieve every objective he had set out to achieve. He put across a supposed intellectual argument that was supposedly supported by law, when it was not the case.
He was a weak man who let anger get the better of him and then filled some void in his life with alcohol and cigarrettes, he was not strong enough to give them up and eventually he killed himself.
He is an example of how for one to not live their life.

A supposed intellect, yet he gave himself oesophageal cancer by the way he lived, that is sad but it shows he was not as clever as some make out.

Hitchens is not great.

If you don't like him, you don't have to be here. Why are you hijacking a thread intended for messages of condolences? The man has just died, ffs.

krudler · 17-12-2011 04:40PM

philologos wrote: »

I wouldn't quite agree with what Min said, in that I think Christopher Hitchens was one of the brightest minds amongst us. Ultimately though as far as I see it he dedicated his mind to the wrong cause.

getting people to think for themselves?

Logical Fallacy · 17-12-2011 04:40PM

philologos wrote: »

Ultimately though as far as I see it he dedicated his mind to the wrong cause.

Philologos, anyone who isn't on bended knee to one particular deity is dedicated to the wrong cause as far as you are concerned.

philologos · 17-12-2011 04:45PM

krudler wrote: »

getting people to think for themselves?

Rejecting God doesn't of necessity mean thinking for themselves. I thought for myself and it brought me to Him. I think in what he did, he committed his mind to the wrong cause.

Logical Fallacy: Anyone who denies Jesus Christ, and encourages others to do so is on the wrong side of the argument as far as I see it. I regard it as a tragedy that Christopher Hitchens chose to dedicate his life and his clear intelligence to doing this, and I also regard it as a tragedy that Christopher Hitchens never knew Him.

amacachi · 17-12-2011 04:47PM

Min wrote: »

A supposed intellect, yet he gave himself oesophageal cancer by the way he lived, that is sad but it shows he was not as clever as some make out.

That Oscar Wilde lad, supposed to be an intellect but he got himself locked up because he couldn't resist bumming men.

See how easy it is to make ridiculous arguments?

philologos wrote: »

I wouldn't quite agree with what Min said, in that I think Christopher Hitchens was one of the brightest minds amongst us. Ultimately though as far as I see it he dedicated his mind to the wrong cause.

Just out of interest, have you any feelings on the fact (in your eyes) that he's being tormented in hell?

Logical Fallacy · 17-12-2011 04:50PM

philologos wrote: »

Logical Fallacy: Anyone who denies Jesus Christ, and encourages others to do so is on the wrong side of the argument. I regard it as a tragedy that Christopher Hitchens chose to dedicate his life to doing this.

Oh well, stick me on the pyre so buddy, because your god does not exist.

Dyr · 17-12-2011 04:51PM

philologos wrote: »

Ultimately though as far as I see it he dedicated his mind to the wrong cause.

I'd say you probably cant see all that far.

krudler · 17-12-2011 04:54PM

philologos wrote: »

Rejecting God doesn't of necessity mean thinking for themselves. I thought for myself and it brought me to Him. I think in what he did, he committed his mind to the wrong cause.

Logical Fallacy: Anyone who denies Jesus Christ, and encourages others to do so is on the wrong side of the argument as far as I see it. I regard it as a tragedy that Christopher Hitchens chose to dedicate his life and his clear intelligence to doing this, and I also regard it as a tragedy that Christopher Hitchens never knew Him.

unless it was gods plan that brought you to him, in which case you werent thinking for yourself, or that god doesnt have a plan, because he doesnt exist.

philologos · 17-12-2011 04:55PM

amacachi wrote: »

Just out of interest, have you any feelings on the fact (in your eyes) that he's being tormented in hell?

I've said it's tragic, that's what I feel for anyone who made the choice that he did with his life. That is withstanding the limited form of doubt that one could have that he changed his mind in the final moments which seems slim.

krudler wrote: »

unless it was gods plan that brought you to him, in which case you werent thinking for yourself, or that god doesnt have a plan, because he doesnt exist.

Perhaps it was God's plan for me to think about it!

I lived my life without knowing Him for so long. I even struggle to this day fighting off the old nature that brings me away from Him. I remember a few years ago when I resolved to read the Bible, the Qur'an and look into other religious texts and indeed atheist critiques of religion to see what it was all about and my life changing in response to discovering God for the first time.

Logical Fallacy · 17-12-2011 04:57PM

philologos wrote: »

I've said it's tragic, that's what I feel for anyone who made the choice that he did with his life. That is withstanding the limited form of doubt that one could have that he changed his mind in the final moments which seems slim.

lol, i was waiting for that one.

amacachi · 17-12-2011 04:58PM

philologos wrote: »

I've said it's tragic, that's what I feel for anyone who made the choice that he did with his life. That is withstanding the limited form of doubt that one could have that he changed his mind in the final moments which seems slim.

There's something else I want to ask but I want to just get a completely clear answer before I do. Do you think it's sad that he is now to be tortured for all eternity? If so, why do you find that something in God's Perfect judgement is sad? Surely it's ludicrous for you to question the big man? Do you feel it is deserved? Since he had more opportunities than most to accept God into his life?

krudler · 17-12-2011 05:00PM

amacachi wrote: »

There's something else I want to ask but I want to just get a completely clear answer before I do. Do you think it's tragic that he is now to be tortured for all eternity? If so, why do you find that something in God's Perfect judgement is tragic? Surely it's ludicrous for you to question the big man?

no no you see god forgives everyone, so regardless of if you reject him or not you're still in thanks to peoples batsh1t crazy thinking about it

philologos · 17-12-2011 05:02PM

I don't know if Hitchens is in hell for sure (I really hope he isn't because I wouldn't want anyone to go there), because I don't know what happened in his final moments.

What I will say is if you reject Jesus Christ there is no other way to salvation. Jesus Christ died on the cross to take the penalty for our sin so that we might be forgiven. Reject Jesus, and one rejects forgiveness.

God's judgement is righteous, but it is tragic for the individual because they could have accepted Christ and lived for the gospel, and they could have been saved. I wouldn't want anyone to go to hell, not even my worst enemy. More importantly God doesn't want people to go there either. God is just and merciful. Those who reject His mercy through Jesus taking away the sins of the world, will have to accept His justice instead.

MagicMarker · 17-12-2011 05:05PM

philologos wrote: »

I don't know if Hitchens is in hell for sure (I really hope he isn't because I wouldn't want anyone to go there), because I don't know what happened in his final moments.

Good to know that all anyone has to do to get into heaven is convert on their deathbed.

God is an idiot.

philologos · 17-12-2011 05:06PM

MagicMarker wrote: »

Good to know that all anyone has to do to get into heaven is convert on their deathbed.

God is an idiot.

If one sincerely believes in the Gospel and is transformed by it, then one can be saved irrespective of when it happens. I fail to see how that is God being an idiot.

amacachi · 17-12-2011 05:08PM

philologos wrote: »

I don't know if Hitchens is in hell for sure (I really hope he isn't because I wouldn't want anyone to go there), because I don't know what happened in his final moments.

What I will say is if you reject Jesus Christ there is no other way to salvation. Jesus Christ died on the cross to take the penalty for our sin so that we might be forgiven. Reject Jesus, and one rejects forgiveness.

God's judgement is righteous, but it is tragic for the individual because they could have accepted Christ and lived for the gospel, and they could have been saved. I wouldn't want anyone to go to hell, not even my worst enemy. More importantly God doesn't want people to go there either. God is just and merciful. Those who reject His mercy through Jesus taking away the sins of the world, will have to accept His justice instead.

For someone so righteous God is very petty.

Da Shins Kelly · 17-12-2011 05:10PM

philologos wrote: »

I don't know if Hitchens is in hell for sure (I really hope he isn't because I wouldn't want anyone to go there), because I don't know what happened in his final moments.

What I will say is if you reject Jesus Christ there is no other way to salvation. Jesus Christ died on the cross to take the penalty for our sin so that we might be forgiven. Reject Jesus, and one rejects forgiveness.

God's judgement is righteous, but it is tragic for the individual because they could have accepted Christ and lived for the gospel, and they could have been saved. I wouldn't want anyone to go to hell, not even my worst enemy. More importantly God doesn't want people to go there either. God is just and merciful. Those who reject His mercy through Jesus taking away the sins of the world, will have to accept His justice instead.

A God that judges people on their words rather than their actions is not really a God worth knowing.

philologos · 17-12-2011 05:11PM

amacachi wrote: »

For someone so righteous God is very petty.

There's nothing petty about it at least not on God's part. God's offered you mercy. People decide to reject it. I think it is petty to reject this mercy that God has given so that you might be saved.

Da Shins Kelly: God doesn't judge people on their word. He judges them on the sincerity of their hearts, the sincerity of their belief in Jesus.

Ellis Dee · 17-12-2011 05:12PM

The brilliant Richard Dawkins sums it up beautifully in his moving tribute to his friend and fellow-secularist in today's Independent (UK): "A symbol of the honesty and dignity of atheism".

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/richard-dawkins-illness-made-hitchens-a-symbol-of-the-honesty-and-dignity-of-atheism-6278298.html

"He looked frail, and his voice was no longer the familiar Richard Burton boom; but, though his body had clearly been diminished by the brutality of cancer, his mind and spirit had not. Just two months before his death, he was still shining his relentless light on uncomfortable truths, still speaking the unspeakable ("The way I put it is this: if you're writing about the history of the 1930s and the rise of totalitarianism, you can take out the word 'fascist', if you want, for Italy, Portugal, Spain, Czechoslovakia and Austria and replace it with 'extreme-right Catholic party'"), still leading the charge for human freedom and dignity ("The totalitarian, to me, is the enemy – the one that's absolute, the one that wants control over the inside of your head, not just your actions and your taxes. And the origins of that are theocratic, obviously. The beginning of that is the idea that there is a supreme leader, or infallible pope, or a chief rabbi, or whatever, who can ventriloquise the divine and tell us what to do") and still encouraging others to stand up fearlessly for truth and reason ("Stridency is the least you should muster ... It's the shame of your colleagues that they don't form ranks and say, 'Listen, we're going to defend our colleagues from these appalling and obfuscating elements'.").

I feel privileged to have been able to live on this planet at the same time as someone like Hitch (and Dawkins). Hitch is gone, but his ideas live on and his light will continue to help dispel the dark shadows of ignorance and superstition that religions cast on humankind.

We of sound mind will miss him, but one consolation is that the god-botherers have not tried to claim he recanted and turned to the sky fairy on his deathbed. I think Hitch had taken precautions against that.

Beautiful phrase, by the way, "ventriloquise the divine". A real Dawkins gem and it so wonderfully sums up the god-bothering vendors of myths and their utterly spurious claims to have a direct line of communication with something that any sane mind knows does not exist.:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Dimithy · 17-12-2011 05:12PM

philologos wrote: »

There's nothing petty about it. God's offered you mercy. People decide to reject it. I think it is petty to reject this mercy that God has given so that you might be saved.

Kinda like the guy who points a knife at you, and says "give me your wallet, or i'll stab you"?

Pherekydes · 17-12-2011 05:13PM

philologos wrote: »

There's nothing petty about it. God's offered you mercy. People decide to reject it. I think it is petty to reject this mercy that God has given so that you might be saved.

What mercy is offered to all the children that die in infancy? They've never known anything, even themselves.

RichieC · 17-12-2011 05:13PM

Father Damo wrote: »

MrStuffins wrote: »

RIP to one of the great minds of our and all time

Isnt RIP a bit of an oxymoron to him seeing as there is no such thing as restful existance post death?

edit- seen that got mentiond in the 21 previous pages.

Millitanrt Christians/ Muslims are lunatics. Millitant athiests are actually retarded (the Dawkins types mind. Hitchens was actually quite a smart journo and I always liked his articles)

But there is a great difference between the likes of me, who finds religion so irrelevant that its more of a culture thing to say Im Catholic despite the fact Ive zero opinion on the existance of God, as opposed to millitant athiests who seem to nearly wish they had been indoctrined into the church as a child so they could rebel against it.

Im pretty outspoken nontheist and I was indoctrinated into the church. As were the majority in Ireland.

philologos · 17-12-2011 05:14PM

Pherekydes wrote: »

What mercy is offered to all the children that die in infancy? They've never known anything, even themselves.

Do you think that infants have sinned?

I certainly don't. If one hasn't sinned, how could God reasonably punish them for it? Jesus came into the world to save us from the weight of our sin.

Ellis Dee · 17-12-2011 05:15PM

Da Shins Kelly wrote: »

A God that judges people on their words rather than their actions is not really a God worth knowing.

Well said. In fact, someone once said to me that there couldn't be a god, because someone so full of love as that deity is supposed to be would never have created anything as cruel and evil as humans. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

gizmo · 17-12-2011 05:16PM

Min wrote: »

Well his friend, Richard Dawkins says it is child abuse to have your child brought up with religion being a part of it.
Surely it is far worse to have an alcoholic father and a mother who puts carcinogens into the air that her child has to breathe.
Alcohol causes a lot of harm in society as do cigarettes, this man said he hated what his parents did with the drinking and smoking, yet he inflicted it on his own who had asked him to stop.
Selfish man, who couldn't even stop doing to his own children what he himself couldn't stand.
The man is such a hypocrite.

He put himself before his children, similar to how some in the church put the church before the victims of abuse.
No child wants an alcoholic father or have to breathe in the smoke of the cigarretes of their mother.

...

A supposed intellect, yet he gave himself oesophageal cancer by the way he lived, that is sad but it shows he was not as clever as some make out.

Yet Hitchens never claimed to be a superman, never claimed to be infallible or beyond reproach. In doing the above he showed that he was still only human and that, at the end of the day, was what much of his writing was really about.

Min wrote: »

The Pope campaign by him was his last real high profile event, he achieved nothing, it was an utter failure that simply pandered to his worshippers and not the mainstream.
It failed to achieve every objective he had set out to achieve. He put across a supposed intellectual argument that was supposedly supported by law, when it was not the case.
He was a weak man who let anger get the better of him and then filled some void in his life with alcohol and cigarrettes, he was not strong enough to give them up and eventually he killed himself.
He is an example of how for one to not live their life.

I do love the way you completely ignored my question in response to your earlier post. I'll ask it again just in case you missed it...

“The institutionalized concealment of child rape is a crime under any law and demands not private ceremonies of repentance or church-funded payoffs, but justice and punishment."

Do you disagree with Hitchen's statement?

philologos · 17-12-2011 05:16PM

Dimithy wrote: »

Kinda like the guy who points a knife at you, and says "give me your wallet, or i'll stab you"?

More akin to the guy who shows up at court, refuses to accept their guilt and argues with the judge as to what the sentence is - even when the judge has offered leniency if they were honest about what they did and aimed to turn their life around.

Ellis Dee wrote: »

Well said. In fact, someone once said to me that there couldn't be a god, because someone so full of love as that deity is supposed to be would never have created anything as cruel and evil as humans. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

What a depressing view of humanity.

RichieC · 17-12-2011 05:17PM

No surprise philogos is in capitalising on a mans death to spread his brand of mental illness.

MagicMarker · 17-12-2011 05:18PM

philologos wrote: »

Do you think that infants have sinned?

I certainly don't. If one hasn't sinned, how could God reasonably punish them for it? Jesus came into the world to save us from the weight of our sin.

Oh right, so it's only babies that take other baby's toys without permission that burn in hell. Right so.

Pherekydes · 17-12-2011 05:19PM

philologos wrote: »

Do you think that infants have sinned?

I certainly don't. If one hasn't sinned, how could God reasonably punish them for it? Jesus came into the world to save us from the weight of our sin.

Then what is the purpose of a life that lasts days, weeks, months?

Our only raison d'être is to proclaim the glory of God. How does an infant do this in a short time on this earth?

philologos · 17-12-2011 05:20PM

RichieC wrote: »

No surprise philogos is in capitalising on a mans death to spread his brand of mental illness.

I've argued that Christopher Hitchens was an intelligent man, and a ferocious debater, and that it was a tragedy that he decided to use it in the way that he did. I read his "God is not Great" a few years ago, and I found it witty, and humorous, by far the best of the atheist critiques, but ultimately he lived for the wrong cause.

Mental illness or not, the question of his atheism was the pink elephant in the room. It was going to come out eventually.

Christopher Hitchens has died

Comments