Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Christopher Hitchens has died

1111214161723

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    It's a cause in so far as people have aimed to propagate it. It's actually surprisingly evangelical.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,118 ✭✭✭AnnyHallsal


    Dudess wrote: »
    Jeez, disliking him because you believe in god is understandable, but child abuse through smoking and drinking... bit too much of a stretch. Kinda insulting to people who were actually abused too. You don't have to make sh1t up to get across the point that you're not a fan of someone.

    Absolutely. Hitchens was a man of great intellectual honesty and integrity. He believed in, and demonstrated, Bertrand Russell's principle of "evidence against interest", that you do not suppress or deny the relevance of material that appears to, or actually does, undermine your argument. As a writer and debater, I believe he played fair.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Sin if it exists in the universe was as a concept created by God.

    It's a product of our free will. God gave us liberty, we do what we will in there. As for "if it exists". I think it's pretty evident. Look at the newspaper, read about what has happened today, I can guarantee you that you'll find wrongdoing left, right and centre.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    He creates sin, he creates our ability to be sinners, he tempts us with such sin and then expects us to turn away. That's stacking the deck. It's heavily weighted in the house's favour.

    God tempts us? Explain this a little bit more. God gives us the liberty to do as we will, God gives us standards to live by. We can choose to follow those standards, or choose to disobey them. If we couldn't choose we'd be mere automaton.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    The "chosen people" That would be favouritism then. Ditto for Christian and Muslim thinking. The former position is that if you don't go through Jesus you're damned. Niiiiice. So millions have been damned throughout history because of ignorance born of an accident of birth? Evil bastard. How many did he kill in his "flood"? How many did he kill in Sodom and Gomorrah? He killed lots wife just for looking back. How many Egyptian children did he kill on behalf of Moses? Mass infanticide is pretty non U in fairness. The list is long and old Jehovah is heavy on the smiting and revenge. Evil murderous bastard. Now of course there's feck all evidence that any of that happened, but that's as it's written. Vague? he can't seem to keep his story straight and contradicts himself all the bloody time.

    Jesus died for the sin of the world. How is that a "chosen people" terminology.

    As for taking life - God has bestowed it on us, and as far as I'm concerned He has the right to take it away as well.

    Also, to clarify murder is unlawful killing. The ultimate standard in terms of this as far as I would see it is what God has revealed to us. If people do what is evidently wrong, God is entitled to take their lives away.

    It's peculiar how people seem to whip up the idea that God is immoral, but rather God throughout the space of time as far as Judeo-Christianity is concerned has punished as a result of wrongdoing. Looking to the history of Israel presented in the Hebrew Scriptures, this is exactly what He did.

    In terms of Christianity - we have a choice, but our choices ultimately have consequences.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 21,264 ✭✭✭✭Hobbes


    philologos wrote: »
    God gives us the liberty to do as we will

    Pretty sure the devil is the one who gave us liberty. Prior to that we were just part of Gods private zoo.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭Saganist


    philologos wrote: »
    It's a cause in so far as people have aimed to propagate it. It's actually surprisingly evangelical.

    Thats one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 863 ✭✭✭DoireNod


    philologos wrote: »
    Sorry for missing this.
    Not a problem. We are human after all.
    philologos wrote: »
    1) Atheism.
    As a previous poster asks, is atheism a cause? I suppose the championing of atheism over theism or deism could be construed as a cause, but atheism in and of itself is surely not a cause. I would argue that his main "cause", if he ever had just one main cause, was the rational pursuit of truth. Being an anti-theist, to my mind, was simply a consequence of this dogged pursuit.
    2) If it leads people away from their Creator, if it stops people from knowing what is true about God and if it ultimately prevents people from being saved through Jesus' death on the cross.
    Here I must remove myself from the theatre of discussion, for, as another poster put it, your description of what constitutes a "wrong cause" arrogantly presupposes the existence of a "Creator", something which I do not invest in.


  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,387 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    philologos wrote: »
    It's a product of our free will. God gave us liberty, we do what we will in there. As for "if it exists". I think it's pretty evident. Look at the newspaper, read about what has happened today, I can guarantee you that you'll find wrongdoing left, right and centre.
    Again avoiding the central theological and philosophical problem of where sin comes from in the first place. It had to come from god if it created the universe and everything in it. Apparently nothing happens without this god, so sin is his baby. If such a deity was "upset" by sin then why did he create it in the first place?


    God tempts us? Explain this a little bit more.
    Gives us intelligence and the ability to discover, yet when we do this we get damned. Tree of knowledge anyone? OK take someone who is a member of the extreme(and they would feel more accurate representation) of the Christian right. Science and their own two eyes show them that many of the stories touted as fact in the old Testament are fables at best and utterly laughable at worst. If they think "hmmm don't really believe the old Noah story TBH". BANG straight to hell. IE it's better to be ignorant.
    God gives us the liberty to do as we will, God gives us standards to live by. We can choose to follow those standards, or choose to disobey them. If we couldn't choose we'd be mere automaton.
    Right, so lets go back to square one. Garden of Eden. Exterior. Day. Lovely place all told. Blessed by and in the presence of god. They can do what they like, but don't touch the special tree. They do and get kicked out of gods sight. The name numpty who put the tree there in the first place. That's like any dog owner leaving a roast on the kitchen table and leaving said dog on it's own for an hour. You would want to be a bit retarded to think old fido won't chow down and utterly sadistic if you then throw the dog out on the streets because it did so. You'd have the ISPCA on you for that one and social services would send someone around to feel your bumps. Daft.
    Jesus died for the sin of the world. How is that a "chosen people" terminology.
    More like he died for the locals as it was a small scale Jewish splinter faith. Oul Paul made it universal. EG from Matthew(speaking about bringing the message to gentiles) ""It is not fair to take bread and throw it to the dogs. to his apostles "Go nowhere among the Gentiles, and enter no town of the Samaritans, but go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel." Of course at other times he seems OK with gentiles and again we're back to confusion. But I'm quite sure if Jesus was around today he'd be shocked christians are happily eating sausages and for the most part not snipping off bits of babies willies. We have Paul the Grecoromanised Jew to thank for our bacon fryups. Well... Not really. Thank the Greeks and Romans at the time. They saw food restrictions as a bit daft(like all Latins to this day they loved their pork) and circumcision uncivilised and barbaric and a way out was found.
    As for taking life - God has bestowed it on us, and as far as I'm concerned He has the right to take it away as well.
    That's a tad masochistic IMH. Not a little cruel on the part of this god too.

    What happens down the line when at some point in the future we become functionally immortal? It's not impossible, it's a question of engineering. Heavy duty engineering in fairness, but a 1000 years ago so was powered flight or "thinking" machines. One man's science is anothers magic. One can practically posit a future where humanity or it's engineered descendants can manipulate reality and be immortal to all intents and purposes. Then we would be "gods". Or as close as makes no diff. We may even be able to create new universes out of singularities in the lab. That would be the full package. Indeed I could more easily believe our own universe was created in such a way. Makes more sense than an internally inconsistent deity born of Bronze age tribal sand dwellers jostling for political power.
    Also, to clarify murder is unlawful killing. The ultimate standard in terms of this as far as I would see it is what God has revealed to us. If people do what is evidently wrong, God is entitled to take their lives away.
    OK(mad stuff Ted, but OK). How many died in natural disasters throughout history. Nothing natural about them if you consider your god is controlling the least little thing. When Noah was reading his Ladybird "how to build a boat" book many 100's of 1000's of people were knocking about. Apparently all of them sinners and every single one of them destined to drown and burn in hell. Nice.
    It's peculiar how people seem to whip up the idea that God is immoral, but rather God throughout the space of time as far as Judeo-Christianity is concerned has punished as a result of wrongdoing. Looking to the history of Israel presented in the Hebrew Scriptures, this is exactly what He did.
    So a woman deserved to be burnt to death in a "pillar of salt" for having a look? Yet someone like David who was responsible for torched earth policies, adultery and all sorts of shenanigans was exalted? What about all those Egyptian babies? They deserved to die? That's an example of morality? Or good judgement? Foooook :eek:
    Hobbes wrote: »
    Pretty sure the devil is the one who gave us liberty. Prior to that we were just part of Gods private zoo.
    Well the devil bit came later H. The devil has really evolved as a character. Early on he was a judge sent by god, or just someone who got in the way in a minor sense. We have to thank some ergot blasted monks in the 2nd and 3rd centuries for more flesh on satans bones. The medieval types went to town on it. He's up there with Mary in the texts. Hardly mentioned much at all. The "serpent" in Eden has no name. Indeed isn't even a snake. He had legs when he was talking to the humans. Only after did god curse all snakes to crawl on their bellies for ever. All snakes mind you, not just the talking one. Bit OTT on snakes I would have thought? Which again he created. Unless that slipped his mind? You never know. With all that creation of the universe, you're bound to get distracted and create an evil quasi lizard with vocal chords and a semblance of good sense. A lizard you don't warn the two eejits about, that will tempt them to rebel and eat fruit. Fruit from a tree you planted. You couldn't sell this guff to tree year olds in an episode of the teletubbies. :D

    Many worry about Artificial Intelligence. I worry far more about Organic Idiocy.



  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    DoireNod wrote: »
    As a previous poster asks, is atheism a cause? I suppose the championing of atheism over theism or deism could be construed as a cause, but atheism in and of itself is surely not a cause. I would argue that his main "cause", if he ever had just one main cause, was the rational pursuit of truth. Being an anti-theist, to my mind, was simply a consequence of this dogged pursuit.

    Of course it is. That's precisely why Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris etc write their books. They want people to stop believing in God. Another poster says I'm stupid for saying this, but this is explicitly why they have done it.

    If you want to call evangelical atheists such as the above anti-theists, I'm happy to use that definition for the remainder of the thread.

    There's nothing "rational" about being skeptical about God as I would see it. Or at least there is no assurance that skepticism can be rational. There are plenty of forms of irrational skepticism that one could cite. I find the argument that atheists are automatically more rational than believers to be a misnomer.
    DoireNod wrote: »
    Here I must remove myself from the theatre of discussion, for, as another poster put it, your description of what constitutes a "wrong cause" arrogantly presupposes the existence of a "Creator", something which I do not invest in.

    There's nothing arrogant about it. What is arrogant about my position? I claim that I am a sinner who has been saved by Christ, and that Christ deserves to be praised.

    What is egotistical or arrogant about that? Unless what is reasonable is arrogant or egotistical that is.
    Saganist wrote: »
    Thats one of the dumbest things I've ever heard.

    See above.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    philologos wrote: »
    Of course it is. That's precisely why Dawkins, Hitchens, Harris etc write their books. They want people to stop believing in God. Another poster says I'm stupid for saying this, but this is explicitly why they have done it.

    I disagree, I don't think they care whether you believe in a god so long as you've come to that conclusion yourself using all the facts available, and once you don't try and force your beliefs on anyone else after the fact.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭Saganist


    philologos wrote: »
    I claim that I am a sinner who has been saved by Christ, and that Christ deserves to be praised..

    Praised by who ? More than just yourself ?


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    ^^ All people when they realise who God is and what He's done for us.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    God didn't give us the ability to fly or the ability of telepathy, so why did he give us the ability to sin? He gave us free will of course, but we only have free will within certain parameters/constraints, so he could have just created us without the ability to have sinful thoughts or ideas, and then allowed us to have free will within those constraints.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I disagree, I don't think they care whether you believe in a god so long as you've come to that conclusion yourself using all the facts available, and once you don't try and force your beliefs on anyone else after the fact.

    Telling people about Christianity != Forcing people to believe in Christianity surely?

    On a regular enough basis I would talk to people I know and who don't believe about Jesus, but it is generally on their impetus and if they ask me to stop I will. However, it would be fundamentally immoral from a Christian perspective not to.

    I think the current climate of a public discourse forming is better than getting everyone to shut up about it.

    Dave! - Your question is effectively why did God give you free will. I suspect it has something to do with it being better than living as mere automatons. Free will within certain constraints != Free will. Also, I don't believe that God is responsible for what you choose to do. It sounds like a lazy way to deny accountability for ones actions rather than an honest way of dealing with them surely if one was to argue that?


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    philologos wrote: »
    Telling people about Christianity != Forcing people to believe in Christianity surely?

    On a regular enough basis I would talk to people I know and who don't believe about Jesus, but it is generally on their impetus and if they ask me to stop I will. However, it would be fundamentally immoral from a Christian perspective not to.

    I think the current climate of a public discourse forming is better than getting everyone to shut up about it.

    No, you could tell me about Christianity but you wouldn't be forcing me to believe it because I have the ability of rational thought. Telling children about it and telling them it's true is forcing them.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    No, you could tell me about Christianity but you wouldn't be forcing me to believe it because I have the ability of rational thought. Telling children about it and telling them it's true is forcing them.

    The rational thought argument is just useless rhetoric.

    The fact of the matter is that people have the liberty to decide on the basis of what they hear, what they know and what they think whether or not to believe in X or Y.

    Even in the case of children, ultimately they have to decide for themselves whether or not they are going to believe in what they have heard as children. I.E They will have to repackage the beliefs that they had in a way that is meaningful for them. In the ability that they fail to do this, they will more than likely just lapse.

    Most of the Christians that I know found their teenage years / early twenties to be the pivotal moment when they decided to follow Jesus mostly through their own reading and thinking. A large proportion of the Christians I know decided to follow Jesus at university.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭Saganist


    philologos wrote: »
    ^^ All people when they realise who God is and what He's done for us.

    Can you please qualify that statement with some proof he even exists. And please don't start quoting some scripture at me.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    philologos wrote: »
    Dave! - Your question is effectively why did God give you free will. I suspect it has something to do with it being better than living as mere automatons. Free will within certain constraints != Free will. Also, I don't believe that God is responsible for what you choose to do. It sounds like a lazy way to deny accountability for ones actions rather than an honest way of dealing with them surely if one was to argue that?

    But God doesn't give us unlimited control of our destinies, he gives us free will within certain constraints. We have physical limitations in that we can't fly, etc., and we have mental constraints because he created a universe which doesn't facilitate certain things like telepathy, telekinesis, etc. So if he gave us certain limitations, why didn't he give us other limitations too? He could have created us without the capacity to want to commit genocide or rape.

    Pretty specific limitation, no real implications for the rest of our lives, we'll still have free will as before, just when Hitler and Stalin took a dislike to certain people they wouldn't be able to think "let's just kill them all". This would mean that millions of people would not have had to suffer unduly.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    philologos wrote: »
    The rational thought argument is just useless rhetoric.

    The fact of the matter is that people have the liberty to decide on the basis of what they hear, what they know and what they think whether or not to believe in X or Y.

    Even in the case of children, ultimately they have to decide for themselves whether or not they are going to believe in what they have heard as children. I.E They will have to repackage the beliefs that they had in a way that is meaningful for them. In the ability that they fail to do this, they will more than likely just lapse.

    Most of the Christians that I know found their teenage years / early twenties to be the pivotal moment when they decided to follow Jesus mostly through their own reading and thinking. A large proportion of the Christians I know decided to follow Jesus at university.
    Riiight, so you don't think telling children that god definitely exists from the moment they're born is giving god a bit of an unfair advantage?

    Please tell me you're not that stupid?


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    I wouldn't argue for telling children that God definitely exists. If I had children, I would certainly tell them that I believed God existed, and I would show them some of the reasoning I had as to why I think God exists. If I had children I would bring them to church probably as well unless they had a major objection to going.

    It's better to encourage people to look at the reasoning and at the arguments and come to their own conclusion. I wouldn't shy away from going through some philosophy such as the Problem of Evil by Epicurus either. When I was introduced to the philosophy of religion at university and looked at some of the atheistic arguments for God's existence it ended up strengthening my faith by encouraging me to think more deeply about some of the things I believed in.


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    philologos wrote: »
    I wouldn't argue for telling children that God definitely exists. If I had children, I would certainly tell them that I believed God existed, and I would show them some of the reasoning I had as to why I think God exists. If I had children I would bring them to church probably as well unless they had a major objection to going.

    It's better to encourage people to look at the reasoning and at the arguments and come to their own conclusion. I wouldn't shy away from going through some philosophy such as the Problem of Evil by Epicurus either. When I was introduced to the philosophy of religion at university and looked at some of the atheistic arguments for God's existence it ended up strengthening my faith by encouraging me to think more deeply about some of the things I believed in.
    So you'd tell your child you think god exists, bring them to church where the priest will tell them stories about god, and more than likely send them to a religious school where the teachers will also tell the children they think god exists all the while teaching them about how god created us and praying multiple times a day.

    Ah yeah, doesn't sound at all forced.

    You're right, people should be looking at the reasoning and the arguments but the point is children can't do this.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭Saganist


    philologos wrote: »
    I wouldn't argue for telling children that God definitely exists. If I had children, I would certainly tell them that I believed God existed, and I would show them some of the reasoning I had as to why I think God exists.

    But isn't the indoctrination of children the reason why so many people still believe in God(s) ?

    That is how Religion works.. It has to indoctrine children or else it would die.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭Wattle


    Min wrote: »
    He abused his children.

    He complained about how he hated how his father was an alcoholic and his mother a heavy smoker.

    So he then and went and did it to his children who had asked him to stop before it damaged him.

    An utter failure of man who was all talk and little else, he said he would either have the Pope arrested in the UK or make the visit very uncomfortable for the government to the point they won't pay for it.
    Not only did the UK government pay for it, the visit went far better than anyone could have imagined.

    He killed himself in the end, but then he was suppose to be an intellect, which is questionable, talk is cheap and he had plenty of cheap talk.

    He lived to be 62. Not a bad age for someone apparently hell bent on suicide.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 7,331 ✭✭✭RichieC


    Saganist wrote: »
    philologos wrote: »
    I wouldn't argue for telling children that God definitely exists. If I had children, I would certainly tell them that I believed God existed, and I would show them some of the reasoning I had as to why I think God exists.

    But isn't the indoctrination of children the reason why so many people still believe in God(s) ?

    That is how Religion works.. It has to indoctrine children or else it would die.

    Absolutely, imagine for a moment trying to explain to a person the concept of god who'd never been exposed to it.

    Early exposure to the concept is imo absolutely required. Theres a good reason they are infesting our education system.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 8,822 ✭✭✭ShooterSF


    Dave! wrote: »
    But God doesn't give us unlimited control of our destinies, he gives us free will within certain constraints. We have physical limitations in that we can't fly, etc., and we have mental constraints because he created a universe which doesn't facilitate certain things like telepathy, telekinesis, etc. So if he gave us certain limitations, why didn't he give us other limitations too? He could have created us without the capacity to want to commit genocide or rape.

    Pretty specific limitation, no real implications for the rest of our lives, we'll still have free will as before, just when Hitler and Stalin took a dislike to certain people they wouldn't be able to think "let's just kill them all". This would mean that millions of people would not have had to suffer unduly.

    Or create a universe where we can't physically hurt or kill each other while still giving us free will...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 22,479 ✭✭✭✭philologos


    Saganist wrote: »
    But isn't the indoctrination of children the reason why so many people still believe in God(s) ?

    That is how Religion works.. It has to indoctrine children or else it would die.

    In your assumption, that's how it works. From my personal experience and the experience of a lot of others I know it arises from a lot of personal thought.

    That mightn't work too well with the whole faith is irrational card chestnut though.

    How do you think the first Christians came into existence if adults can't make a reasoned decision to become Christians?
    You're right, people should be looking at the reasoning and the arguments but the point is children can't do this.

    You also assume falsely that reasoning about it will bring people to atheism. My point on children was that children make definitive decisions about what they believe much later in their lives.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,336 ✭✭✭Saganist


    philologos wrote: »
    In your assumption, that's how it works. From my personal experience and the experience of a lot of others I know it arises from a lot of personal thought.

    If that's how it stayed then we'd all be in a better place. :D


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 32,865 ✭✭✭✭MagicMarker


    philologos wrote: »
    You also assume falsely that reasoning about it will bring people to atheism.

    No I don't.
    philologos wrote: »
    My point on children was that children make definitive decisions about what they believe much later in their lives.

    No need to force it upon them from birth then.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 27,856 ✭✭✭✭Dave!


    ShooterSF wrote: »
    Or create a universe where we can't physically hurt or kill each other while still giving us free will...

    Indeed

    Giving free will is nice and all, but it'd be more caring and loving to impose certain limitations. We can still oppose God's will by being mean to our parents, working on the Sabbath, etc., but we just wouldn't be able to kill each other.

    I'd want my child to be able to walk around the living room and explore the house, but I'd put up a guard around the fireplace, and a lock on the knife drawer.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,118 ✭✭✭AnnyHallsal


    Apologies if this has been posted already:



  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 13,029 ✭✭✭✭Chuck Stone


    philologos wrote: »
    From my personal experience and the experience of a lot of others I know it arises from a lot of personal thought.

    That sentence is meaningless.

    What do you mean by

    1. 'it'

    and

    2. 'arises'


Advertisement
Advertisement