Best, I think I was clear as to how we know he didn’t go. He will be forgotten.
Originally Posted by lexum:
huckster hitchens never went to the Middle East except maybe in drag disguise other wise the Muslims would have split his ***sack and run his leg through it. he was just a mouthy coward.
his hate for Christianity will soon be forgotten and his life of hate could only serve as a warning to those that might recall his awful deeds.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Lexum, I suspect that the muslims just don't take drunken fools very seriously, just like the Indians used to laugh at crazy people. I wouldn't be the least bit concerned with him if it weren't for the fact he is a god to the atheists in this forum. While they boast of wisdom, they are being shown as fools.
Hitchens just wasn't that smart. he was just good at acting that way, plus his competition just didn'
t want to expose his incompetency as I am now doing.
Yes 260, hitchens was quite the role model for the athiest on here
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
How do you know if he did or did not go to the middle east? What does it matter if he did or did not go to the middle east? No, he won't be forgotten, and as far as his "evil deeds", what would you consider those to be? Telling the truth?
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hitchens was the personification of a scam artist. He made lots of money, lived very high lifestyle, drank lots of whiskey, Oh wait, he sounds like the fake preachers he claimed to condemn. He was just the other side of the same coin. In the end God got his man. Throat cancer. Whoda thunk it. The very thing he used against God is the thing that sent him to Hell.
If he made a lot of money from telling the truth so be it. And your god gave him cancer? Is that what you're saying? Your "loving god"? Is that the thing you believe? Explain to me all the cancer and other horrible things your god gives babies and little children, AND you christians, his "children". Are you as happy about that extra, as you are about hitchens? hmmmmmmmmmm
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
If he made a lot of money from telling the truth so be it. And your god gave him cancer? Is that what you're saying? Your "loving god"? Is that the thing you believe? Explain to me all the cancer and other horrible things your god gives babies and little children, AND you christians, his "children". Are you as happy about that extra, as you are about hitchens? hmmmmmmmmmm
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And one day God will send his death angel for you. I hope you are ready.
No extra, one day I will die. No death angels, none of that stuff. So will you and every other living creature on earth. Now answer the question extra, how do you like what your god does to babies and children, and "his" children? What did those babies do to cause your god to do those horrible things to them?
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
No extra, one day I will die. No death angels, none of that stuff. So will you and every other living creature on earth. Now answer the question extra, how do you like what your god does to babies and children, and "his" children? What did those babies do to cause your god to do those horrible things to them?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Everyone dies.
Look, if you don't like the way God runs his universe, take it up with him. I have a feeling he doesn't care what you think though.
Well first of all there is no god to "take it up with". Secondly I'm watching you, a hypocrite, gloat because a man died, and you're trying to say your god did it because that man told the truth. But you refuse to address the things that happen to good people and little children. You know extra, if there was a god, he'd have met his match with hitchens.
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Well first of all there is no god to "take it up with". Secondly I'm watching you, a hypocrite, gloat because a man died, and you're trying to say your god did it because that man told the truth. But you refuse to address the things that happen to good people and little children. You know extra, if there was a god, he'd have met his match with hitchens.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So in your mind, man has no responsibility when it comes to these things? It's all Gods fault to you. That's the cowards way out.
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Well first of all there is no god to "take it up with". Secondly I'm watching you, a hypocrite, gloat because a man died, and you're trying to say your god did it because that man told the truth. But you refuse to address the things that happen to good people and little children. You know extra, if there was a god, he'd have met his match with hitchens.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You just haven't got a clue.
you atheists can't even win an argument with me.
Slowly extra, read slowly and see if you can comprehend ONE thing. YOU claim YOUR god gave hitchens cancer, Now I ask you, since YOU, and not me, thinks your god exists and can do that, why does he do it to children and all his other "children"? You were gloating about your god giving him cancer, but now all of a sudden you won't admit that if you believe that you have to believe he does it to everyone.
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
So in your mind, man has no responsibility when it comes to these things? It's all Gods fault to you. That's the cowards way out.
------------------------------------------------
It's you that keeps screeching "gawd did it". I don't believe in a god.
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Slowly extra, read slowly and see if you can comprehend ONE thing. YOU claim YOUR god gave hitchens cancer, Now I ask you, since YOU, and not me, thinks your god exists and can do that, why does he do it to children and all his other "children"? You were gloating about your god giving him cancer, but now all of a sudden you won't admit that if you believe that you have to believe he does it to everyone.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again, and I will type slowly for your comprehension. man does many things to cause cancer, as you very well know. Most of the cancer is from man made sources. You want to blame all cancer on God. that's the cowards way out because then it allows you not to think.
Since God has all things at his disposal is also perfectly capable of smiting people with various diseases as he very well has. Cancer would only be one of many.
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must be rotten fruit laying on the ground no one wants.
ptt uh huh she rotten uh huh
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must be rotten fruit laying on the ground no one wants.
----------------------------
I'm the one stepping over your rotten droppings picking all the low hanging fruit.
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must be rotten fruit laying on the ground no one wants.
----------------------------
I'm the one stepping over your rotten droppings picking all the low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only in your deluded atheist world. Deep Fat and robustus were smart enough to see they were licked, only you are dumb enough to believe you still have a chance to win an argument that is over.
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must be rotten fruit laying on the ground no one wants.
----------------------------
I'm the one stepping over your rotten droppings picking all the low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only in your deluded atheist world. Deep Fat and robustus were smart enough to see they were licked, only you are dumb enough to believe you still have a chance to win an argument that is over.
--------------------------
LOL! Well who licked them slick? You call not answering questions and running "licking" somebody? Because that's all I see that you've done. You never had an argument to begin with. How old are you anyway?
Extra says: "Look, if you don't like the way God runs his universe, take it up with him. I have a feeling he doesn't care what you think though."
There, right THERE, we have an example of why Extra is either NOT a Christian, or else he is displeasing God. To pronounce that God doesn't care what Jen thinks only proves it.
For your information, Extra, God cares a LOT about what ALL of us think. If He didn't, he wouldn't care if any of us loved Him. He wouldn't care if any of us were saved. Those who already have a relationship with Him don't have to "think" if we are truly His children - we put our lives, our thoughts and our actions in His hands.
<address>And those who don't have a relationship with Him are the ones He is MOST concerned about what they think. He wants them to think of Him and come to know Him. God is in the business of saving souls, and just like a businessperson, it is the customers whom you HAVEN'T had in your store yet that you want to reach. (And I'll tell you something - you don't gain new customers by telling them they are already da m ned.)</address>
Originally Posted by lexum:
Yes 260, hitchens was quite the role model for the athiest on here
______________________
I suppose you think you & Extra is quite the role model for God?
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:
Originally Posted by lexum:
Yes 260, hitchens was quite the role model for the athiest on here
______________________
I suppose you think you & Extra is quite the role model for God?
--------------------------------------------
Let me add, I was an atheist long before I ever knew hitchens or dawkins existed.
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
In the end God got his man. Throat cancer. Whoda thunk it. The very thing he used against God is the thing that sent him to Hell.
__________________
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
man does many things to cause cancer, as you very well know. Most of the cancer is from man made sources. You want to blame all cancer on God. that's the cowards way out because then it allows you not to think. Since God has all things at his disposal is also perfectly capable of smiting people with various diseases as he very well has. Cancer would only be one of many.
_________________
You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth & you’re too full of vindictiveness & hate for your fellow human beings to give a decent reply that makes any sense but I’m going to ask anyway. You say God gave Hitchens cancer, that He got “his man” as though God hated Hitchens.
THEN you say man does things to cause cancer, that Jenn wants to blame it all on God. YOU are the one that opened that can of worms. How can God give cancer to one man but not others? He picks & chooses who He gives it to & who He doesn’t? Maybe gives it to those He believes to be evil & who isn’t?
If that’s the case, you better keep an eye on your health. God just might choose to slap you with cancer & get you since you are the very definition of evil. If I had any faith at all in the things you say, then you would be confirming what I think much of the time about God & who He “gets” & who He doesn’t.
You say God has all things at his disposal & perfectly capable of smiting people with various diseases, but I’ve been told by many people on this forum that God doesn’t work that way. So which is it?
I’ve always said that Bill Gray is no Christian, that he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing & you are that same wolf but with evil in your soul.
If you really believe yourself to be a Christian, you better get that Bible out & start studying it with your heart instead of that damaged, sick brain you have.
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Sez Ex:
Deep,
If anything in the article is true then Hitchens was a contridiction in his own terms. I find nothing commendable in that.
Hitchens was nothing if not consistent. See, Ex, I have no stock in Hitchens, Inc., it's just that his point of view is superior to the religious one. Hitchens used logic, reason, and evidence much, much more consistently that anyone with whom he crossed swords who could only rely on the demonstrably false prattlings of ancient shepherds.
Hitch simply viewed the arguments for religion in the same light, and with the same judiciousness, as he would arguments about any other human endeavor. He found those arguments farcical, as indeed they are.
Hitch loathed tyranny of all sorts, whether it be the tyranny of a Saddam Hussein or the tyranny of manipulative preachers who prey on the vulnerability of we animals who know we're going to die. I can understand why you disliked him, but he was utterly consistent.
DF
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He said his favorite miracle of Jesus was wehen he turned water into wine. That belies that he believed in some credibility of the scriptures. If it's true, then all his socalled wisdom and intellect as you put it, was phoney.
You must be kidding. Irony was Hitch's stock in trade.
DF
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must be rotten fruit laying on the ground no one wants.
----------------------------
I'm the one stepping over your rotten droppings picking all the low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only in your deluded atheist world. Deep Fat and robustus were smart enough to see they were licked, only you are dumb enough to believe you still have a chance to win an argument that is over.
Ex, when you actually put forth an argument, then perhaps robustus and I will be licked, but so far, all you've done is parrot a perverted party line from a fundamentalist interpretation of an ancient collection of fairy tales.
The Bible is work of flawed humans, as evidenced by its fictional histories, flawed science, and failure to mention most of the essential features of the universe. It's been edited, translated, redacted, rewritten, and co-opted by charlatans and demagogues since its suspicious beginning. It is in no way a blueprint for a decent, benevolent, meaningful life. It it, however, a collection of miseries, superstitions, hatreds, immoralities, mythologies, and manipulations of our human recognition of death.
when you can demonstrate something true, moral, and uplifting about your book, then you will at least have an argument. We're all waiting. So far, you've posted squat.
DF
Deep, the civilized world disagrees with you and Adot if you are his proxy
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Sez Ex:
Deep,
If anything in the article is true then Hitchens was a contridiction in his own terms. I find nothing commendable in that.
Hitchens was nothing if not consistent. See, Ex, I have no stock in Hitchens, Inc., it's just that his point of view is superior to the religious one. Hitchens used logic, reason, and evidence much, much more consistently that anyone with whom he crossed swords who could only rely on the demonstrably false prattlings of ancient shepherds.
Hitch simply viewed the arguments for religion in the same light, and with the same judiciousness, as he would arguments about any other human endeavor. He found those arguments farcical, as indeed they are.
Hitch loathed tyranny of all sorts, whether it be the tyranny of a Saddam Hussein or the tyranny of manipulative preachers who prey on the vulnerability of we animals who know we're going to die. I can understand why you disliked him, but he was utterly consistent.
DF
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He said his favorite miracle of Jesus was wehen he turned water into wine. That belies that he believed in some credibility of the scriptures. If it's true, then all his socalled wisdom and intellect as you put it, was phoney.
You must be kidding. Irony was Hitch's stock in trade.
DF
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So you have no stock in hitchens inc. but you certainly come running to defend him. So you like to pick out the irony or hypocrisy of the Godly, but when it comes to your man, you want to give him credit for irony?
No i don't think so, hitchens was about to die and he knew better start having a little respect for this God he's been blaspheming. That's the total reason for the article, to put hitchens in the light of someone finally getting close to his humanity.
Originally Posted by semiannualchick:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
In the end God got his man. Throat cancer. Whoda thunk it. The very thing he used against God is the thing that sent him to Hell.
__________________
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
man does many things to cause cancer, as you very well know. Most of the cancer is from man made sources. You want to blame all cancer on God. that's the cowards way out because then it allows you not to think. Since God has all things at his disposal is also perfectly capable of smiting people with various diseases as he very well has. Cancer would only be one of many.
_________________
You’re talking out of both sides of your mouth & you’re too full of vindictiveness & hate for your fellow human beings to give a decent reply that makes any sense but I’m going to ask anyway. You say God gave Hitchens cancer, that He got “his man” as though God hated Hitchens.
THEN you say man does things to cause cancer, that Jenn wants to blame it all on God. YOU are the one that opened that can of worms. How can God give cancer to one man but not others? He picks & chooses who He gives it to & who He doesn’t? Maybe gives it to those He believes to be evil & who isn’t?
If that’s the case, you better keep an eye on your health. God just might choose to slap you with cancer & get you since you are the very definition of evil. If I had any faith at all in the things you say, then you would be confirming what I think much of the time about God & who He “gets” & who He doesn’t.
You say God has all things at his disposal & perfectly capable of smiting people with various diseases, but I’ve been told by many people on this forum that God doesn’t work that way. So which is it?
I’ve always said that Bill Gray is no Christian, that he is a wolf in sheep’s clothing & you are that same wolf but with evil in your soul.
If you really believe yourself to be a Christian, you better get that Bible out & start studying it with your heart instead of that damaged, sick brain you have.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It's no wonder you don't understand, this is an adult conversation..... That leaves you out.
Originally Posted by Not Shallow Not Slim:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
Extra, you don't have an "argument". Sorry pal, you're just low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Then you must be rotten fruit laying on the ground no one wants.
----------------------------
I'm the one stepping over your rotten droppings picking all the low hanging fruit.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Only in your deluded atheist world. Deep Fat and robustus were smart enough to see they were licked, only you are dumb enough to believe you still have a chance to win an argument that is over.
Ex, when you actually put forth an argument, then perhaps robustus and I will be licked, but so far, all you've done is parrot a perverted party line from a fundamentalist interpretation of an ancient collection of fairy tales.
The Bible is work of flawed humans, as evidenced by its fictional histories, flawed science, and failure to mention most of the essential features of the universe. It's been edited, translated, redacted, rewritten, and co-opted by charlatans and demagogues since its suspicious beginning. It is in no way a blueprint for a decent, benevolent, meaningful life. It it, however, a collection of miseries, superstitions, hatreds, immoralities, mythologies, and manipulations of our human recognition of death.
when you can demonstrate something true, moral, and uplifting about your book, then you will at least have an argument. We're all waiting. So far, you've posted squat.
DF
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Deep, you have admitted that science teaches lies and that you teach lies. You have admitted that much of the "science" taught right now, will be revealed to be lies.
Now you want to take these "lies" taught by science and use them to disprove the Bible. i think not.
Originally Posted by O No!:
Extra says: "Look, if you don't like the way God runs his universe, take it up with him. I have a feeling he doesn't care what you think though."
There, right THERE, we have an example of why Extra is either NOT a Christian, or else he is displeasing God. To pronounce that God doesn't care what Jen thinks only proves it.
For your information, Extra, God cares a LOT about what ALL of us think. If He didn't, he wouldn't care if any of us loved Him. He wouldn't care if any of us were saved. Those who already have a relationship with Him don't have to "think" if we are truly His children - we put our lives, our thoughts and our actions in His hands.
<address>And those who don't have a relationship with Him are the ones He is MOST concerned about what they think. He wants them to think of Him and come to know Him. God is in the business of saving souls, and just like a businessperson, it is the customers whom you HAVEN'T had in your store yet that you want to reach. (And I'll tell you something - you don't gain new customers by telling them they are already da m ned.)</address>
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trust me, he isn't losing any sleep if people disagree with him. Rev 22:15 "For without are dogs, and sorcerers, and *****mongers, and murderers, and idolators, and whosoever loveth and maketh a lie".
Don't sound as if God will lose sleep that these people won't make it in. Yes God loves us and cares for us, but he demands WE change, he isn't going to change to win our affection. If you don't want him, he is willing to let you have it your way.
Exodus 20:5-6 "Visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me. And showing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments."
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
To understand the context of the quote, which is a joke, one would have to know that Hitchens was a very famously devout imbiber. Of course his favorite Bible miracle was the turning of water into wine.
There is no contradiction. Few people have ever had the contempt and repulsion to the Abrahamic religions as did Christopher Hitchens.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed. it's too bad he didn't ever do as he promised and go to Iran and the middle east to free them from their religious wickedness. I guess it was just that they didn't have enough Johnny Walker whiskey, fine food, or just that it is safer picking on Christians in America. Maybe all three.
Stop the ignorance. You know very little and presume a lot. How do you know he didn't spend plenty of time in the Middle East? How do you know that he didn't rail, even more fiercely, against Islam? Why do you ignorantly assume that he and other atheists only pick on Christians? Get over your pity party and do some research before you type.
AUDIENCE MEMBER 6: Mr. Hitchens, you are likely the world’s most charming, roguish, and enlightened atheist and I love you for that but as a Sufi Muslim I’m very ruffled by the title of your book. Of all the titles you likely had at your disposal did you have to settle for the literal negation of “Allah akbar”?
HITCHENS: Yes.
MODERATOR: Thank you for that question. Thank you. It’s a very good question and I’m glad. I wanted to go back to it. Why?
HITCHENS: As I said, I think that all religions are wrong in the same way in that they privilege faith over reason but they’re not all equally bad in the same way all the time. I mean if I had been writing in the 1930s I would certainly have said that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous religion in the world because of its open alliance with fascism and anti-Semitism, which—the damage from that our culture has never recovered from and never will but at the moment it’s very clear to me that most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form, the horrible idea of wanting to end up with Sharia, with a religion-governed state (a state of religious law) and that the best means of getting there is jihad (holy war) and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense and…
MODERATOR: But the entirety? In its entirety?
HITCHENS: In its entirety. The idea that God speaks to some illiterate merchant warlord in Arabia and he’s able to write this down perfectly and it contains the answers to all human—don’t waste my time, it’s bull****.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So WHERE was Hitchen's when he said those things?
And by the way. I don't presume anything, I know. Contrary to you who hasn't got a clue about what your talking about.
Good to hear. Since you know with such certainty before you type please share your sources of knowledge as to the limits of Hitchens' travels and activity abroad. After all, I am clueless and in humble need of educated correction. Proceed.
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
To understand the context of the quote, which is a joke, one would have to know that Hitchens was a very famously devout imbiber. Of course his favorite Bible miracle was the turning of water into wine.
There is no contradiction. Few people have ever had the contempt and repulsion to the Abrahamic religions as did Christopher Hitchens.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed. it's too bad he didn't ever do as he promised and go to Iran and the middle east to free them from their religious wickedness. I guess it was just that they didn't have enough Johnny Walker whiskey, fine food, or just that it is safer picking on Christians in America. Maybe all three.
Stop the ignorance. You know very little and presume a lot. How do you know he didn't spend plenty of time in the Middle East? How do you know that he didn't rail, even more fiercely, against Islam? Why do you ignorantly assume that he and other atheists only pick on Christians? Get over your pity party and do some research before you type.
AUDIENCE MEMBER 6: Mr. Hitchens, you are likely the world’s most charming, roguish, and enlightened atheist and I love you for that but as a Sufi Muslim I’m very ruffled by the title of your book. Of all the titles you likely had at your disposal did you have to settle for the literal negation of “Allah akbar”?
HITCHENS: Yes.
MODERATOR: Thank you for that question. Thank you. It’s a very good question and I’m glad. I wanted to go back to it. Why?
HITCHENS: As I said, I think that all religions are wrong in the same way in that they privilege faith over reason but they’re not all equally bad in the same way all the time. I mean if I had been writing in the 1930s I would certainly have said that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous religion in the world because of its open alliance with fascism and anti-Semitism, which—the damage from that our culture has never recovered from and never will but at the moment it’s very clear to me that most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form, the horrible idea of wanting to end up with Sharia, with a religion-governed state (a state of religious law) and that the best means of getting there is jihad (holy war) and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense and…
MODERATOR: But the entirety? In its entirety?
HITCHENS: In its entirety. The idea that God speaks to some illiterate merchant warlord in Arabia and he’s able to write this down perfectly and it contains the answers to all human—don’t waste my time, it’s bull****.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So WHERE was Hitchen's when he said those things?
And by the way. I don't presume anything, I know. Contrary to you who hasn't got a clue about what your talking about.
Good to hear. Since you know with such certainty before you type please share your sources of knowledge as to the limits of Hitchens' travels and activity abroad. After all, I am clueless and in humble need of educated correction. Proceed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed, now you are moving the goal posts.
Now you post an exchange between hitchens and a supposed muslim with the intention of leading us all to believe that hitch went to the middle east and stared down the muslim hordes.
Out with it, give us the dates and places he went and debated the muslims.
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
To understand the context of the quote, which is a joke, one would have to know that Hitchens was a very famously devout imbiber. Of course his favorite Bible miracle was the turning of water into wine.
There is no contradiction. Few people have ever had the contempt and repulsion to the Abrahamic religions as did Christopher Hitchens.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed. it's too bad he didn't ever do as he promised and go to Iran and the middle east to free them from their religious wickedness. I guess it was just that they didn't have enough Johnny Walker whiskey, fine food, or just that it is safer picking on Christians in America. Maybe all three.
Stop the ignorance. You know very little and presume a lot. How do you know he didn't spend plenty of time in the Middle East? How do you know that he didn't rail, even more fiercely, against Islam? Why do you ignorantly assume that he and other atheists only pick on Christians? Get over your pity party and do some research before you type.
AUDIENCE MEMBER 6: Mr. Hitchens, you are likely the world’s most charming, roguish, and enlightened atheist and I love you for that but as a Sufi Muslim I’m very ruffled by the title of your book. Of all the titles you likely had at your disposal did you have to settle for the literal negation of “Allah akbar”?
HITCHENS: Yes.
MODERATOR: Thank you for that question. Thank you. It’s a very good question and I’m glad. I wanted to go back to it. Why?
HITCHENS: As I said, I think that all religions are wrong in the same way in that they privilege faith over reason but they’re not all equally bad in the same way all the time. I mean if I had been writing in the 1930s I would certainly have said that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous religion in the world because of its open alliance with fascism and anti-Semitism, which—the damage from that our culture has never recovered from and never will but at the moment it’s very clear to me that most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form, the horrible idea of wanting to end up with Sharia, with a religion-governed state (a state of religious law) and that the best means of getting there is jihad (holy war) and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense and…
MODERATOR: But the entirety? In its entirety?
HITCHENS: In its entirety. The idea that God speaks to some illiterate merchant warlord in Arabia and he’s able to write this down perfectly and it contains the answers to all human—don’t waste my time, it’s bull****.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So WHERE was Hitchen's when he said those things?
And by the way. I don't presume anything, I know. Contrary to you who hasn't got a clue about what your talking about.
Good to hear. Since you know with such certainty before you type please share your sources of knowledge as to the limits of Hitchens' travels and activity abroad. After all, I am clueless and in humble need of educated correction. Proceed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed, now you are moving the goal posts.
Now you post an exchange between hitchens and a supposed muslim with the intention of leading us all to believe that hitch went to the middle east and stared down the muslim hordes.
Out with it, give us the dates and places he went and debated the muslims.
==
Not at all. I think that, "I don't presume anything, I know. Contrary to you who hasn't got a clue about what your talking about." Is the boldest and most provable statement you've made, and requires the most attention since it sets up your credibility for all the rest. Are you willing to back up your assertions or not?
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
Originally Posted by Extra-260:
Originally Posted by A. Robustus:
To understand the context of the quote, which is a joke, one would have to know that Hitchens was a very famously devout imbiber. Of course his favorite Bible miracle was the turning of water into wine.
There is no contradiction. Few people have ever had the contempt and repulsion to the Abrahamic religions as did Christopher Hitchens.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed. it's too bad he didn't ever do as he promised and go to Iran and the middle east to free them from their religious wickedness. I guess it was just that they didn't have enough Johnny Walker whiskey, fine food, or just that it is safer picking on Christians in America. Maybe all three.
Stop the ignorance. You know very little and presume a lot. How do you know he didn't spend plenty of time in the Middle East? How do you know that he didn't rail, even more fiercely, against Islam? Why do you ignorantly assume that he and other atheists only pick on Christians? Get over your pity party and do some research before you type.
AUDIENCE MEMBER 6: Mr. Hitchens, you are likely the world’s most charming, roguish, and enlightened atheist and I love you for that but as a Sufi Muslim I’m very ruffled by the title of your book. Of all the titles you likely had at your disposal did you have to settle for the literal negation of “Allah akbar”?
HITCHENS: Yes.
MODERATOR: Thank you for that question. Thank you. It’s a very good question and I’m glad. I wanted to go back to it. Why?
HITCHENS: As I said, I think that all religions are wrong in the same way in that they privilege faith over reason but they’re not all equally bad in the same way all the time. I mean if I had been writing in the 1930s I would certainly have said that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous religion in the world because of its open alliance with fascism and anti-Semitism, which—the damage from that our culture has never recovered from and never will but at the moment it’s very clear to me that most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form, the horrible idea of wanting to end up with Sharia, with a religion-governed state (a state of religious law) and that the best means of getting there is jihad (holy war) and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense and…
MODERATOR: But the entirety? In its entirety?
HITCHENS: In its entirety. The idea that God speaks to some illiterate merchant warlord in Arabia and he’s able to write this down perfectly and it contains the answers to all human—don’t waste my time, it’s bull****.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So WHERE was Hitchen's when he said those things?
And by the way. I don't presume anything, I know. Contrary to you who hasn't got a clue about what your talking about.
Good to hear. Since you know with such certainty before you type please share your sources of knowledge as to the limits of Hitchens' travels and activity abroad. After all, I am clueless and in humble need of educated correction. Proceed.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes indeed, now you are moving the goal posts.
Now you post an exchange between hitchens and a supposed muslim with the intention of leading us all to believe that hitch went to the middle east and stared down the muslim hordes.
Out with it, give us the dates and places he went and debated the muslims.
==
Not at all. I think that, "I don't presume anything, I know. Contrary to you who hasn't got a clue about what your talking about." Is the boldest and most provable statement you've made, and requires the most attention since it sets up your credibility for all the rest. Are you willing to back up your assertions or not?
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is you who made the assertion. You claimed that hitchens went to the middle east and stared down the muslim hordes. Now pony up with the evidence. Or are you like Deep and all your other atheistic friends on this who are willing to bend the truth to make yourself look good.
It is you who made the assertion. You claimed that hitchens went to the middle east and stared down the muslim hordes. Now pony up with the evidence. Or are you like Deep and all your other atheistic friends on this who are willing to bend the truth to make yourself look good.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
You keep posting that. Bend what truth? Can you show me where he made that claim? Are you saying the claim was made on this thread, or where? You have no idea where hitchens went or what he did. I have no idea where he went. I never claimed I did and can't find where AR did either. You get way more torn up about the "muslim hordes" than atheists ever have, so when are you going to go "stare them down"? You're just like bill, you make claims when you have no idea of the truth, and when you get backed into a corner you just ignore questions or "claim victory".
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
It is you who made the assertion. You claimed that hitchens went to the middle east and stared down the muslim hordes. Now pony up with the evidence. Or are you like Deep and all your other atheistic friends on this who are willing to bend the truth to make yourself look good.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
You keep posting that. Bend what truth? Can you show me where he made that claim? Are you saying the claim was made on this thread, or where? You have no idea where hitchens went or what he did. I have no idea where he went. I never claimed I did and can't find where AR did either. You get way more torn up about the "muslim hordes" than atheists ever have, so when are you going to go "stare them down"? You're just like bill, you make claims when you have no idea of the truth, and when you get backed into a corner you just ignore questions or "claim victory".
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
He made a statement that said I was ignorant as to whether hitchens aver went to the middle east implying he did. Then he posted a supposed exchange between a muslim and hithcens. Now he can put up or shut up. Give us the link to the verbaL EXCHANGE. Where was it at, what country, what city? Exactly what countries in the middle east did hitchens go to to spread his delusional lies?
It's not that hard to understand. Robustus implied he went. Lets see the evidence.
He made a statement that said I was ignorant as to whether hitchens aver went to the middle east implying he did. Then he posted a supposed exchange between a muslim and hithcens. Now he can put up or shut up. Give us the link to the verbaL EXCHANGE. Where was it at, what country, what city? Exactly what countries in the middle east did hitchens go to to spread his delusional lies?
It's not that hard to understand. Robustus implied he went. Lets see the evidence.
---------------------------------------------
You are ignorant as to whether or not hitchens ever went to the middle east. That is a plain true statement. Is this the "exchange" you're referring to? If it isn't please post the correct one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUDIENCE MEMBER 6: Mr. Hitchens, you are likely the world’s most charming, roguish, and enlightened atheist and I love you for that but as a Sufi Muslim I’m very ruffled by the title of your book. Of all the titles you likely had at your disposal did you have to settle for the literal negation of “Allah akbar”?
HITCHENS: Yes.
MODERATOR: Thank you for that question. Thank you. It’s a very good question and I’m glad. I wanted to go back to it. Why?
HITCHENS: As I said, I think that all religions are wrong in the same way in that they privilege faith over reason but they’re not all equally bad in the same way all the time. I mean if I had been writing in the 1930s I would certainly have said that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous religion in the world because of its open alliance with fascism and anti-Semitism, which—the damage from that our culture has never recovered from and never will but at the moment it’s very clear to me that most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form, the horrible idea of wanting to end up with Sharia, with a religion-governed state (a state of religious law) and that the best means of getting there is jihad (holy war) and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense and…
MODERATOR: But the entirety? In its entirety?
HITCHENS: In its entirety. The idea that God speaks to some illiterate merchant warlord in Arabia and he’s able to write this down perfectly and it contains the answers to all human—don’t waste my time, it’s bull****.
Originally Posted by Bestworking:
He made a statement that said I was ignorant as to whether hitchens aver went to the middle east implying he did. Then he posted a supposed exchange between a muslim and hithcens. Now he can put up or shut up. Give us the link to the verbaL EXCHANGE. Where was it at, what country, what city? Exactly what countries in the middle east did hitchens go to to spread his delusional lies?
It's not that hard to understand. Robustus implied he went. Lets see the evidence.
---------------------------------------------
You are ignorant as to whether or not hitchens ever went to the middle east. That is a plain true statement. Is this the "exchange" you're referring to? If it isn't please post the correct one.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
AUDIENCE MEMBER 6: Mr. Hitchens, you are likely the world’s most charming, roguish, and enlightened atheist and I love you for that but as a Sufi Muslim I’m very ruffled by the title of your book. Of all the titles you likely had at your disposal did you have to settle for the literal negation of “Allah akbar”?
HITCHENS: Yes.
MODERATOR: Thank you for that question. Thank you. It’s a very good question and I’m glad. I wanted to go back to it. Why?
HITCHENS: As I said, I think that all religions are wrong in the same way in that they privilege faith over reason but they’re not all equally bad in the same way all the time. I mean if I had been writing in the 1930s I would certainly have said that the Roman Catholic Church was the most dangerous religion in the world because of its open alliance with fascism and anti-Semitism, which—the damage from that our culture has never recovered from and never will but at the moment it’s very clear to me that most toxic form that religion takes is the Islamic form, the horrible idea of wanting to end up with Sharia, with a religion-governed state (a state of religious law) and that the best means of getting there is jihad (holy war) and that Muslims have a special right to feel aggrieved enough to demand this, I think is absolute obscene wickedness and I think their religion is nonsense and…
MODERATOR: But the entirety? In its entirety?
HITCHENS: In its entirety. The idea that God speaks to some illiterate merchant warlord in Arabia and he’s able to write this down perfectly and it contains the answers to all human—don’t waste my time, it’s bull****.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
That is it, prefaced with this statement. " How do you know he didn't spend plenty of time in the Middle East? How do you know that he didn't rail, even more fiercely, against Islam? "
Hitchens was a self admitted drunk.
A June 2006 profile on Hitchens by NPR stated: "Hitchens is known for his love of cigarettes and alcohol — and his prodigious literary output."[41] However, in late 2007 he gave up smoking, undergoing an epiphany in Madison, Wisconsin.[156] His brother Peter later wrote of his surprise at this decision.[157] It was while writing his memoir Hitch-22 that he resumed smoking cigarettes and continued until his cancer diagnosis. Hitchens admitted to drinking heavily; in 2003 he wrote that his daily intake of alcohol was enough "to kill or stun the average mule", noting that many great writers "did some of their finest work when blotto, smashed, polluted, ****faced, squiffy, whiffled, and three sheets to the wind."[158]