A great article written by a friend of Christopher Hitchens.
I disagreed with Hitchen's views on religion. However, I respect him for the fact that he was able to engage in controversial debates purely with intellect and not emotion.
That's the way it should be.
Replies sorted oldest to newest
A great article written by a friend of Christopher Hitchens.
I disagreed with Hitchen's views on religion. However, I respect him for the fact that he was able to engage in controversial debates purely with intellect and not emotion.
That's the way it should be.
Good article, Nash. If there's one thing Hitch taught me, it's that friends can withstand strong criticism of iffy beliefs. I think this is a basis of our discussions.
DF
Ex, I take it that you show appropriate respect for Hitch for his ability to deliver sharp, nuanced, poignant, ironic, and erudite challenges to your faith. You have my respect if I'm correct.
DF
Ex, I take it that you show appropriate respect for Hitch for his ability to deliver sharp, nuanced, poignant, ironic, and erudite challenges to your faith. You have my respect if I'm correct.
DF
Deep,
If anything in the article is true then Hitchens was a contridiction in his own terms. I find nothing commendable in that.
Ex, I take it that you show appropriate respect for Hitch for his ability to deliver sharp, nuanced, poignant, ironic, and erudite challenges to your faith. You have my respect if I'm correct.
DF
_______________________
Extra has no respect for anyone. I don't think he knows what the word means & he doesn't deserve your respect. 
Ex, I take it that you show appropriate respect for Hitch for his ability to deliver sharp, nuanced, poignant, ironic, and erudite challenges to your faith. You have my respect if I'm correct.
DF
_______________________
Extra has no respect for anyone. I don't think he knows what the word means & he doesn't deserve your respect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have more respect for Deep and hitchens than you. I have no respect for you. At least their point of view is rooted in some rationale, your is just rooted in hatred.
Ex, I take it that you show appropriate respect for Hitch for his ability to deliver sharp, nuanced, poignant, ironic, and erudite challenges to your faith. You have my respect if I'm correct.
DF
_______________________
Extra has no respect for anyone. I don't think he knows what the word means & he doesn't deserve your respect.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I have more respect for Deep and hitchens than you. I have no respect for you. At least their point of view is rooted in some rationale, your is just rooted in hatred. You have no original thought, you only cheer anything that's against God.
A great article written by a friend of Christopher Hitchens.
I disagreed with Hitchen's views on religion. However, I respect him for the fact that he was able to engage in controversial debates purely with intellect and not emotion.
That's the way it should be.
Good article, Nash. If there's one thing Hitch taught me, it's that friends can withstand strong criticism of iffy beliefs. I think this is a basis of our discussions.
DF
______________
Agreed. A good debate doesn't necessarily end with a winner and loser, but with both parties knowing how to put the issue to the side and having a friendly drink afterwards.
nash dude was the clear winner over DF
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
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.
Gee, I have some "favorite parts" of the harry potter stories. So using your logic that means I believe in wizards.
Gee, I have some "favorite parts" of the harry potter stories. So using your logic that means I believe in wizards.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But you don't stump all over the country in debates and writng books calling harry potter "ultimate wickedness" and telling people they need to be freed from it's false hoods. Hitchens did exactly that with regards to the Bible, making alot of money in the process. So we can conclude that hitchens was no better than the phoney evangelists he claimed to despise so much.
Gee, I have some "favorite parts" of the harry potter stories. So using your logic that means I believe in wizards.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But you don't stump all over the country in debates and writng books calling harry potter "ultimate wickedness" and telling people they need to be freed from it's false hoods. Hitchens did exactly that with regards to the Bible, making alot of money in the process. So we can conclude that hitchens was no better than the phoney evangelists he claimed to despise so much.
--------------------------------------
I think the bible is phooey but if pressed I might could come up with one story I thought was OK in there. That's all he did. No, you most certainly can't claim that about him and your trying makes you look even goofier than usual.
Gee, I have some "favorite parts" of the harry potter stories. So using your logic that means I believe in wizards.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But you don't stump all over the country in debates and writng books calling harry potter "ultimate wickedness" and telling people they need to be freed from it's false hoods. Hitchens did exactly that with regards to the Bible, making alot of money in the process. So we can conclude that hitchens was no better than the phoney evangelists he claimed to despise so much.
--------------------------------------
I think the bible is phooey but if pressed I might could come up with one story I thought was OK in there. That's all he did. No, you most certainly can't claim that about him and your trying makes you look even goofier than usual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His favorite story in the Bible was a miracle of Jesus.
Gee, I have some "favorite parts" of the harry potter stories. So using your logic that means I believe in wizards.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But you don't stump all over the country in debates and writng books calling harry potter "ultimate wickedness" and telling people they need to be freed from it's false hoods. Hitchens did exactly that with regards to the Bible, making alot of money in the process. So we can conclude that hitchens was no better than the phoney evangelists he claimed to despise so much.
--------------------------------------
I think the bible is phooey but if pressed I might could come up with one story I thought was OK in there. That's all he did. No, you most certainly can't claim that about him and your trying makes you look even goofier than usual.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
His favorite story in the Bible was a miracle of Jesus.
-----------------------------------------
So what extra? That didn't mean he believed it. You really need to think before you post. That argument won't even fly with the most die hard godbots.
I have a favorite car, a favoite color, favorite book, favorite restaurant, favorite friends, favorite food,... ect.
All of these statements imply a favorable view above all others. Hitchens said that the story of the miracle of Jesus was his "favorite story", this after saying he was trying to save the world from this "ultimate wickedness". These two statements of hitchens are irreconcilable. We can only conclude that hitchens only took his position as an argument with which he milked to his personal financial benefit.
And I could say that my "favorite" post by you was one of those "9/11 was an inside job" posts. Doesn't mean I agree with your insane ravings. It just means I think it was your funniest.
I'm one of those "Godbots" Jen was referring to, and she's right, your argument doesn't fly with me, any more than it would fly with ANYONE who had even a trifling knowledge of LOGIC.
I have a favorite car, a favoite color, favorite book, favorite restaurant, favorite friends, favorite food,... ect.
All of these statements imply a favorable view above all others. Hitchens said that the story of the miracle of Jesus was his "favorite story", this after saying he was trying to save the world from this "ultimate wickedness". These two statements of hitchens are irreconcilable. We can only conclude that hitchens only took his position as an argument with which he milked to his personal financial benefit.
--------------------------------------
Link? He didn't say it was his favorite story meaning above all else. He meant in the bible. Like I said, I could come up with a "favorite" story from the bible if ask, and I can assure you I think it's fiction. I have a favorite story from stephen kings short stories and I certainly don't believe in werewolves, vampires, killer clowns, killer cars etc.
And I could say that my "favorite" post by you was one of those "9/11 was an inside job" posts. Doesn't mean I agree with your insane ravings. It just means I think it was your funniest.
I'm one of those "Godbots" Jen was referring to, and she's right, your argument doesn't fly with me, any more than it would fly with ANYONE who had even a trifling knowledge of LOGIC.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But none of my posts are your favorite. He said that was his "favorite miracle". Call yourself what you will, I call you a apostate heretic who loves the adoration of men more than that of God.
Killer clowns!!!
Maybe Hitchens DID believe, somewhere deep inside - I don't believe in Killer clowns either, but every once in a while when I'm brushing my teeth, I back away from the sink. 
I have a favorite car, a favoite color, favorite book, favorite restaurant, favorite friends, favorite food,... ect.
All of these statements imply a favorable view above all others. Hitchens said that the story of the miracle of Jesus was his "favorite story", this after saying he was trying to save the world from this "ultimate wickedness". These two statements of hitchens are irreconcilable. We can only conclude that hitchens only took his position as an argument with which he milked to his personal financial benefit.
--------------------------------------
Link? He didn't say it was his favorite story meaning above all else. He meant in the bible. Like I said, I could come up with a "favorite" story from the bible if ask, and I can assure you I think it's fiction. I have a favorite story from stephen kings short stories and I certainly don't believe in werewolves, vampires, killer clowns, killer cars etc.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Once again, from the top, hitchens said that the Bible and Christianity was an "ultimate wickedness", his words not mine, then said Jesus's miracle was his favorite miracle.
Now I believe Harry potter books are about witchcraft. Since I think witchcraft is a heinous sin, I don't read them. Even if I did, I would never say that any part of it was a favorite of mine in any way.
Sorry that comprehension is not one of your strengths.
And you know what, Extra? I think you are scarier than killer clowns! I hope you don't own a gun because you are so obviously unstable that anyone who crosses you just might be in danger. Get help before it's too late.
From the article.
"The second chapter of John’s Gospel was on the agenda: The wedding at Cana where Jesus turned water into wine. “That is my favorite miracle,” Hitch quipped."
That statement is irreconcilable with calling Christianity and the Bible "Ultimate Wickedness".
And you know what, Extra? I think you are scarier than killer clowns! I hope you don't own a gun because you are so obviously unstable that anyone who crosses you just might be in danger. Get help before it's too late.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I actually own many guns. I'm a big fan of sport shooting and hunting. The only thing I'm a danger to is deer, and they laugh at me all the time. I haven;t killed one in five years.
From the article.
"The second chapter of John’s Gospel was on the agenda: The wedding at Cana where Jesus turned water into wine. “That is my favorite miracle,” Hitch quipped."
That statement is irreconcilable with calling Christianity and the Bible "Ultimate Wickedness".
___________________________________________________________________________
OK, one time, and I'll type slowly. Hitchens was making a JOKE, because he likes WINE. That's why the interviewer said he "quipped". Look up the word and maybe you'll finally understand.
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.
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.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So he was an irreverent drunk.
Precisely the reason he should be regarded with contempt and repulsion.
The man had so much ability and wit to spare that he needed to handicap himself to give the appearance of a fair tussle. He was better on a bad day than most of his capable opponents on a good day.
btw, don't think I didn't notice that you switched the goal posts. As you were.
Extra, now you call him a drunk? LOL! Dude, you are pitiful.
The man had so much ability and wit to spare that he needed to handicap himself to give the appearance of a fair tussle. He was better on a bad day than most of his capable opponents on a good day.
btw, don't think I didn't notice that you switched the goal posts. As you were.
Maybe you are right, he didn't ever doubt his atheistic beliefs. He's a true believer now for sure.
And I didn't move the goal posts, I take it that he was trying to show some respectful attitude in the presence of his Christian friend. As I said, if that was the case then he was compromising all of his historical stands of record. It doesn't matter how you slice it, the statement is a contradiction. To call the Bible and Christianity "ultimate wickedness" it is then hypocritical to refer to any portion of scripture as a favorite.
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.
To call the Bible and Christianity "ultimate wickedness" it is then hypocritical to refer to any portion of scripture as a favorite.
-----------------
Only to you extra, only to you.
To call the Bible and Christianity "ultimate wickedness" it is then hypocritical to refer to any portion of scripture as a favorite.
-----------------
Only to you extra, only to you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well maybe I just have to drink Johnny Walker whiskey to understand the statement.
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****.
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.
How do you know he didn't spend plenty of time in the Middle East?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So give us the dates and places he held these kind of debates in Iran, Syria, Saudi Arabia, and Isreal. Those are places he specifically claimed he wanted to go.
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.
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?
