theses religous nuts have the most stupid post! they only watch theses videos cause they know the truth, and just wanna see how it is when logic comes into play!
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
To me its comical that Christians attack people like Hitchins, and yet they miss the gorilla in the room that is wearing a cross.
Never question much less confront nor attack things like Columbus Day total silence on that, the veneration of a man and men that committed such genocidal cruel perversions while carrying the cross and that is only one chapter of their history of infamy that I wont get into here for lack of space.
Do they really think ignoring is good policy like it will go away ?
@selenadelos Their own ignoble savage brutish behaviors of their churches and fellow believers, did them in my meager opinion more damage then a million Hitchens and Dawkins could do in ten lifetimes.
@selenadelos Jesus never condoned genocide, all you atheists do is point to those individuals who claim Christianity and commit acts you don't like and use that as your foundation to attack Christianity. What words or actions did Jesus Christ do that you believe is bad?
@timcp1 This is not about Jesus Christ! No one even knows if this Jesus actually existed! And if he did, he'd probably never done any of these fanciness that is stated in the Bible. Now, people follow religion to some point where they even burn people who are against it. Inquisition in Europe is past but in Kenya, Christians still burn people accused for witchcraft. And don't come arguing that Communism killed hundreds of million: I don't like communism at all nor most atheists out there!
"They got their name from Christ, who was executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. That checked the pernicious superstition for a short time, but it broke out afresh--not only in Judea, where the plague first arose, but in Rome itself, where all the horrible and shameful things in the world collect and find a home."
@timcp1 This reference is to early Christians. At this time, the name "Jesus" was common among the Jews. The Romans persecuted Jews, specially those who claimed to be the messiah. At that time, lots of them claimed to be the messiah and lots were killed by the Romans. Still no evidences for one that really was really special.
@timcp1 "...depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire..." Matthew 25:40. Introducing the concept of eternal punishment of the dead and with it the idea of modern totalitarianism. So that's one. Then there's the idea of vicarious redemption whereby you can abrogate your own ethical responsibility by piling your sins onto a human scapegoat and have them expunged by means of a vicious and disgusting human sacrifice that you didn't want and had no say in and would have prevented if you could.
@abuliberalee Yet humans give each other two or three life sentences. Even though life expectancy isn't even that long. They throw prisoners in with bigger tougher prisoners where rape and murder and torture take place. Corruption becomes rampant and wardens turn a blind eye. Yet hey, you keep shoveling your tax dollars to them. Yet, Jesus walked the walk and talked the talk and gave you a free gift if you should want it. You do have a say, yes forgive me or no.
@timcp1 Then there's the tacit endorsement of slavery and the failure to repudiate the Old Testament which most definitely does condone and genocide and actually requires it in several cases.
@abuliberalee Slavery found in the Holy Bible isn't the same type found in early America though. There is a law governing what should happen if a slave so loves his master he wants to live with him forever. Yet, in your mind that is an impossibility, however it happened. So we see that slaves in fact went into the agreement as well. Now with genocide, what God allowed Israel to do to its enemies is nearly less than what their enemies did to each other and wanted to do to Israel.
@andy08s the religion you cling to has no evidence supporting it, and massive evidence against it, if anyone has a disease, it's you. If anyone has a mental illness, it's you. You believe in fairytales with no evidence, and your probably an adult. Christopher Hitchens didn't believe in fairytales. YOUR DELUSIONAL, not us.
This holiday season, hell received two famous people as a hot gift, one of them Kim Jong-Il another is Christopher Hitchens, the world got one more step closer toward freedom from economic grip and rid off one more person infected with disease of atheism.
@jwhite256256 pray for me and ask God to reveal himself like I used to all the time back when I was a theist. It will never happen and it is not because I lack the faith because back then I had plenty of it - it's because there is no God. It's not sad; it's reality.
We will all end up as Mr Hichens has eventually. He no longer has the opportunity to make things right with God. If you believe all the teachings that he has made than I pray that you will forgive religion for the many mistakes it has made in History. I ask that you remember that religion does not equal God or Jesus. Religion is made up of people which are all imperfect regardless of beliefs. Find a way to forgive religion as real religious people have found a way to forgive you for any and all
he doesn't have to make anything right with anyone as he didn't believe in original sin or in deities.. you should respect his right to determine what may or may not happen to him after his death, as you can't offer any tangible proof of any kind that he will have to answer to the deity you believe in - nor should you inflict your belief system onto others, that doesn't equate to morality at all -it's actually an attempt to disregard another persons right to free thought.
Mr.Hitchens, for a man who considers himself secular, why do you continue worshiping Western States? Do you not know that the crap you spout is akin to the crap that imperialists in the 19th and 20th century spouted to justify imperialism?
The two biggest problems I have with Hitchens are:
a) he's not secular. He actually follows a religion called "State worship" .
b) he completely ignores the fact that although religion, just like any other human creation, has flaws, religious institutions and religious people have been the biggest advocates of human rights all over the world.
@seventh77 well, firstly, it is true. Secondly, Hitchens may not pray everyday, but he's is just as fanatical as the people that he calls fanatics.
He has been an apologist for Western Imperialism and considers the United States and other Western nations the "bringers of democracy", who, according to him, have all the right to blow other countries to bits.
@toseeornot2see Religion: Belief in or acknowledgement of some superhuman power or powers (esp. a god or gods) which is typically manifested in obedience, reverence, and worship; such a belief as part of a system defining a code of living, esp. as a means of achieving spiritual or material improvement.
@seventh77 Well, you have taken a very narrow definition of religion to suit your argument. Firstly, there does not need to be a supernatural or god specifically involved to make something a religion. Hitchens, like I have said before, believes that Western Nations have a right to do what they want, even if no one else likes it, based on the fact that they are simply right - no evidence needed. Sounds a lot like belief in god, yes?
@toseeornot2see So if you believe the earth is flat and therefore believe women must be slaves, and I, a person from a different nation than yours, come in and free your women because I know the earth is round, that means I'm just as fanatical as you are? And there are criteria that must be met in order for something to be categorized as a religion. Otherwise, it's a cult (and there are strict criteria that must be met for that as well), or it's simply just opinion.
@seventh77 And I don't believe that the Earth should be flat or any of the things you mentioned.
See that's the problem with you guys. You follow everything that Hitchens says like the Bible. He tells you that Iran has an Islamic government, but he forgets to mention how the United States strangled democracy in that country in the first place.
@toseeornot2see (Continued…) If I think my country can invade your country because you are oppressing your people, that isn't based on faith or some fanatical belief in some superhuman power. I think women should have equal rights with men, not because some god says it should be, but because there is simply no evidence that says women shouldn't. And what is Hitchens right about that has no evidence to back it up?
@seventh77 oh, and to make it clearer for you; British imperialists that came to India held a similar belief that they were coming to India to edify the savages and liberate the oppressed. Is that what happened? no.
@seventh77 "Who says it's my country? I'm in Canada, jackass."
Wow, I am not surprised that you actually read the garbage produced by Hitchens anymore. You made a big argument that was worth...nothing. And then you resort to name calling.
@seventh77 Also, I am not sure if you are aware, but he supported the invasion of Iraq? I am sorry, but did you miss that fact? Time to actually do some research instead of blindly adhering to everything that Hitchens says, yes?
@seventh77 well, I believe that women should have equal rights and people should be guaranteed their rights. But if you think that is the reason why United States and Britain invaded Iraq then you are definitely deluded. See the goal was never to free anyone and the facts would tell you exactly that.
@toseeornot2see Secular: Of or belonging to the present or visible world as distinguished from the eternal or spiritual world; temporal, worldly. One who is engaged in the affairs of the world as distinct from the church; a layman. Basically distinguished from the church and religion, not concerned with spirituality or religion
@toseeornot2see (Continued…) Clearly he IS secular, as "State worship" is not a religion. And could you direct me to your source where Hitchens actually claims Western nations "have all the right to blow other countries to bits"?
abrahamic cults are represented by men in black robes cos they are the bringers of the dark ages
i hope enlightenment from these disgusting cults comes soon
i have never heard such stupid logic in my life than when having a proper conversation with someone who suddenly drops in the most absurd statement about their wanderings in the desert or this god character saying stuff to mohamed
shame on us all for not nipping this in the bud much earlier than now
How can you help but admire a man who has made a career out of simply having an opinion that is more worth-listening-to than the next guy's? What a legend.
There is no evidence that proves OR disproves the existence of god. But there is very strong evidence that suggests religion is man-made. That is more than enough.
what? there definitely is btw, i dont know wich chapter or verse but it definitely says for man to lay with man as he lays with woman is an abomination !!!
@grimysoldja Yes it does say that. It does say that for a man to lay with a man as he lays with a woman is an abomination. Correct. I agree. But it doesn't say the person is an abomination. God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son so that all might be saved. God hates the sin, but loves the sinner and wants ALL people to be made new. Homosexuals have the same access to grace as every other person on the face of the earth.
The Bible says that for a man to lay with a man as he lays with a woman is an abomination. Correct. I agree. But it doesn't say the PERSON is an abomination. God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son so that all might be saved. God hates the sin, but loves the sinner and wants ALL people to be made new. Homosexuals have the same access to grace as every other person on the face of the earth.
@rainbowsandonions The Bible says that for a man to lay with a man as he lays with a woman is an abomination. Correct. I agree. But it doesn't say the PERSON is an abomination. God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son so that all might be saved. God hates the sin, but loves the sinner and wants ALL people to be made new. Homosexuals have the same access to grace as every other person on the face of the earth.
@philipcrawford Does it not see men are not allow sleep with men in the same way they would with women? The act of homosexuality is definetly reduced to an abomiantion
The theme of the Bible and Religion centres around cursedness, murder, sacrifice, blood, blood, blood and torture. Is this not a clue to it's origins?
Hitchens is correct on this fact. Religion is the major reason for wars, hatred and I would add greed. Look at the Inquisition and the Roman Catholic Crusades. The Bible, says, there is only one true faith, so I guess if everybody believed in the same one faith as the Bible says there is, it would alleviate the problem. "Love your neighbor as yourself" "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Now if everybody lived that way, the world would be pretty awesome.
Religion is the purest form of narcissism. It is also the world's oldest form of self-inflicted mental illness. Anyone who thinks they're better off worshipping nonexistent sky-beings should be watched carefully and denied sharp objects.
Hypocrite: Someone who believes in God and thinks people who believe in Bigfoot are lunatics.
This comment has received too many negative votesshow
@DeathToAllReligions By your definition of hypocrite, would you call these people hypocrites too (btw some of them Nobel prize winning physicists): Francis Collins Muhammed Yunus William Daniel Phillips Martin Luther King, Jr. Barack Obama Edgar Mitchell Abdul Sattar Edhi Abdus Salam Joseph H. Taylor, Jr If you do then they may be hypocrites, but you are an idiot.
I doubt he'd deny that. I sure as hell know I'd still call them hypocrites. I also call you a fool for that argument... Just because people have done great things in one aspect doesn't mean they're not entirely deluded in another.
Make sure you include yourself in that list. The very thought of you calling MLK Jr. and William Daniel Phillips a hypocrite shows you are only arguing for the sake of argument.
So, because someone is a great person, they can't be a hypocrite... I'm sure there were areas in Norman Borlaug's life that he was hypocritical, and he's accredited with saving the lives of a billion people. To say that someone can't be deluded is to be deluded yourself. Now, that's not to say that I'm not. I want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible. I know I have my delusions, because everbody does. I just don't know what mine are yet, and mine aren't willful.
Unless you haven't figured it out yet, calling someone a hypocrite is an insult, a demeaning act.
People have different believes, everyone does, they can be deluded in some of their believes regardless of how smart and intelligent they are (like Hitchens being a genius but still supporting Iraq War).
Ted Haggard, Sarah Palin, Mark Sanford, they are hypocrites, not the people I mentioned in the list above, they were simply PEOPLE.
Go read your own comment again, it said hypocrite is someone who believes in god and thinks people that believers of bigfoot are lunatics. Unless English is not your native language, then yes you are a DELUDED idiot.
Always trust your childhood impulses. I went to a Catholic School and I was bizarrely educated to a standard (an example of the paradoxically misplaced confidence in their own institution that they employ clever teachers alongside morons)where by the time I was 12 I realised the RE (religious education) teachers were utter fuckwits. Why? because a guide to life constantly rewritten for 2000 years by people hopelessly less well informed than ourselves will always outstrip rational thought? Groan.
I respect Christopher Hitchens but I just wish he would stop pussy footing around the subject of Judaism. He has no problem attacking Christianity or Islam but you hardly ever hear him say a word about Judaism. In my opinion Judaism is just as much a threat to peace as Islam and Christianity.
I think he doesn't go as hard after them because Judaism doesn't proselytize the way Christianity or Islam does. He does point out all the horrors of the Old Testament and the violence surrounding Israel, even if he doesn't mention them here.
Our god-friends never explain why they have the insuperable urge to stuff everyone else with their personal platters of propoganda. JC-people, you say you're not "of the world"----why you don't live your creed? Moslems, you have a bigshot god (Allah)--why you don't let Allah worry about , uh, "only you"? Why you have to mind everyone else
Isn't Atheism suppose to be tolerant? Yet, Hitchens is promoting treating religion with hatred, intolerance, and contempt. Then he claims it is his right. All the while he calls religion being filled with hatred, this is the plain definition of hypocrisy. He clearly holds a view he himself doesn't uphold.
Atheism is the disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. From there Atheists can and do go anywhere. However your assumption that atheism is supposed to be tolerant is obviously false. That there are a lot of tolerant atheist is true, but it is not always the case. However you are right that he seems hypocritical when he claims that his right.
Hitchens claims that it is his right, because it is his right.
Dont you see your critical mistake?
You have swapped people for ideas, and treated them as equivalent.
It is perfectly fine to treat lies, propaganda, and fraud with hatred and contempt.
It is not moral to tolerate a lie.
The other important detail here is that hitchens is NOT advocating against hatred and contempt in any way. He is simply showing how the real consequences of these "anti-hate" laws will be to reinforce hatred.
Well then religion can claim that same right and Hitchens is guilty of doing the same thing. Religion can then say it is perfectly fine to treat lies, propaganda, and fraud with hatred and contempt.
I know Hitchens is not advocating against hatred and contempt. That's his whole problem! He's advocating the same thing that he says these religions are full of: Hatred and Contempt! That's his hypocrisy. He's saying hatred ridicule and contempt is good under Atheism. Religion can than do the same.
We both agree that hitchens is clearly not advocating against hatred and contempt.
But you still say that he is advocating a double standard.
He is not advocating a double standard!
Religions can be used to justify hatred and contempt, but they should not be protected from hatred and contempt either.
Hitchens is merely trying to drive home the point that censorship of ideas can not realistically achieve the supposed goal of reducing hatred. Censorship is inherently corrupt.
Not specifically in this video. But he's condemned Religion for what he considers hatred and contempt certainly in other videos and interviews. That is his hypocrisy when he then turns and says that he has a right to treat religion with hatred and contempt. He has a view he's not upholding. That's clear.
OK, so then religion can be against hate all the while treating atheism with hate.
Sure, he may have a point. But unfortunately for him, he nearly spent 8:00 minutes of it contradicting himself in hypocrisy all along the way. While if all that he meant to say only took 30 seconds, he should have just stepped up for a half of a minute spoke and then split. He would have been more effective.
When are you going to realize that it is meaningless to be against "hate".
That is like being against love, pain, or pleasure.
And yes he did need to spend the rest of the time supporting his main point, and restating it in different ways, because apparently people still manage too miss it because they are just too thick and full of misleading preconceptions.
He even re-stated his point earlier with the example of the witch prosecuter.
Well then, if he says you can as an atheist treat religion with hatred and contempt, he can't complain when Islam come after him showing him hatred and contempt.
"I think it should be, religion; treated with ridicule, hatred and contempt and I claim that right."--Christopher Hitchens
This is not what Richard Dawkins has said about how to be a moral atheist, which is suppose to be tolerant and altruistic. In fact, this is as contradictory as one can get !!!
I loved Hitchens' comment discribing people from yorkshire as "untakeable", l looked up this word in the dictionary and couldn't find it, l'm sure it's ok though.
Dr Hitchens is a Big-IQ guy, no doubt. Our JC, Jewish, RCC, Moslem (Sonnie, Shy-yte), Hindu, Buhddhist, you name it, are louts, lice. The Moslem Race is heinous, to be sure. Nonetheless, all of these and our Humanist/Species-ist friends have one thing in common:
20,000 year Holocaust vs Non-Human Animals. They are lucky there is no Hell.
One could argue that the Catholic Crusades horrors, would make anyone a Atheist. But, my argument is, it should only make you anti-catholic, and not anti-God.
LENNON010: My, you do have some major issues don't you. You must have a religion, because as Mr. Hitchens would imply, religion is the main source of hatred in the world, and your comment exports total hatred. Who is the hypocrite sir? lol.
Here's one who HASN'T read Freud, or he wouldn't be projecting his propensities on others and telling us where he spends his time on the internet. Man, you're transparent... and disgusting.
Remember Chirs, Saul, who later became Paul, actually killed Christians and delivered them up for presecution, but, later became a Christian. He thought what he was doing was actually approved by God.
Chris you are making a true statement, when you say, that religion and organized religion is the main source of hatred in the World. But, as, I stated, this is false religion, as there is only one true FAITH excepted by God.
what religion would u be talking about, one you made up? because they ALL advocate killings and intolerance at some point. Maybe you have chosen to ignore those parts, doesn't mean they don't exist. Also, every holy book will say there is only one true religion, how deluted do you have to be to really think that yours is actually the only one, logically you make no sense. You say that true faith would not threaten hitchens, and yet you feel the need to defend your beliefs, hypocrite.
There is only one true faith excepted by GOD, MR. HITCHENS. Yes, if all the religions you aspire to in your books, and these were actually excepted by God, I would be a atheist also. But, they are not Mr. Hitchens.
But, Mr. Htichens whole premise can be debunked, if one can validify that there is only one true religion. Without all the religions of the Earth, Christopher Hitchens would not have a complete open forum to rake in Millions of dollars. The perfect con job. This one only true religion could stand the ground with Mr. Hitchens, and completely stumble Mr. Hitchens. As, Mr. Hitchens would be humbled to assert, as the atheist in the foxhole would say, "Please God Save Me."
From what I can see of Hitchens' effect on young, ignorant, impressionable minds, his teachings are becoming a main source of hatred in the world. What a pitiful and pitiable hero these atheists have! An ignorant, befuddled drunk whose every argument can be demolished by lowliest acolyte.
It does, moron. Leviticus 18 and 20. It says fags must be killed. So unless you want us to believe the Bible endorses hatred-free killing, then you just got OWNED!
Am I? To prove me wrong you say the Bible says "fags" must be stoned, and yet Hitchens claims the Bible says "you must HATE fags". So, unless you can show me where the Bible says you must HATE fags---you just got counter-OWNED!
Is that the cue for a change of subject, i.e. whether or not killing can ever be a benevolent action? It takes the Christian virtue of humility to admit when you're wrong. You can't seem to admit you were wrong about the Bible saying you must hate fags without throwing in an ironic quip which seems to be assuming that some proposition, i.e., benevolent killing is indefensible. The first thing you need to do if you want to learn is to admit when you're wrong, that you are is indisputable.
Any reasonable person would agree that if you can't show me where the Bible says you must hate fags then your assertion is wrong, period. Admitting that first, without irony, is your first step in showing how big you are.
Christian virtue of humility.. Ha! How much humility pie did you have to swallow before you made such an outrageously and obviously humble claim? And wile you are at it how humble is it to kill. Do tell us.
I'm not sure what claim you're referring to. I'd be glad to talk to you about humility and killing, but first, shouldn't you admit the Bible doesn't say "you must hate fags"? I will concede the Bible says in the O.T. that certain people were told by God under certain circumstances to stone those who are so confused as to have sex with their same gender.
By the way---who is "us"? I just want to make sure you're not a trinity.
1) Any scripture from the Old Testament has to be viewed in a developmental context. Mankind was in a stage of infancy. Now, if you can imagine humans as a single organism then the death of an individual would equate the loss of a skin cell, which is necessary, this is how we learn if no one had ever died in the name of science we would be in the dark ages. So it took a few skin cells to learn that a sharp object trusted through the human body is fatal.
Exactly!!!!!!! Things are different in modern days, religion was used to explain scientific phenomenon that primature beings could now...end of story. It's not applicable anymore and unevolved humans are the only one's that continue to cling to it.
3) The Old Testament is simply a history book, where we came from; however, it is full of timeless wisdom. The New Testament is where we are going, which outlines a reversion of moral understanding
I have hear that same argument time and over again however. However you have not answered why punishing a child in a manner which is unequivocally the epitome of the opposite of love seems to befit what the god of the New testament is capable of. You claim that it is love but this is not it.. Not by a long shot. You punish a child perspective to what the misdeed was. If a child forsakes you, one should not punish them forever with any wrath. That is the trademark of an unloving tyrant.
.Isaiah 66:24 look Upon the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm does not die, And their fire is not quenched. They shall be an abhorrence" Mark 9:43b better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched 44 where Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched.Jude 1:7as Sodom and Gomorrah, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Here's the complete verse from Jude. It's clear people will be in eteral fire. Their are more if you'd like to see them.
Jude 1:7 (New King James Version)
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
Matthew25;41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand, Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:Matthew 25:45 Then He will answer them, saying, Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me. 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.-GOD makes it very clear.
All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away, there is no one righteous, not even one! "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Isaiah 64:6, Romans 3:10, Luke 6:37
Friend, you are mistaken, cf. Matt. xxv. 41, 42, 46. Jude, 6, 7, 13.
The Bible expresses the duration of the future punishment of the wicked as forcibly as it expresses the duration of the future happiness of the righteous.
First you said that those who arent religious (caring for the sick, poor, orphaned, widowed) will be in hell then you said it will just be those who take the mark of the beast... Now, you can take the mark and be religious according to the definition provided. However, you dont have to be religious and dont have to take the mark will these people be in heaven? The mark is absolute defiance in the face of God. Whereas faltering in not holding absolutely true to the Christian doctrine is human.
Those unbelievers who are represented as the goats in the parable (which means all unbelievers) will burn in torment for all eternity, along with those who take the mark. The mark is going to be around (and therefore be possible to take) only for a very limited window of opportunity.
So there you have it: if you don't live in the time of the mark, your test is whether you believe or not and care for the sick, etc... If you live in the time of the mark your final chance for salvation is before you take the mark; if you take the mark you're doomed. I hope that's all clear now. There is not contradiction at all.
And no! for heaven's sake, you cannot take the mark of the beast and be religious! That is absurd. I thought I was talking to a Christian, now I'm unsure what you are. Look, an unbeliever never, not once in his entire life ever does anything that is not sinful. The very first time that a sinner ever does anything that is not a sin is when they repent and turn to God, before that, morally, it's a total loss.
You can be religious and take the mark! James 1:27 "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." By definition you can be religious and take the mark! I am a Christian. However I understand the problems of the faith.
You fail to recognize the catch 22s in the faith the one of which has to do with the unnamed goats. However this is the biggest one of all!.. That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Romans 10:9, Philippians 2:11
So in your version of hell (again) do people or souls go there for a weekend vacation or what? Most christians I talk too believe the whole "Eternal torment" Believerification is just such an example of another loving christian gone mad with delusion. His interpretation is just as valid as yours or any other religion. The problem is that all religions can't be right, but there is a greater provability that they are all wrong.
No, I dont know how hell works it is absolutely clear. I do believe it is a place of eternal torment, I do believe the fire is eternal. I dont know to an absolute degree the duration of residency. Either I am wrong or he is wrong I dont know and you are absolute right not all doctrine are correct (in another post where you contradicted this one), this is of course one of the problems with the church. However it is based on a finite understanding of scripture.
Speaking of contradictions..so you do believe that hell is a place of eternal torment. Ok well this is one example of the type of intellectual dishonesty I find reprehensible, and why I don't associate myself with any religion. At least you are honest about not knowing how hell works and that is a start, but that still does not account for how you managed to think it is ok for any omniscient loving deity to punish unjustly and eternaly for not believing in him.
Hell was made for Satan and his angles. You are not getting it! It is the lack of belief itself that is the cause of punishment. Just like the train tracks.
No both arguments can be "equally valid" (as in worth the same) however both can't be correct. That does not negate the possibility that they can both be wrong. And I already told you why the train track analogy does not work no matter how many times you try and allude to it. It is distinctly different and pointless to repeat different scenario that does not deal with the topic.
Again with the crazy talk. Stop trying to be so mysterious because what you just wrote makes no sense and had no bearing on anything we were talking about. Are you just bored?
uh well the holy spirit
mrlaoTzu09 1 week ago
theses religous nuts have the most stupid post! they only watch theses videos cause they know the truth, and just wanna see how it is when logic comes into play!
seantildawn1982 3 weeks ago
This has been flagged as spam show
JESUS CHRIST, HIS CATHOLIC-UNIVERSAL-APOSTOLIC CHURCH, SACRAMENTS, THE BIBLE, MIRACLES, HEALINGS, ST. MARY APPARITIONS, MESSAGES FROM HEAVEN, SIGNS IN 2011 ARE NOT A MYTHOLOGY BUT THE REALITY !!!
GET READY FOR THE GREAT WARNING NOW!!!
thewarningsecondcoming . com
JezusSlave 4 weeks ago
To me its comical that Christians attack people like Hitchins, and yet they miss the gorilla in the room that is wearing a cross.
Never question much less confront nor attack things like Columbus Day total silence on that, the veneration of a man and men that committed such genocidal cruel perversions while carrying the cross and that is only one chapter of their history of infamy that I wont get into here for lack of space.
Do they really think ignoring is good policy like it will go away ?
selenadelos 4 weeks ago
@selenadelos Their own ignoble savage brutish behaviors of their churches and fellow believers, did them in my meager opinion more damage then a million Hitchens and Dawkins could do in ten lifetimes.
selenadelos 4 weeks ago
@selenadelos Jesus never condoned genocide, all you atheists do is point to those individuals who claim Christianity and commit acts you don't like and use that as your foundation to attack Christianity. What words or actions did Jesus Christ do that you believe is bad?
timcp1 5 days ago
@timcp1 This is not about Jesus Christ! No one even knows if this Jesus actually existed! And if he did, he'd probably never done any of these fanciness that is stated in the Bible. Now, people follow religion to some point where they even burn people who are against it. Inquisition in Europe is past but in Kenya, Christians still burn people accused for witchcraft. And don't come arguing that Communism killed hundreds of million: I don't like communism at all nor most atheists out there!
amycoopie 5 days ago
@amycoopieacitus Roman Annals (c.115-117 C.E.)
"They got their name from Christ, who was executed by sentence of the procurator Pontius Pilate in the reign of Tiberius. That checked the pernicious superstition for a short time, but it broke out afresh--not only in Judea, where the plague first arose, but in Rome itself, where all the horrible and shameful things in the world collect and find a home."
timcp1 5 days ago
@timcp1 This reference is to early Christians. At this time, the name "Jesus" was common among the Jews. The Romans persecuted Jews, specially those who claimed to be the messiah. At that time, lots of them claimed to be the messiah and lots were killed by the Romans. Still no evidences for one that really was really special.
amycoopie 4 days ago
@timcp1 "...depart from me ye cursed into everlasting fire..." Matthew 25:40. Introducing the concept of eternal punishment of the dead and with it the idea of modern totalitarianism. So that's one. Then there's the idea of vicarious redemption whereby you can abrogate your own ethical responsibility by piling your sins onto a human scapegoat and have them expunged by means of a vicious and disgusting human sacrifice that you didn't want and had no say in and would have prevented if you could.
abuliberalee 3 days ago
@abuliberalee Yet humans give each other two or three life sentences. Even though life expectancy isn't even that long. They throw prisoners in with bigger tougher prisoners where rape and murder and torture take place. Corruption becomes rampant and wardens turn a blind eye. Yet hey, you keep shoveling your tax dollars to them. Yet, Jesus walked the walk and talked the talk and gave you a free gift if you should want it. You do have a say, yes forgive me or no.
timcp1 3 days ago
@timcp1 Then there's the tacit endorsement of slavery and the failure to repudiate the Old Testament which most definitely does condone and genocide and actually requires it in several cases.
abuliberalee 3 days ago
@abuliberalee Slavery found in the Holy Bible isn't the same type found in early America though. There is a law governing what should happen if a slave so loves his master he wants to live with him forever. Yet, in your mind that is an impossibility, however it happened. So we see that slaves in fact went into the agreement as well. Now with genocide, what God allowed Israel to do to its enemies is nearly less than what their enemies did to each other and wanted to do to Israel.
timcp1 3 days ago
@andy08s the religion you cling to has no evidence supporting it, and massive evidence against it, if anyone has a disease, it's you. If anyone has a mental illness, it's you. You believe in fairytales with no evidence, and your probably an adult. Christopher Hitchens didn't believe in fairytales. YOUR DELUSIONAL, not us.
SuperGreenperson 1 month ago 2
This has been flagged as spam show
This holiday season, hell received two famous people as a hot gift, one of them Kim Jong-Il another is Christopher Hitchens, the world got one more step closer toward freedom from economic grip and rid off one more person infected with disease of atheism.
andy08s 1 month ago
Spoken like a gentleman
northoforacle 1 month ago
He is immortal in his work and not in some idiotic made up neverland. A great man and an inspiration.
Kneleist 1 month ago 23
RIP Christopher Hitchens
MrGlennsftmb 1 month ago
I will pray for both of you as well.
Gods bless
jwhite256256 1 month ago
@jwhite256256 pray for me and ask God to reveal himself like I used to all the time back when I was a theist. It will never happen and it is not because I lack the faith because back then I had plenty of it - it's because there is no God. It's not sad; it's reality.
fingerlickingoodism 1 month ago
@jwhite256256 Don't waste your time. Prayer does nothing. Do something constructive instead.
RationalConclusion 1 month ago 5
@jwhite256256 lol
seantildawn1982 3 weeks ago
@jwhite256256 he already convince god he doesnt exist.
kataevans 1 week ago
We will all end up as Mr Hichens has eventually. He no longer has the opportunity to make things right with God. If you believe all the teachings that he has made than I pray that you will forgive religion for the many mistakes it has made in History. I ask that you remember that religion does not equal God or Jesus. Religion is made up of people which are all imperfect regardless of beliefs. Find a way to forgive religion as real religious people have found a way to forgive you for any and all
jwhite256256 1 month ago
@jwhite256256 Your salesmanship in the face of this great mans death is sickening and confirms your immorality.
Crucifuck 1 month ago
@jwhite256256
he doesn't have to make anything right with anyone as he didn't believe in original sin or in deities.. you should respect his right to determine what may or may not happen to him after his death, as you can't offer any tangible proof of any kind that he will have to answer to the deity you believe in - nor should you inflict your belief system onto others, that doesn't equate to morality at all -it's actually an attempt to disregard another persons right to free thought.
oswego22 1 month ago
@jwhite256256
Child, go to a library, because you are a few hundred books short compared to me or the late Christopher Hitchens.
Oh, and take your neurosis with you and stab it in the chest with an imaginary dagger.
d3st88 1 month ago
@jwhite256256 lol
seantildawn1982 3 weeks ago
RIP
jridenoure 1 month ago
R.I.P.
matthewmch 1 month ago
RIP Hitch...you will be greatly missed mate....
MrCOLTSR2 1 month ago
Thus.
airevault 1 month ago
So it goes.
UnBeguiled 1 month ago
Mr.Hitchens, for a man who considers himself secular, why do you continue worshiping Western States? Do you not know that the crap you spout is akin to the crap that imperialists in the 19th and 20th century spouted to justify imperialism?
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
The two biggest problems I have with Hitchens are:
a) he's not secular. He actually follows a religion called "State worship" .
b) he completely ignores the fact that although religion, just like any other human creation, has flaws, religious institutions and religious people have been the biggest advocates of human rights all over the world.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see Regardless of whether your statement is true or not, how is "state worship" not secular, and how is it a religion?
seventh77 1 month ago
@seventh77 well, firstly, it is true. Secondly, Hitchens may not pray everyday, but he's is just as fanatical as the people that he calls fanatics.
He has been an apologist for Western Imperialism and considers the United States and other Western nations the "bringers of democracy", who, according to him, have all the right to blow other countries to bits.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see Religion: Belief in or acknowledgement of some superhuman power or powers (esp. a god or gods) which is typically manifested in obedience, reverence, and worship; such a belief as part of a system defining a code of living, esp. as a means of achieving spiritual or material improvement.
seventh77 1 month ago
@seventh77 Well, you have taken a very narrow definition of religion to suit your argument. Firstly, there does not need to be a supernatural or god specifically involved to make something a religion. Hitchens, like I have said before, believes that Western Nations have a right to do what they want, even if no one else likes it, based on the fact that they are simply right - no evidence needed. Sounds a lot like belief in god, yes?
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see So if you believe the earth is flat and therefore believe women must be slaves, and I, a person from a different nation than yours, come in and free your women because I know the earth is round, that means I'm just as fanatical as you are? And there are criteria that must be met in order for something to be categorized as a religion. Otherwise, it's a cult (and there are strict criteria that must be met for that as well), or it's simply just opinion.
seventh77 1 month ago
@seventh77 And I don't believe that the Earth should be flat or any of the things you mentioned.
See that's the problem with you guys. You follow everything that Hitchens says like the Bible. He tells you that Iran has an Islamic government, but he forgets to mention how the United States strangled democracy in that country in the first place.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see I never said that is actually what you believe. You keep missing my point.
seventh77 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see (Continued…) If I think my country can invade your country because you are oppressing your people, that isn't based on faith or some fanatical belief in some superhuman power. I think women should have equal rights with men, not because some god says it should be, but because there is simply no evidence that says women shouldn't. And what is Hitchens right about that has no evidence to back it up?
seventh77 1 month ago
@seventh77 oh, and to make it clearer for you; British imperialists that came to India held a similar belief that they were coming to India to edify the savages and liberate the oppressed. Is that what happened? no.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@seventh77 Oh, and lastly, no one asked your country to bomb innocent people to "bring democracy" to the region.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see Who says it's my country? I'm in Canada, jackass.
seventh77 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@seventh77 "Who says it's my country? I'm in Canada, jackass."
Wow, I am not surprised that you actually read the garbage produced by Hitchens anymore. You made a big argument that was worth...nothing. And then you resort to name calling.
Bravo, my vacuous friend, bravo.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@seventh77 Also, I am not sure if you are aware, but he supported the invasion of Iraq? I am sorry, but did you miss that fact? Time to actually do some research instead of blindly adhering to everything that Hitchens says, yes?
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see I am aware he supported the war.
seventh77 1 month ago
@seventh77 well, I believe that women should have equal rights and people should be guaranteed their rights. But if you think that is the reason why United States and Britain invaded Iraq then you are definitely deluded. See the goal was never to free anyone and the facts would tell you exactly that.
toseeornot2see 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see I never said that was why the US invaded Iraq.
seventh77 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see Secular: Of or belonging to the present or visible world as distinguished from the eternal or spiritual world; temporal, worldly. One who is engaged in the affairs of the world as distinct from the church; a layman. Basically distinguished from the church and religion, not concerned with spirituality or religion
seventh77 1 month ago
@toseeornot2see (Continued…) Clearly he IS secular, as "State worship" is not a religion. And could you direct me to your source where Hitchens actually claims Western nations "have all the right to blow other countries to bits"?
seventh77 1 month ago
This has been flagged as spam show
I believe we were created from marsh mallows, an inanimate design.
misfitstattoo 2 months ago
abrahamic cults are represented by men in black robes cos they are the bringers of the dark ages
i hope enlightenment from these disgusting cults comes soon
i have never heard such stupid logic in my life than when having a proper conversation with someone who suddenly drops in the most absurd statement about their wanderings in the desert or this god character saying stuff to mohamed
shame on us all for not nipping this in the bud much earlier than now
timewilltell7 2 months ago
How can you help but admire a man who has made a career out of simply having an opinion that is more worth-listening-to than the next guy's? What a legend.
Singebuggercat 2 months ago
Once Oil runs out the mid east will be abandoned.
Algonquin81 2 months ago
There is no evidence that proves OR disproves the existence of god. But there is very strong evidence that suggests religion is man-made. That is more than enough.
heartion 2 years ago
I would go one step further and point out that the lack of evidence for an assertion' warrants its dismissal.
vooooom 2 years ago
@vooooom
I agree. Too bad some people NEED answers to things that no one can possibly know.
heartion 2 years ago
The Bible does not say anything about hating homosexuals.
philipcrawford 2 years ago
what? there definitely is btw, i dont know wich chapter or verse but it definitely says for man to lay with man as he lays with woman is an abomination !!!
grimysoldja 2 years ago
@grimysoldja Yes it does say that. It does say that for a man to lay with a man as he lays with a woman is an abomination. Correct. I agree. But it doesn't say the person is an abomination. God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son so that all might be saved. God hates the sin, but loves the sinner and wants ALL people to be made new. Homosexuals have the same access to grace as every other person on the face of the earth.
philipcrawford 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@philipcrawford
thank god there is no god
timewilltell7 2 months ago
@philipcrawford You obviously haven't read the bible.
TheDmo22222 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The Bible says that for a man to lay with a man as he lays with a woman is an abomination. Correct. I agree. But it doesn't say the PERSON is an abomination. God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son so that all might be saved. God hates the sin, but loves the sinner and wants ALL people to be made new. Homosexuals have the same access to grace as every other person on the face of the earth.
philipcrawford 2 months ago
@philipcrawford urm i think it does. you might wanna go and read your bible again
rainbowsandonions 2 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@rainbowsandonions The Bible says that for a man to lay with a man as he lays with a woman is an abomination. Correct. I agree. But it doesn't say the PERSON is an abomination. God loved the world so much that He gave His one and only Son so that all might be saved. God hates the sin, but loves the sinner and wants ALL people to be made new. Homosexuals have the same access to grace as every other person on the face of the earth.
philipcrawford 2 months ago
@philipcrawford Does it not see men are not allow sleep with men in the same way they would with women? The act of homosexuality is definetly reduced to an abomiantion
moroney1 2 months ago
The theme of the Bible and Religion centres around cursedness, murder, sacrifice, blood, blood, blood and torture. Is this not a clue to it's origins?
MyFeatherstone 2 years ago 2
Hitchens is correct on this fact. Religion is the major reason for wars, hatred and I would add greed. Look at the Inquisition and the Roman Catholic Crusades. The Bible, says, there is only one true faith, so I guess if everybody believed in the same one faith as the Bible says there is, it would alleviate the problem. "Love your neighbor as yourself" "Do unto others as you would have them do unto you." Now if everybody lived that way, the world would be pretty awesome.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago 2
@BikersFromIreland
Well said.
Religion is the purest form of narcissism. It is also the world's oldest form of self-inflicted mental illness. Anyone who thinks they're better off worshipping nonexistent sky-beings should be watched carefully and denied sharp objects.
Hypocrite: Someone who believes in God and thinks people who believe in Bigfoot are lunatics.
DeathToAllReligions 2 years ago 16
This comment has received too many negative votes show
MrBlondeVicVega 2 years ago
@MrBlondeVicVega
I doubt he'd deny that. I sure as hell know I'd still call them hypocrites. I also call you a fool for that argument... Just because people have done great things in one aspect doesn't mean they're not entirely deluded in another.
ReeseAM 2 years ago 2
"entirely deluded"
Make sure you include yourself in that list. The very thought of you calling MLK Jr. and William Daniel Phillips a hypocrite shows you are only arguing for the sake of argument.
MrBlondeVicVega 2 years ago
So, because someone is a great person, they can't be a hypocrite... I'm sure there were areas in Norman Borlaug's life that he was hypocritical, and he's accredited with saving the lives of a billion people. To say that someone can't be deluded is to be deluded yourself. Now, that's not to say that I'm not. I want to believe as many true things and as few false things as possible. I know I have my delusions, because everbody does. I just don't know what mine are yet, and mine aren't willful.
ReeseAM 2 years ago
Unless you haven't figured it out yet, calling someone a hypocrite is an insult, a demeaning act.
People have different believes, everyone does, they can be deluded in some of their believes regardless of how smart and intelligent they are (like Hitchens being a genius but still supporting Iraq War).
Ted Haggard, Sarah Palin, Mark Sanford, they are hypocrites, not the people I mentioned in the list above, they were simply PEOPLE.
MrBlondeVicVega 2 years ago
@MrBlondeVicVega
Are you actually suggesting that those people you listed believe in Bigfoot?
Apparently the subtlety of my point escaped your religion-addled pile of congealed oatmeal where in a normal human a brain would be.
Fuck yourself.
DeathToAllReligions 2 years ago 2
Go read your own comment again, it said hypocrite is someone who believes in god and thinks people that believers of bigfoot are lunatics. Unless English is not your native language, then yes you are a DELUDED idiot.
MrBlondeVicVega 2 years ago
@MrBlondeVicVega
PS: Barak Obama is a FUCKING HUGE hypocrite, and organized superstition has nothing to do with it.
DeathToAllReligions 2 years ago 2
Always trust your childhood impulses. I went to a Catholic School and I was bizarrely educated to a standard (an example of the paradoxically misplaced confidence in their own institution that they employ clever teachers alongside morons)where by the time I was 12 I realised the RE (religious education) teachers were utter fuckwits. Why? because a guide to life constantly rewritten for 2000 years by people hopelessly less well informed than ourselves will always outstrip rational thought? Groan.
KILLERSTROP 6 days ago
Comment removed
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
JC-people worship "Word Made Flesh" as, uh, revealed by human writers.
Humanists worship flesh of human, a priori. Humanism = a religion. It's irrational devotion to Homo Sapien, the ultimate destructor.
lumpagogo 2 years ago
I respect Christopher Hitchens but I just wish he would stop pussy footing around the subject of Judaism. He has no problem attacking Christianity or Islam but you hardly ever hear him say a word about Judaism. In my opinion Judaism is just as much a threat to peace as Islam and Christianity.
AnnaTheAtheist 2 years ago 2
I think he doesn't go as hard after them because Judaism doesn't proselytize the way Christianity or Islam does. He does point out all the horrors of the Old Testament and the violence surrounding Israel, even if he doesn't mention them here.
Echelon030 2 years ago 2
Thats not entirely true. He is always on the case of the "genital mutilation community" which he consideres entirely jewish.
Islam definetly deserve more criticism though, especially after their treatment of salman rushdie or the world trade centers.
Islam IS without doubt a bigger threat to peace than judaism, not because of its dogma but because of its stupid, fanatic adherents.
That said, I would consider all religions as equally fatuous.
automaticSOM 2 years ago
Our god-friends never explain why they have the insuperable urge to stuff everyone else with their personal platters of propoganda. JC-people, you say you're not "of the world"----why you don't live your creed? Moslems, you have a bigshot god (Allah)--why you don't let Allah worry about , uh, "only you"? Why you have to mind everyone else
business?
lumpagogo 2 years ago
go Christopher Hitchens.
jimmysome 2 years ago
Comment removed
timcp1 2 years ago
Orwells victory?
rudenoodle 2 years ago
Isn't Atheism suppose to be tolerant? Yet, Hitchens is promoting treating religion with hatred, intolerance, and contempt. Then he claims it is his right. All the while he calls religion being filled with hatred, this is the plain definition of hypocrisy. He clearly holds a view he himself doesn't uphold.
timcp1 2 years ago
Right!
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
@timcp1
Atheism is the disbelief in the existence of a supreme being or beings. From there Atheists can and do go anywhere. However your assumption that atheism is supposed to be tolerant is obviously false. That there are a lot of tolerant atheist is true, but it is not always the case. However you are right that he seems hypocritical when he claims that his right.
x1tekja 2 years ago
Hitchens claims that it is his right, because it is his right.
Dont you see your critical mistake?
You have swapped people for ideas, and treated them as equivalent.
It is perfectly fine to treat lies, propaganda, and fraud with hatred and contempt.
It is not moral to tolerate a lie.
The other important detail here is that hitchens is NOT advocating against hatred and contempt in any way. He is simply showing how the real consequences of these "anti-hate" laws will be to reinforce hatred.
St37One 2 years ago 2
Well then religion can claim that same right and Hitchens is guilty of doing the same thing. Religion can then say it is perfectly fine to treat lies, propaganda, and fraud with hatred and contempt.
I know Hitchens is not advocating against hatred and contempt. That's his whole problem! He's advocating the same thing that he says these religions are full of: Hatred and Contempt! That's his hypocrisy. He's saying hatred ridicule and contempt is good under Atheism. Religion can than do the same.
timcp1 2 years ago
We both agree that hitchens is clearly not advocating against hatred and contempt.
But you still say that he is advocating a double standard.
He is not advocating a double standard!
Religions can be used to justify hatred and contempt, but they should not be protected from hatred and contempt either.
Hitchens is merely trying to drive home the point that censorship of ideas can not realistically achieve the supposed goal of reducing hatred. Censorship is inherently corrupt.
St37One 2 years ago
Not specifically in this video. But he's condemned Religion for what he considers hatred and contempt certainly in other videos and interviews. That is his hypocrisy when he then turns and says that he has a right to treat religion with hatred and contempt. He has a view he's not upholding. That's clear.
timcp1 2 years ago
But again, he says the source of hatred is religion in this video. Yet he advocates a source of hatred but from atheism. That's hypocritical too.
timcp1 2 years ago
but its not hypocritical AT ALL.
Hitchens sums up his entire point brilliantly from 8:08 to the end.
He is saying that the argument for censorship is a GIGANTIC FALSE ANTITHESIS!
Everything else is intended to support that point.
There is no excuse for missing the point.
St37One 2 years ago
OK, so then religion can be against hate all the while treating atheism with hate.
Sure, he may have a point. But unfortunately for him, he nearly spent 8:00 minutes of it contradicting himself in hypocrisy all along the way. While if all that he meant to say only took 30 seconds, he should have just stepped up for a half of a minute spoke and then split. He would have been more effective.
timcp1 2 years ago
Hitchens never once contradicted himself though.
When are you going to realize that it is meaningless to be against "hate".
That is like being against love, pain, or pleasure.
And yes he did need to spend the rest of the time supporting his main point, and restating it in different ways, because apparently people still manage too miss it because they are just too thick and full of misleading preconceptions.
He even re-stated his point earlier with the example of the witch prosecuter.
St37One 2 years ago
Well then, if he says you can as an atheist treat religion with hatred and contempt, he can't complain when Islam come after him showing him hatred and contempt.
timcp1 2 years ago
He does not say religion is the source of all hatred in the world.
rudenoodle 2 years ago
Are you serious? Did you not listen to the first 11 seconds!!
timcp1 2 years ago
I stand corrected
rudenoodle 2 years ago
Hitchens is basically trying to tell people something which should be more obvious than it is.... that they can not have thier cake and eat it too.
But you seem to think that Hitchens is saying that cake is good, and contradicting himself by also saying that cake is bad.
But that is wrong, and it is missing the point entirely.
St37One 2 years ago
Atheism is not an ideology. It is the rejection of superstition. That's it. Nothing more or less.
JesusSucksHorseCock 2 years ago 3
i'm not against religion, i'm against corrupted immoral evil group, that's why i'm against Christianity, Islam and Judaism...
jojoinhere 2 years ago 2
"I think it should be, religion; treated with ridicule, hatred and contempt and I claim that right."--Christopher Hitchens
This is not what Richard Dawkins has said about how to be a moral atheist, which is suppose to be tolerant and altruistic. In fact, this is as contradictory as one can get !!!
timcp1 2 years ago
I loved Hitchens' comment discribing people from yorkshire as "untakeable", l looked up this word in the dictionary and couldn't find it, l'm sure it's ok though.
boobalooba2 2 years ago
Dr Hitchens is a Big-IQ guy, no doubt. Our JC, Jewish, RCC, Moslem (Sonnie, Shy-yte), Hindu, Buhddhist, you name it, are louts, lice. The Moslem Race is heinous, to be sure. Nonetheless, all of these and our Humanist/Species-ist friends have one thing in common:
20,000 year Holocaust vs Non-Human Animals. They are lucky there is no Hell.
lumpagogo 2 years ago
I don't know what drugs you're taking, but I want some.
DeathToAllReligions 2 years ago
One could argue that the Catholic Crusades horrors, would make anyone a Atheist. But, my argument is, it should only make you anti-catholic, and not anti-God.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
LENNON010: My, you do have some major issues don't you. You must have a religion, because as Mr. Hitchens would imply, religion is the main source of hatred in the world, and your comment exports total hatred. Who is the hypocrite sir? lol.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
Here's one who HASN'T read Freud, or he wouldn't be projecting his propensities on others and telling us where he spends his time on the internet. Man, you're transparent... and disgusting.
Believerification 2 years ago
By inconsistencies I mean in the presentation of whom you believe will be in hell, please elaborate.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
If all monotheisms are plagiarisms of each other, from what source did the first monotheism plagiarize?
Believerification 2 years ago
Compare 00:10-13 with 4:16. Tell me this guy is not confused. Everything he says is wrong!
Believerification 2 years ago
Remember Chirs, Saul, who later became Paul, actually killed Christians and delivered them up for presecution, but, later became a Christian. He thought what he was doing was actually approved by God.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
Chris you are making a true statement, when you say, that religion and organized religion is the main source of hatred in the World. But, as, I stated, this is false religion, as there is only one true FAITH excepted by God.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
what religion would u be talking about, one you made up? because they ALL advocate killings and intolerance at some point. Maybe you have chosen to ignore those parts, doesn't mean they don't exist. Also, every holy book will say there is only one true religion, how deluted do you have to be to really think that yours is actually the only one, logically you make no sense. You say that true faith would not threaten hitchens, and yet you feel the need to defend your beliefs, hypocrite.
lennon010 2 years ago
True faith Mr. Hitchens would not threaten you or inspire hate speech towards homosexuals and inspire people to hurt these individuals.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
There is only one true faith excepted by GOD, MR. HITCHENS. Yes, if all the religions you aspire to in your books, and these were actually excepted by God, I would be a atheist also. But, they are not Mr. Hitchens.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
And yes, Mr. Hitchens, I like my Johnnie Walker Black label. Lol.
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
As, the Bible, states, there is 'ONE LORD, ONE FAITH, ONE BAPTISM."
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
But, Mr. Htichens whole premise can be debunked, if one can validify that there is only one true religion. Without all the religions of the Earth, Christopher Hitchens would not have a complete open forum to rake in Millions of dollars. The perfect con job. This one only true religion could stand the ground with Mr. Hitchens, and completely stumble Mr. Hitchens. As, Mr. Hitchens would be humbled to assert, as the atheist in the foxhole would say, "Please God Save Me."
BikersFromIreland 2 years ago
From what I can see of Hitchens' effect on young, ignorant, impressionable minds, his teachings are becoming a main source of hatred in the world. What a pitiful and pitiable hero these atheists have! An ignorant, befuddled drunk whose every argument can be demolished by lowliest acolyte.
Believerification 2 years ago
The Bible does NOY say you must hate fags. Hitchens is an idiot!
Believerification 2 years ago
It does, moron. Leviticus 18 and 20. It says fags must be killed. So unless you want us to believe the Bible endorses hatred-free killing, then you just got OWNED!
Stupid fucking cunt!
DeathToAllReligions 2 years ago 4
Am I? To prove me wrong you say the Bible says "fags" must be stoned, and yet Hitchens claims the Bible says "you must HATE fags". So, unless you can show me where the Bible says you must HATE fags---you just got counter-OWNED!
Believerification 2 years ago
@Believerification
Yeah you are right. Stoning back in the days was the ultimate embodiment of love... Boy were we all wrong
You showed us all..
x1tekja 2 years ago 2
Is that the cue for a change of subject, i.e. whether or not killing can ever be a benevolent action? It takes the Christian virtue of humility to admit when you're wrong. You can't seem to admit you were wrong about the Bible saying you must hate fags without throwing in an ironic quip which seems to be assuming that some proposition, i.e., benevolent killing is indefensible. The first thing you need to do if you want to learn is to admit when you're wrong, that you are is indisputable.
Believerification 2 years ago
Any reasonable person would agree that if you can't show me where the Bible says you must hate fags then your assertion is wrong, period. Admitting that first, without irony, is your first step in showing how big you are.
Can I defend benevolent killing? Certainly.
Believerification 2 years ago
@Believerification
Christian virtue of humility.. Ha! How much humility pie did you have to swallow before you made such an outrageously and obviously humble claim? And wile you are at it how humble is it to kill. Do tell us.
x1tekja 2 years ago
I'm not sure what claim you're referring to. I'd be glad to talk to you about humility and killing, but first, shouldn't you admit the Bible doesn't say "you must hate fags"? I will concede the Bible says in the O.T. that certain people were told by God under certain circumstances to stone those who are so confused as to have sex with their same gender.
By the way---who is "us"? I just want to make sure you're not a trinity.
Believerification 2 years ago
Slavery is absolutely wrong. The Bible does not advocate it but acknowledges it as a part of the human condition.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
1) Any scripture from the Old Testament has to be viewed in a developmental context. Mankind was in a stage of infancy. Now, if you can imagine humans as a single organism then the death of an individual would equate the loss of a skin cell, which is necessary, this is how we learn if no one had ever died in the name of science we would be in the dark ages. So it took a few skin cells to learn that a sharp object trusted through the human body is fatal.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Exactly!!!!!!! Things are different in modern days, religion was used to explain scientific phenomenon that primature beings could now...end of story. It's not applicable anymore and unevolved humans are the only one's that continue to cling to it.
lennon010 2 years ago
I have an I.Q. of 137, I dont have my "wisdom teeth" and my feet are oddly formed so I can run faster. I am evolved!
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
3) The Old Testament is simply a history book, where we came from; however, it is full of timeless wisdom. The New Testament is where we are going, which outlines a reversion of moral understanding
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
The Old testament is quite a bit more than a history book.
progressfabbrian 2 years ago
5) The Underlying issue is love; if you love your child you will discipline him/her.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
I have hear that same argument time and over again however. However you have not answered why punishing a child in a manner which is unequivocally the epitome of the opposite of love seems to befit what the god of the New testament is capable of. You claim that it is love but this is not it.. Not by a long shot. You punish a child perspective to what the misdeed was. If a child forsakes you, one should not punish them forever with any wrath. That is the trademark of an unloving tyrant.
x1tekja 2 years ago
If no one dies no one lives! Look for the last time you need to quote (ANY) scripture where ANY HUMAN is bound in hell for ETERNITY!
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
.Isaiah 66:24 look Upon the corpses of the men Who have transgressed against Me. For their worm does not die, And their fire is not quenched. They shall be an abhorrence" Mark 9:43b better for you to enter into life maimed, rather than having two hands, to go to hell, into the fire that shall never be quenched 44 where Their worm does not die And the fire is not quenched.Jude 1:7as Sodom and Gomorrah, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
progressfabbrian 2 years ago
The fire is mentioned as eternal not the peoples stay. Satan is the only one who will reside in hell for eternity.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Here's the complete verse from Jude. It's clear people will be in eteral fire. Their are more if you'd like to see them.
Jude 1:7 (New King James Version)
7 as Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities around them in a similar manner to these, having given themselves over to sexual immorality and gone after strange flesh, are set forth as an example, suffering the vengeance of eternal fire.
progressfabbrian 2 years ago
Yes it is clear the fire will be eternal. But in no place do you find a scripture that states a person will remain in hell eternally.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Matthew25;41 Then He will also say to those on the left hand, Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels:Matthew 25:45 Then He will answer them, saying, Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me. 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.-GOD makes it very clear.
progressfabbrian 2 years ago
All of us have become like one who is unclean, and all our righteous acts are like filthy rags; we all shrivel up like a leaf, and like the wind our sins sweep us away, there is no one righteous, not even one! "Do not judge, and you will not be judged. Do not condemn, and you will not be condemned. Forgive, and you will be forgiven. Isaiah 64:6, Romans 3:10, Luke 6:37
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
We are all guilty!
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Friend, you are mistaken, cf. Matt. xxv. 41, 42, 46. Jude, 6, 7, 13.
The Bible expresses the duration of the future punishment of the wicked as forcibly as it expresses the duration of the future happiness of the righteous.
Believerification 2 years ago
It mentions eternal fire and eternal punishment for angles... anything else is an assumption
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Now that we've established the duration of the punishment, let us see WHO will be punished for that duration, cf. Rev. xiv. 9-11
"...the smoke of THEIR torment..." Who's torment? Those who worship the beast and his image, and receive his mark...
That pretty much settles it.
Believerification 2 years ago
This is in opposition of what you previously quoted. How do you reconcile the inconsistencies?
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
There are no inconsistencies to reconcile that I can see. Be specific about the what the imagined inconsistencies are.
Believerification 2 years ago
First you said that those who arent religious (caring for the sick, poor, orphaned, widowed) will be in hell then you said it will just be those who take the mark of the beast... Now, you can take the mark and be religious according to the definition provided. However, you dont have to be religious and dont have to take the mark will these people be in heaven? The mark is absolute defiance in the face of God. Whereas faltering in not holding absolutely true to the Christian doctrine is human.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Those unbelievers who are represented as the goats in the parable (which means all unbelievers) will burn in torment for all eternity, along with those who take the mark. The mark is going to be around (and therefore be possible to take) only for a very limited window of opportunity.
Believerification 2 years ago
So there you have it: if you don't live in the time of the mark, your test is whether you believe or not and care for the sick, etc... If you live in the time of the mark your final chance for salvation is before you take the mark; if you take the mark you're doomed. I hope that's all clear now. There is not contradiction at all.
Believerification 2 years ago
And no! for heaven's sake, you cannot take the mark of the beast and be religious! That is absurd. I thought I was talking to a Christian, now I'm unsure what you are. Look, an unbeliever never, not once in his entire life ever does anything that is not sinful. The very first time that a sinner ever does anything that is not a sin is when they repent and turn to God, before that, morally, it's a total loss.
Believerification 2 years ago
You can be religious and take the mark! James 1:27 "Religion that God our Father accepts as pure and faultless is this: to look after orphans and widows in their distress and to keep oneself from being polluted by the world." By definition you can be religious and take the mark! I am a Christian. However I understand the problems of the faith.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
You fail to recognize the catch 22s in the faith the one of which has to do with the unnamed goats. However this is the biggest one of all!.. That if you confess with your mouth, "Jesus is Lord," and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved, and every tongue confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father. Romans 10:9, Philippians 2:11
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
So in your version of hell (again) do people or souls go there for a weekend vacation or what? Most christians I talk too believe the whole "Eternal torment" Believerification is just such an example of another loving christian gone mad with delusion. His interpretation is just as valid as yours or any other religion. The problem is that all religions can't be right, but there is a greater provability that they are all wrong.
x1tekja 2 years ago
No, I dont know how hell works it is absolutely clear. I do believe it is a place of eternal torment, I do believe the fire is eternal. I dont know to an absolute degree the duration of residency. Either I am wrong or he is wrong I dont know and you are absolute right not all doctrine are correct (in another post where you contradicted this one), this is of course one of the problems with the church. However it is based on a finite understanding of scripture.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Speaking of contradictions..so you do believe that hell is a place of eternal torment. Ok well this is one example of the type of intellectual dishonesty I find reprehensible, and why I don't associate myself with any religion. At least you are honest about not knowing how hell works and that is a start, but that still does not account for how you managed to think it is ok for any omniscient loving deity to punish unjustly and eternaly for not believing in him.
x1tekja 2 years ago
Hell was made for Satan and his angles. You are not getting it! It is the lack of belief itself that is the cause of punishment. Just like the train tracks.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
@ VindicatedVigilante
And please show me where I contradicted myself and said that they were all correct. not say they were correct.
But keep in mind there is a distinct difference between the words "valid" and "correct"
x1tekja 2 years ago
I would like you to make that distinction. However one of our views is valid and the other invalid. It is against the laws of logic otherwise.
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
No both arguments can be "equally valid" (as in worth the same) however both can't be correct. That does not negate the possibility that they can both be wrong. And I already told you why the train track analogy does not work no matter how many times you try and allude to it. It is distinctly different and pointless to repeat different scenario that does not deal with the topic.
x1tekja 2 years ago
Then the allusion is unnecessary! Is it so hard to see that a lack of belief in and of its self can lead to death?
VindicatedVigilante 2 years ago
Again with the crazy talk. Stop trying to be so mysterious because what you just wrote makes no sense and had no bearing on anything we were talking about. Are you just bored?
x1tekja 2 years ago