Let me ask a question to all those people who admire this man - If there isn't a God, and we are alone, and there is nothing after this life, why follow a man who has devoted his very finite existence to attacking other people's beliefs? Religion gives people purpose, happiness, and motivation. Why take that away from them?
@SovietPoptarts As Hitchens sayed in this video, there is not a single noble action that cant be done in a secular way, I can find happiness, purpose and motivation as an atheist. And also you can think of ways of enhancing your happiness, motivation and purpose outside the limitations of a watchfull deity. Eg: A closeted gay person, equality of women, freedom of speech, scientific research, etc. Cheers
be godly that we deem virtuous today only because of Judaism's influence on western religious thought, but were ludicrous at their time (and even in Greece and Rome), e.g. humility, modesty. These are anathema to mainstream Greek virtues of power and victory. The Jewish prophets decried these "evils" at the time when their own kings won battles and were victorious.
The reason Hitchens kills Shmuley with his last question is because, as has been pointed out by numerous people, Shmuley is a publicity rabbi and wants to water down Judaism to be as palatable as possible to as many as possible (see, for example, his article on homosexuality acc to Judaism 10/15/10.)
Authentic Judaism has many answers for the question, offering sacrifices, resting on sabbath, etc. However, and more fundamentally, Judaism established many ideas to
I've always thought that if you wanted to create a modern religion, one of the most important tenets would be the Darwin quote that Hitchens mentioned: "we bear in out bodily frames the indelible stamp of our lowly origin". Right there you have an explanation for why humanity behaves in such disappointing and destructive ways. Taking ownership of our lowly origin, and working to avoid expressing it, is a moral obligation.
Absolutely fucking brutal. Scmuley's a good guy though, he interviewed Mr Hitchens recently and was very complimentary. that's what comes of having your ass served to you on a platter I guess
Christopher Hitchens, God bless you! I know you don't believe in God, yet I will still pray for you...
I had no idea you had cancer, and while I disagree with some of your arguements about God, you still try to help people in your own rational way. You seek to have people question the world and that's a very good thing. I love you as human being and I truly hope you get better! :D
He would say that its up to , if you want to waste your time praying to a myth go right a head , but I'm not that polite , so don't be so patronizingly stupid , keep your asinine praying , false idol worshiping, daddy in the sky loving prayers and shove them up you ass , jack ass!.
@adlerbr12: Well personally I don't consider it to be a myth, I don't see how I am being stupid. For me prayer is a big part of my life, and I really do want for Hitchens to get better just because he is a person, and I like and respect him as a person. I don't want to convert him or anything like that if that's what you think my comment is all about, I just once again want him to get better.
@RockyBalboa211 You maybe have lot of things worth respect, but not faith and praying. Prayers is just a way to comfort yourself as doing something while you do nothing, and that is the stupid part. It's not the same as you are stupid, you just are programmed to believe it and your brain programmed to ignore the fact that your prayers has nothing to do with whatever will happen. (can be tested)
I purchased one of his books, it don't help much, but more then all prayers in the world together.
Try talking to God some time. We only get what we give. God has no desire to be in a place of denial, to what benefit? How is it that someone can get up in the morning and simply say, 'There is no God.' Can one walk into a forest and deny there are trees.
@MalachiWohl If God truly cared that we believe in him he would come to us a little less ambiguously than in my dreams or through a holy man. I can see, touch, smell, taste those trees but God, making himself supernatural, cannot be felt by natural means even though he could. It means he simply does not care about us if he is real
@MalachiWohl You can see, touch, taste and smell trees. There is proof that trees exist and have existed. We do not have the same proof about god. How is it that someone can get up in the morning and simply say, "There is a God"?
dr greg's girl going up in flames. when there is war BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE THAT. i'm telling you, there will be little restriction on faking a shit ball like that and torching it, as a signet of PEACE.
@nVei06 Seriously, You need therapy. Wow. At least I know to ignore the rest of your comments now. For a second, I thought you might be worth debating, but I see you are just off your xanax. Good luck with the rest of your life.
@drgregsgurl you're going to be debatign with smoke and ripping your arms off. who do you think you are talking shit like that? you are wrong, and you think you should walk around. you;re being hung up and burned alive for your being wrong.
And you guys seriously need to go watch this full debate, its hilarious. Boteach just dismantles the theory of evolution without God. Hitchens brought nothing to the table. As Boteach brought up, Darwin..who was a Deist...said that "I became sick when I thought about how the complexity of the eye couldve formed." And "to suppose the eye couldve been born by natural selection seems to be, I confess, absurd in the highest possible degree!" Enough said. Atheism is FALSE!
And you guys seriously need to go watch this full debate, its hilarious. Boteach just dismantles the theory of evolution without God. Hitchens brought nothing to the table. As Boteach brought up, Darwin..who was a Deist...said that "I became sick when I thought about how the complexity of the eye couldve formed." And "to suppose the eyecouldve been born by natural selection seems to be, I confess, absurd in the highest possible degree!" Enough said. Atheism is FALSE!
And you guys seriously need to go watch this full debate, its hilarious. Boteach just dismantles the theory of evolution without God. Hitchens brought nothing to the table. As Boteach brought up, Darwin..who was a Deist...said that "I became sick when I thought about how the complexity of the eye couldve formed." And "to suppose the eye couldve been born by natural selection seems to be, I confess, absurd in the highest possible degree!" Enough said. Atheism is FALSE!
Well to all you atheists out there, all I got to say is..you better go to your mother and show you how much you love her for creating you. Because once she dies...thats it...you will NEVER..EVER..see her again. You better let all your family know how much you love them, let all your friends and family, every day! Know how much you love them, because you can die tomorrow, and thats it. All thats ahead for you is nothingness FOREVER. And we wonder why were so miserable, its beliefs like this.
@FightingForFreedom23 How about you then? Will all your sins be "forgiven"? So you can continue to act like a schmuck in your lifetime? We are ALL going to the same place,the nothingness.Just the same place we all "came" from.Never did hurt me before I was born.
Boteach always embarrasses himself in these debates with Hitchens and Dawkins. I've watched four of them now (the full length versions) and it's makes me feel sort of ashamed to even watch. It's like that monty python sketch with the boxer (Hitchens) and the 12 year old school girl (Boteach)
@drgregsgurl people who think hitchens made any sense or said anything intelligent should be found and put in a simple maze where they die. mice are smarter than these people, and they should no pollute our genes and our policy. He was destroyed.
@nVei06 LOL It's interesting how the religious immediately turn hateful and violent and wish death on people who don't agree with them. It simply proves every point that Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris and Dennett have ever made. And you definitely seem to be in the minority. When they show the polling results before and after a debate, almost all of the people in the audience side with Hitchens by the end of a debate. (like @ the intelligence squared debate). It's just you, I think.
@drgregsgurl no, what is amazing is that the liberal will always say this. There is no truth in the statement but the liberal will slways reply just as you did. We're going to put a test, we're going to dissagree with 100 religious people of any choosing. Is none of them 'immediately turn hateful and violent.' we're going to set you on fire and torch your ass? deal?
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.
Random mutation and natural selection is all the theory of evolution fucking is! Guess what, mutations occur and animals change as a result of them ( this is PROVEN), and guess what, some of these changes are better than others ( and once again this is PROVEN). Based on these assumption deep/strong connections between extinct species and those living today have been found through the fields of genetics, ecology, histology, microbial biology, geography, immunology and physiology .
@TheApparentHead And the freemasons are supported by Jay-Z! It all makes sense now! Darwin, freemasons, Jay-Z, hip-hop, gangs violence, racism, race, race car!
And I'm saying it doesn't matter. I don't care if the Theory of evolution was first supported by baby killing, racist, sociopaths; the only thing that dictates my belief in it is whether it is true or not and the scientific peer review IS THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE OF PEER REVIEWS. Even if what you're saying about the origins of evolution were indeed correct, that doesn't change the fact that evolution is a proven theory based on the fields of ecology, paleontology, genetics, etc.
That doesn't dictate anything. They helped bring it upfront so what? They were atheists so why shouldn't they help bring up the theory upfront? After all, the theory of evolution is already accepted by the Roman Catholic Church. They abolished the whole story of Genesis why? Because as our species evolves over time, so does our intelligence to comprehend what physics is and what defies it's laws. Genesis does so plainly.
Those are just conspiracy theories. You are a fool if you think that is true. Science as of right now is the only thing responsible for bringing the theory of evolution upfront. We don't need secret societies to present something that has of substantial and tremendous evidence to support itself.
Constantly coming up with new ideas is a better way of saying it. Science is susceptible to change, but religion isn't. We know how many things work but we know nothing. We have yet to learn about the universe. But at least we know the gist of basic universal principles of the cosmos. The universe is 14 billion years old. Modern science surfaced about 2 thousand years ago. Give science more time if it doesn't have all the answers.
You are quoting me since you are confused about that statement. Educate yourself first with science because arguing with someone who is ignorant about any science up to date is useless. Neill-Degrasse Tyson, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitches, etc. Watch the lectures and debates. It's not my job to educate you.
The theory of evolution, abiogenesis, string theory, and the big bang theory are pretty accurate. Ever since man had looked up in the sky we've been aware that our universe and the world we live in worked in a weird way. Something that needed calculation from a rational perspective and it took brilliant minds to form these types of hypothesis on how the universe works. These were the times of Copernicus and Galileo. Today, we are at peak evidence strong enough to support these theories.
I believe that God implanted morals and values in us for our own minds to evaluate since the beginning of time. I hard it find to believe that, through out the 100,000 years of human existence, God intervened after 95,000 years and then came moral values. Did God really just watch in dismay for the past 95,000 years? I don't think so.
Life forming on Earth does not interpret deism. We are made of star dust and this is fact. Watch Neil-Degrasse Tyson's lectures and you will see for yourself. I do acknowledge that the origins of species is indeed by random chance but intended by God. Why isn't life on the other planets of our solar system? Because our Earth is the only planet capable of life. If Mars would take the orbital place of the Earth it would have been the same thing.
Bullshitting about what it's the truth. Why would I shut up if they're replying back to me? There is no change and you're the ignorant one butting in other peoples conversations. Talk about ignorant, this isn't even a forum. Epic fail.
Somewhat agnostic but more on the deist perspective. Which God are you talking about? The God that I believe in does not intervene. I used to be a Catholic and yes I prayed before. Didn't really help me when I was devout. Science really opened up my mind and got me aware of what things in religion defied the laws of physics and people absolutely believed in them. Some say some stories are symbolism and some are not when in fact they do not know which is which.
I was being sarcastic. Don't get me wrong, religion does in fact teach morals and values. It's just, when people take it literally and go crazy on the subject and actually live in fear of hell or whatever it is the alternative for a better afterlife. You can't make that assumption because we have no access of the unknown. Unless God spoke to us, but what is our evidence that he did?
"Name me if you can a noble thought, or a noble action preformed, or a noble thought uttered by a believer in God that could not be uttered by a non-believer." And I say it was Jesus when he was dying on the cross asking God to "forgive them for they know not what they do."
If an atheist said it it wouldn't be noble ("of an exalted moral or mental character or excellence"), it wouldn't be genuine. In that incident Jesus is asking God's forgiveness of the people mocking him on the cross.
MrShimasaki. You are only right in that an atheist would not be noble if he talked to a God that he didn't believe in.
He could say out loud to his family, "Forgive them for they know not what they do." Meaning that they don't understand the value of life or some other such thing.
If the character Jesus was to say the same but put the word Buddha in there, then it would also not be noble.
Actually Hitchens mentions this comment in his debate with William Lane Craig (in early 2009). This was the only exception Hitchens made when referring to his statement made in this particular video.
You don't make any sense. Hitchens was talking about morals in a sense that, if they really did come from God, would a non-believer have the same level of morality. Jesus asking God to forgive the people who condemned him to the cross is not a moral standard.
Dude, you're not clear on what you're saying. Who made a response? What response? You proposed what response? The man I'm talking about is Hitchens and how can he validate something in which he came up with? It can't be validated for 1 obvious reason: morals is in a nature regardless of belief nor disbelief.
A) Hitchens says: "Name me if you can a noble thought, or a noble action preformed, or a noble thought uttered by a believer in God that could not be uttered by a non-believer."
B) And I say:" it was Jesus when he was dying on the cross asking God to "forgive them for they know not what they do."
In a debate held at Biola University a few months earlier Hitchens addresses his comment (A) by stating that my comment (B) was the only exception to his comment (A).
It was only after I saw the debate between Hitchens and Craig on DVD that was recorded a few months before my comment that I realized I had put down the one exception Hitchens mentions.
Morals standards aren't part of Hitchens question. Forgiveness is indeed a moral standard and so is loving thine enemies. Forgiveness is a noble act based on morals which are pillar of Christianity.
I still don't think you got what he said. What he asked of the audience was basically a rhetorical statement because there was obviously no answer to that. Why? Because the only difference between a believer and non-believer are the beliefs. We are all human and there is no one out there that has experienced such divinity to state any evidence whatsoever. Why? Because we have nothing in our possession to access the spiritual world. Never have never will.
I got what he said. I'm not going to argue with you about what he did and didn't say. To get further perspective on his comment (A) you need to watch the debate between Hitchens and Craig from 2009.
As for this comment "there is no one out there that has experienced such divinity to state any evidence whatsoever" I would really beg to differ. There have been thousands of people in the Bible who have experienced the divinity of God. If you take one instance in the New Testament alone (which I believe holds more solid evidence than the old testament in my opinion) there were over 500 people alone that witnessed the resurrection first hand.
All religious believers to some extent have experiences with divine moments, through the power of prayer, and certain events in their lives. These events are what belief is built upon.
Divine moments like what? When do they even experience these divine moments? I guarantee you that a person on drugs can experience more divinity than anyone else.
I believe in God, never said I didn't. But he does not intervene. How do I know this? Because if he did, 6 million Jews wouldn't have suffered in the Holocaust and thousands of people wouldn't have died in Haiti. Countless Massacres and killings out in the world of today including poverty, which children suffer the most in parts of 3rd world countries and child labor and prostitution active until this day.
On one hand if you can see things as cause and effect, then down the road everything works toward the glory of God. It may seem sad no but these tragic events lead people to become believers, and if you believe in heaven then these people didn't die in vain and are now in heaven.
On the other hand God although being very paternal isnt going to treat us like infants and do everything for us. We need to take what we learn and make things right in the world ourselves. If something tragic like Haiti happens we as Christians need to take care of our brothers and sisters in Haiti. It helps us grow becoming better Christians and it also helps to show others the examples of good Christians
Thats what I believe from a religious viewpoint take what you will from it
Divine moments such as? Have you ever experienced it? I would assume that you have had these experiences since you're religious yourself. Please feel free to tell me at least one of the stories that would change the way I think about religion. Prayer? Amputees pray but it's just too bad for them I guess. It's weird that most of the devastating natural disasters happen to people who are poor and have nothing? Haiti for example? Hurricane Katrina? Typhoon in the Philippines? God does not intervene
I'm mentally challenged? Didn't you just read what you wrote to me at first? Talk about challenged, you're the ignoramus if that's the best you can come up with to reply to me. You call me these things without evidence to support it. Something of which your faith applies to as well. Dumbass.
@Reiff444 his audience are people who should be turned into inanimate material. From beginning to end, he's an expression of idiocy. question, why should people be honest? ANSWER: people should not be honest, but they should live in a society where OTHERS are honest. This is what hichens is about, all these people are about that. How many bad points does he make? none, He doesn';t make any points. religious people are bad because athiests are bad too?? err duur,. this works for him and you.
Go straight to hell and rot Shmuley Boteach! You're a thief, liar and a crook who stoles hundreds from innocent children's. You're a money hungry devil worshiper! DON'T BUY HIS BOOKS!
Wow Hypocrisy at its finest. Schmuley has some NERVE to talk and call himself a rabbi ever after HE STOLE BIG MONEY from HEAL THE KIDS FOUNDATION which is the reason why Michael Jackson severed ties with him! Schmuley, I hope you rot in hell for posing as a rabbi while robbing poor and sick children left and right. Self-righteous and self-serving ass-holes like you are made of pure rusted steel--YOU ARE SHAMELESS!!! Hope you snap in 2 very soon!
av427: Wow! Why did you spent so much time writing this message. Sure: when you disagree with somebody the best way is to SLANDER a person. This comes from you a petty thief and an alcoholic.
Excuse me DO YOUR RESEARCH, are you kneeling to Shmuley?? YUKK!!! Do you know that your hero is prohibited from having a PULPIT in UK because of 2 cases of MALVERSATION of CHARITY FUNDS! Thats why he calles himself America's Rabbi-- coz in reality, he cannot practice anywhere else! Thank you, thats your idol in a GIST! ---If you cannot do research because you cannot handle the truth, thats your problem!
@MrSalamander7 boteach destroyed hitchens like an olympic boxer hitting a slow witted retarded guy who drank a lot of scotch. he put so much hurt on him, yet he felt soft warm. yet you think it went otherwise. when hitchens makes any of his statements, nothing he says is relivent or logical. his only point is 'boteach is stupid' you agree with him, but reality does not. Boteach is agile guy. his logic and utility is exceptionally high. Hitchens is slow witted, false, + doesn't use logic at all.
Really the silliest of subjects about which to debate, as neither one of these debaters can ever prove themself correct in an absolute sense. However, Hitchens' engaging rhetorical style is always entertaining. Too bad for him he's fighting a losing battle.
You misapprehended my meaning. "...in an absolute sense" means it's not a "yes" or "no" argument; there is no way to prove that God either exists or doesn't exist, and therefore one can never make the most convincing argument because of a lack of concrete evidence (viz. facts) to support one's opinions. You can debate about anything you choose, but you'll never win a debate that's based on personal beliefs.
These kind of debates are not merely about personal beliefs though. Like most debates, they are about the facts underlying your personal beliefs.
The atheist says that no convincing case for the existence of God can be made. The theist disagrees and thinks he has a case. Right there you have the basis for a good debate.
The 'winner' will be the one who presents the most convincing argument and who is most likely to be right.
Fair enough, yet I am still skeptical that one can win a war of opinions. There really are no facts involved when trying to prove or disprove the existence of God. Agnostics claim that since they cannot prove empirically that God exists, he doesn't until "proved" otherwise. A counter-argument would be that just because we cannot see or hear something doesn't mean it isn't there, as was the case before Benjamin Franklin proved that electricity exists.
I do agree, however, that "winning" a debate involves presenting the most convincing argument, but in the case of actually proving whether or not God exists by philosophical debate? I'll never be convinced that there is a true "winner."
(Actually, that's not what agnostics at all. Read Thomas Huxley's essay where he coined the term for the correct definition.)
I think a war of ideas (not of opinions, as I said there are quite some facts to be interpreted) can be won, but I'm not sure whether we should try to. What the New Atheist movement means to be is a movement that wants religion to be open to criticism, and at the same time show that atheism is a reasonable position to have.
I have read Huxley's essay and I disagree that my understanding of the definition of Agnostic in incorrect. Please cite a quotation directly from that source. If I am incorrect, I'd like to have verification to avoid confusion in the future. I like what you said about the New Atheist movement. I agree that religion should be open to criticism and that Atheism is a reasonable position to have. Humankind's struggle with its impulse for religiosity is universal and should not be denegrated.
USABOYMAN, You want to challenge me? I can send you the NEWS ARTICLES pertaining to Shmuley's THEFT--2 CASES in the UK and God Knows how many more in the US starting with HEAL THE KIDS! You are blinded by your lack of knowledge and frankly, its pathetic because you obviously dont know WHO you are talking about. Ignorant people like you hide behind religious beliefs because in reality, you dont want to find the TRUTH behind things! Take a Hike!
Does not have anything to do with religious believe. It has to do with your SLANDER. I am sure I can find on the Internet fact that you personally are a child-molester recidivist. You confirm the Internet is a sewarage and indeed you stink, writing complete garbage.
The toxicity of radiation to organisms is well known. Ignore it at your peril. Radiation spawned by the Van Allen belts is lethal, as the Russians revealed, after the fact, when they admitted the loss of animals who flew through the lower bands of the magnetosphere.
I would be too if I was a sane genius stuck in a loony bin like Hitchens is. To be fair, he puts himself in these situations willingly (i.e. debate after debate) and I'm thankful for that. He's a glutton for (dealing out) punishment.
You asked for white noise and you got it. So true. Absolutely a question designed to bolster the argument of the rabbi yet one that was detrimental to his argument when viewed by anyone but a die hard theist.
R. Boteach is brilliant and this Hitchens is an arrogant son of a bitch. He accuses R. Boteach in filibustereing while himself unable to stop talking.
Hitchens arrogant?..what because he does not believe the same belief as you? that's like complaining that others don't share your opinion.he is entitled to it so don't call him arrogant, if that's the case boteach is arrogant for not believing a non-believer.
priss: I am just expressing my opinion. You love Hitchens? No problem - it is your business. The problem with your amateurish atheists that you want people walk in a lockstep like soldiers on a parade. Why are YOU so much afraid of the opposite opinion. By the way I sincerely think that Hichens arguments are primitive and banal.
my business? so why do you parade your beliefs around then.....and love him? u imposing im gay as a pathetic debate?...who said im an atheist? and you use words like primitive and banal to improve your appearance....and who's afraid? everything you say to me applies directly to you..yes you can have an opinion but calling him a SON OF A BITCH is harsh, you don't know him, seems your getting defensive as a result of his brilliance and sense.
priss: This is not your space; when you are on a public forum be ready for different opinion otherwise you behave either as a little dictator or jist a coward. I am standing behind my words because I cannot stand when an arrogant goose with a haughty accent appeals to the low atheistic denominator. Any demogogue is SOB because he tries to control human mind.
you are amazing,,,,,everything you have said to me applies directly to yourself.....mind control?....religion does the same...i am ready for different opinions....so because i dont agree with your opinion means im a coward? again, same rules applies to you.
oh right you playing that one.........honest opinion you say, which you do so do i, make yourself sound loving by tolerating my view....ide rather you be honest and tell me what you think.....i am not right, i dont know why where here, or how we got here, i can admit that honestly , yet you claim to have an answer due to a belief !!......Do you think that as long whoever is an Theist s/he automatically is right?
priss. Thx. You are a Gentleman. I am not here to play. I have much more questions than answers, but this does not make me a relativist. I respect theologists and atheists who speak coherently and objectivelyy. As for "Theologists" there are not too many of them who are persuasive. That does not prevent me in my belief in the Author of the Beginning.
Hitchens upsets me because he is banal, speaks platitudes and continuously is trying to bully his opponents.
@jomper God has no need to have been created, since He exists either outside time (where cause and effect do not operate) or within multiple dimensions of time ...
How can you know this? Is there any reason you can give me to believe what you say about God that doesn't involve a leap of faith? Wouldn't it be just as meaningful to say "the universe was created outside time" without involving the idea of God? And is it just your God that has no need to be created? What about other gods, like the Hindu gods? Are they also outside of time and and space, like the God you're talking about? Are all gods the same in this respect? Thanks.
Who the hell picked that jew to represent religion in this debate, its like they want to lose or something. "For me god is he who watches while I make a fricking fool out of myself in front of thousands." Thats what he should have said
could the desire for a uptopian workers state under communism not have come from atheism though? Perhaps atheists need something else to fill the spiritual void left from their abandonment of religion and are more susceptable to human messiahs and radical politics.
More importantly, atheism doesnt prevent people from being killers. Atheistic regimes have been the most brutal of all regimes.. I doubt most nazi or communist prison camp guards were a bible thumbing churchgoing christian.
again you missed the whole point of our debates, we aren't trying to convert you to atheism, it is not a religion no rules, no laws, no scripture....what do we need to fill in our so called void? i suppose by filling your void with an easy answer to the universe you must feel happy?i doubt you must lay in bed at night and think, maybe i should take responsibility for my own actions, and discover the real truth behind everything.Instead of giving up and accepting the easiest theory ever to grasp.
the very last point Hitchens made is a bit silly. He could also say that non-believers including the leaders of the Soviet Union have done wicked things. Acts of violence have been committed by religious and non-religious people. But the acts of believers and non-believers don't make their beliefs either right or wrong.
Hi Jim, yes whilst leaders of say, the soviet union commited wicked crimes, they were not in the name of atheism. His point is that many wicked things have been commited in the name of religion, but not actually in the name of atheism.
Well i don't think the soviet union imprisoned priests, leveled russian orthodox churches and killed innocent religious believers because of their russian nationalism or because communist economic theory calls for it....i think it was the atheism
Communist Russia regarded religious organizations as a hinderance towards the creation of a worker's state. In that respect we are generally looking at threats to political idealogical issues, not a question of a sort of atheism v religion.
What people killed for in this respect was communism and any of the threats to it. The notion that they killed for atheism in particular is innaccurate as the cause and belief was a political ideology not a religious or irreligious one.
This Rabbi Schmuley is an absolute nimrod. He has dedicated his entire life to God yet cannot properly answer a simple question. I am not a terribly religious person but could have provided a much better answer. There is not enough space for me to provide the answer here, but if anyone wants it, I will gladly e-mail you. This Rabbi should be ashamed of himself. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid!
Let me ask a question to all those people who admire this man - If there isn't a God, and we are alone, and there is nothing after this life, why follow a man who has devoted his very finite existence to attacking other people's beliefs? Religion gives people purpose, happiness, and motivation. Why take that away from them?
SovietPoptarts 2 months ago
@SovietPoptarts As Hitchens sayed in this video, there is not a single noble action that cant be done in a secular way, I can find happiness, purpose and motivation as an atheist. And also you can think of ways of enhancing your happiness, motivation and purpose outside the limitations of a watchfull deity. Eg: A closeted gay person, equality of women, freedom of speech, scientific research, etc. Cheers
pigin007 2 months ago
LOL I love the narrator! Go Hitchens!
MrNicMachiavelli 4 months ago
So god is batman? lol
mathmexican4234 7 months ago
...to the best of his ability...lol
papermermaid 7 months ago
This poor jewish guy is just scared and doesn't wanna be there. That said, he should grow the fuck up and ditch his invisible friend finally.
aegisgfx 11 months ago
HITCHSLAPPED!
projektdotnet 11 months ago 5
@projektdotnet adding this to my personal vocab
grayseeroly 11 months ago
hitchens is god
rapeand 11 months ago 4
This has been flagged as spam show
Our lives are based on our decisions
Our decisions are based on our perspective.
Our perspective is based on our personality.
Our personality is located in the orbital layer of the pre-frontal cortex.
Our brain's wiring is determined by our DNA.
Our DNA is luck.
Therefore, Luck Is Everything (L.I.E. Theory).
Free will aint no good!
chefshitpiece 5 months ago
chefshitpiece 1 year ago
Love Shmuley's voice, it's like this squeaking teenager protesting his innocence to his mother who caught him wanking to gay porn.
HRage 1 year ago 28
be godly that we deem virtuous today only because of Judaism's influence on western religious thought, but were ludicrous at their time (and even in Greece and Rome), e.g. humility, modesty. These are anathema to mainstream Greek virtues of power and victory. The Jewish prophets decried these "evils" at the time when their own kings won battles and were victorious.
itsnotatoober 1 year ago
The reason Hitchens kills Shmuley with his last question is because, as has been pointed out by numerous people, Shmuley is a publicity rabbi and wants to water down Judaism to be as palatable as possible to as many as possible (see, for example, his article on homosexuality acc to Judaism 10/15/10.)
Authentic Judaism has many answers for the question, offering sacrifices, resting on sabbath, etc. However, and more fundamentally, Judaism established many ideas to
itsnotatoober 1 year ago
Shalom!
dycarbon1 1 year ago
I've always thought that if you wanted to create a modern religion, one of the most important tenets would be the Darwin quote that Hitchens mentioned: "we bear in out bodily frames the indelible stamp of our lowly origin". Right there you have an explanation for why humanity behaves in such disappointing and destructive ways. Taking ownership of our lowly origin, and working to avoid expressing it, is a moral obligation.
UppruniTegundanna 1 year ago
Absolutely fucking brutal. Scmuley's a good guy though, he interviewed Mr Hitchens recently and was very complimentary. that's what comes of having your ass served to you on a platter I guess
LeBigMacDaddy 1 year ago
i want to see more of this
jknight1972 1 year ago
Christopher Hitchens, God bless you! I know you don't believe in God, yet I will still pray for you...
I had no idea you had cancer, and while I disagree with some of your arguements about God, you still try to help people in your own rational way. You seek to have people question the world and that's a very good thing. I love you as human being and I truly hope you get better! :D
RockyBalboa211 1 year ago
@RockyBalboa211
He would say that its up to , if you want to waste your time praying to a myth go right a head , but I'm not that polite , so don't be so patronizingly stupid , keep your asinine praying , false idol worshiping, daddy in the sky loving prayers and shove them up you ass , jack ass!.
adlerbr12 1 year ago
@adlerbr12: Well personally I don't consider it to be a myth, I don't see how I am being stupid. For me prayer is a big part of my life, and I really do want for Hitchens to get better just because he is a person, and I like and respect him as a person. I don't want to convert him or anything like that if that's what you think my comment is all about, I just once again want him to get better.
RockyBalboa211 1 year ago
@RockyBalboa211 You maybe have lot of things worth respect, but not faith and praying. Prayers is just a way to comfort yourself as doing something while you do nothing, and that is the stupid part. It's not the same as you are stupid, you just are programmed to believe it and your brain programmed to ignore the fact that your prayers has nothing to do with whatever will happen. (can be tested)
I purchased one of his books, it don't help much, but more then all prayers in the world together.
ytbabbler 1 year ago 2
@RockyBalboa211 what's prayer going to do?
rapeand 11 months ago 5
beautifully said Rabbi
WinkyMaeve 1 year ago
Try talking to God some time. We only get what we give. God has no desire to be in a place of denial, to what benefit? How is it that someone can get up in the morning and simply say, 'There is no God.' Can one walk into a forest and deny there are trees.
MalachiWohl 1 year ago
@MalachiWohl If God truly cared that we believe in him he would come to us a little less ambiguously than in my dreams or through a holy man. I can see, touch, smell, taste those trees but God, making himself supernatural, cannot be felt by natural means even though he could. It means he simply does not care about us if he is real
jimjamgumbob 1 year ago
@MalachiWohl You can see, touch, taste and smell trees. There is proof that trees exist and have existed. We do not have the same proof about god. How is it that someone can get up in the morning and simply say, "There is a God"?
Linkacious1 1 year ago
there is about nobody who won't do that.
nVei06 1 year ago
dr greg's girl going up in flames. when there is war BECAUSE OF PEOPLE LIKE THAT. i'm telling you, there will be little restriction on faking a shit ball like that and torching it, as a signet of PEACE.
nVei06 1 year ago
@nVei06 Seriously, You need therapy. Wow. At least I know to ignore the rest of your comments now. For a second, I thought you might be worth debating, but I see you are just off your xanax. Good luck with the rest of your life.
drgregsgurl 1 year ago
@drgregsgurl you're going to be debatign with smoke and ripping your arms off. who do you think you are talking shit like that? you are wrong, and you think you should walk around. you;re being hung up and burned alive for your being wrong.
nVei06 1 year ago
Hitchens needs to learn to be more respectful!
AlanJacksonisgreat 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And you guys seriously need to go watch this full debate, its hilarious. Boteach just dismantles the theory of evolution without God. Hitchens brought nothing to the table. As Boteach brought up, Darwin..who was a Deist...said that "I became sick when I thought about how the complexity of the eye couldve formed." And "to suppose the eye couldve been born by natural selection seems to be, I confess, absurd in the highest possible degree!" Enough said. Atheism is FALSE!
FightingForFreedom23 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And you guys seriously need to go watch this full debate, its hilarious. Boteach just dismantles the theory of evolution without God. Hitchens brought nothing to the table. As Boteach brought up, Darwin..who was a Deist...said that "I became sick when I thought about how the complexity of the eye couldve formed." And "to suppose the eyecouldve been born by natural selection seems to be, I confess, absurd in the highest possible degree!" Enough said. Atheism is FALSE!
FightingForFreedom23 1 year ago
This has been flagged as spam show
And you guys seriously need to go watch this full debate, its hilarious. Boteach just dismantles the theory of evolution without God. Hitchens brought nothing to the table. As Boteach brought up, Darwin..who was a Deist...said that "I became sick when I thought about how the complexity of the eye couldve formed." And "to suppose the eye couldve been born by natural selection seems to be, I confess, absurd in the highest possible degree!" Enough said. Atheism is FALSE!
FightingForFreedom23 1 year ago
Comment removed
FightingForFreedom23 1 year ago
Well to all you atheists out there, all I got to say is..you better go to your mother and show you how much you love her for creating you. Because once she dies...thats it...you will NEVER..EVER..see her again. You better let all your family know how much you love them, let all your friends and family, every day! Know how much you love them, because you can die tomorrow, and thats it. All thats ahead for you is nothingness FOREVER. And we wonder why were so miserable, its beliefs like this.
FightingForFreedom23 1 year ago
@FightingForFreedom23 How about you then? Will all your sins be "forgiven"? So you can continue to act like a schmuck in your lifetime? We are ALL going to the same place,the nothingness.Just the same place we all "came" from.Never did hurt me before I was born.
bananabeam 1 year ago
Boteach always embarrasses himself in these debates with Hitchens and Dawkins. I've watched four of them now (the full length versions) and it's makes me feel sort of ashamed to even watch. It's like that monty python sketch with the boxer (Hitchens) and the 12 year old school girl (Boteach)
drgregsgurl 1 year ago
@drgregsgurl people who think hitchens made any sense or said anything intelligent should be found and put in a simple maze where they die. mice are smarter than these people, and they should no pollute our genes and our policy. He was destroyed.
nVei06 1 year ago
@nVei06 LOL It's interesting how the religious immediately turn hateful and violent and wish death on people who don't agree with them. It simply proves every point that Hitchens, Dawkins, Harris and Dennett have ever made. And you definitely seem to be in the minority. When they show the polling results before and after a debate, almost all of the people in the audience side with Hitchens by the end of a debate. (like @ the intelligence squared debate). It's just you, I think.
drgregsgurl 1 year ago
@drgregsgurl no, what is amazing is that the liberal will always say this. There is no truth in the statement but the liberal will slways reply just as you did. We're going to put a test, we're going to dissagree with 100 religious people of any choosing. Is none of them 'immediately turn hateful and violent.' we're going to set you on fire and torch your ass? deal?
nVei06 1 year ago
@drgregsgurl you're dead. you won't escape
nVei06 1 year ago
@nVei06 wow. Crazy. Are you off your meds?
drgregsgurl 1 year ago
For a moment there I thought it said that Neil Gaiman was the moderator. Drat.
wilfredthebold 1 year ago
hasidic jews are great, especially the ones who shook hands with Ahmadinejad after he publicly denied the holocaust
slingshot2427 1 year ago
schmuck go-bleach genocidal jehovah from your holiest ass
TheTattikarlo 1 year ago
Give a man a fish and he will eat for a day; teach a man to fish and he will eat for a lifetime; give a man religion and he will die praying for a fish.
adlerbr12 1 year ago 73
@adlerbr12 No, he'll probably slaugter, in the name of his god, someone who actually caught a fish.
josenros 1 year ago
@adlerbr12 Or take someone else's fish "for god".
caseybv74 1 year ago 5
@TheApparentHead
Oh no, the illuminati and the freemasons!!!11!!1!
Did the Gnomes of Zurich send their flying monkeys to use the mind control lasers or was the plan even more nefarious than that?
ApesAmongUs 1 year ago
The God of the Jews is merely the Planet Saturn.
AnonymousWhitePerson 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
"Random mutation and natural selection are completely insufficient! Get a new theory...lol"
one last thing. Thanks for showing everyone that you have absolutely no knowledge regarding evolution or science in general. Made my job easier :)
toohuman90 2 years ago
Random mutation and natural selection is all the theory of evolution fucking is! Guess what, mutations occur and animals change as a result of them ( this is PROVEN), and guess what, some of these changes are better than others ( and once again this is PROVEN). Based on these assumption deep/strong connections between extinct species and those living today have been found through the fields of genetics, ecology, histology, microbial biology, geography, immunology and physiology .
toohuman90 2 years ago 3
@TheApparentHead And the freemasons are supported by Jay-Z! It all makes sense now! Darwin, freemasons, Jay-Z, hip-hop, gangs violence, racism, race, race car!
JackHDiamond 2 years ago
@TheAppartentHead
And I'm saying it doesn't matter. I don't care if the Theory of evolution was first supported by baby killing, racist, sociopaths; the only thing that dictates my belief in it is whether it is true or not and the scientific peer review IS THE MOST COMPREHENSIVE OF PEER REVIEWS. Even if what you're saying about the origins of evolution were indeed correct, that doesn't change the fact that evolution is a proven theory based on the fields of ecology, paleontology, genetics, etc.
toohuman90 2 years ago 8
That doesn't dictate anything. They helped bring it upfront so what? They were atheists so why shouldn't they help bring up the theory upfront? After all, the theory of evolution is already accepted by the Roman Catholic Church. They abolished the whole story of Genesis why? Because as our species evolves over time, so does our intelligence to comprehend what physics is and what defies it's laws. Genesis does so plainly.
anime891 2 years ago
@ theapparenthead
haha nice, so there is this whole underground, secret "da vinci code" conspiracy about the theory of evolution!
Dude, don't be retarded. The scientific peer review is one of the most rigorous and brutal of examinations period.
toohuman90 2 years ago
Those are just conspiracy theories. You are a fool if you think that is true. Science as of right now is the only thing responsible for bringing the theory of evolution upfront. We don't need secret societies to present something that has of substantial and tremendous evidence to support itself.
anime891 2 years ago
hitchens is funny but he's so rude lol. just because you disagree wth something doesn't mean you should treat those who do with disrespect.
humbletim10 2 years ago
Hahaha, yeah I agree with you on that one. He's so blunt.
anime891 2 years ago
@humbletim10
Yes you bloody should if they are talking bollocks.
PrinceBishop3 2 years ago
lol at future hitler
humbletim10 2 years ago
Constantly coming up with new ideas is a better way of saying it. Science is susceptible to change, but religion isn't. We know how many things work but we know nothing. We have yet to learn about the universe. But at least we know the gist of basic universal principles of the cosmos. The universe is 14 billion years old. Modern science surfaced about 2 thousand years ago. Give science more time if it doesn't have all the answers.
anime891 2 years ago
You are quoting me since you are confused about that statement. Educate yourself first with science because arguing with someone who is ignorant about any science up to date is useless. Neill-Degrasse Tyson, Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitches, etc. Watch the lectures and debates. It's not my job to educate you.
anime891 2 years ago
The theory of evolution, abiogenesis, string theory, and the big bang theory are pretty accurate. Ever since man had looked up in the sky we've been aware that our universe and the world we live in worked in a weird way. Something that needed calculation from a rational perspective and it took brilliant minds to form these types of hypothesis on how the universe works. These were the times of Copernicus and Galileo. Today, we are at peak evidence strong enough to support these theories.
anime891 2 years ago
I believe that God implanted morals and values in us for our own minds to evaluate since the beginning of time. I hard it find to believe that, through out the 100,000 years of human existence, God intervened after 95,000 years and then came moral values. Did God really just watch in dismay for the past 95,000 years? I don't think so.
anime891 2 years ago
Life forming on Earth does not interpret deism. We are made of star dust and this is fact. Watch Neil-Degrasse Tyson's lectures and you will see for yourself. I do acknowledge that the origins of species is indeed by random chance but intended by God. Why isn't life on the other planets of our solar system? Because our Earth is the only planet capable of life. If Mars would take the orbital place of the Earth it would have been the same thing.
anime891 2 years ago
@anime891 Of all bullshitters on the forum you are a real champ. Why would not you shut up, for a change, ignoramus?
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
Bullshitting about what it's the truth. Why would I shut up if they're replying back to me? There is no change and you're the ignorant one butting in other peoples conversations. Talk about ignorant, this isn't even a forum. Epic fail.
anime891 2 years ago
Somewhat agnostic but more on the deist perspective. Which God are you talking about? The God that I believe in does not intervene. I used to be a Catholic and yes I prayed before. Didn't really help me when I was devout. Science really opened up my mind and got me aware of what things in religion defied the laws of physics and people absolutely believed in them. Some say some stories are symbolism and some are not when in fact they do not know which is which.
anime891 2 years ago
I was being sarcastic. Don't get me wrong, religion does in fact teach morals and values. It's just, when people take it literally and go crazy on the subject and actually live in fear of hell or whatever it is the alternative for a better afterlife. You can't make that assumption because we have no access of the unknown. Unless God spoke to us, but what is our evidence that he did?
anime891 2 years ago
Because everything religion is a joke.
anime891 2 years ago
Can anyone answer the part 1 of that question posed by CH? anyone.....anyone........anyone.......?
pillowbugg 2 years ago
"Name me if you can a noble thought, or a noble action preformed, or a noble thought uttered by a believer in God that could not be uttered by a non-believer." And I say it was Jesus when he was dying on the cross asking God to "forgive them for they know not what they do."
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
Beautiful quote... Yet you do not believe that an atheist could utter the same sentiment? ... Interesting...
You do realize that you are wrong, Yes?
coco7010 2 years ago 2
If an atheist said it it wouldn't be noble ("of an exalted moral or mental character or excellence"), it wouldn't be genuine. In that incident Jesus is asking God's forgiveness of the people mocking him on the cross.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
MrShimasaki. You are only right in that an atheist would not be noble if he talked to a God that he didn't believe in.
He could say out loud to his family, "Forgive them for they know not what they do." Meaning that they don't understand the value of life or some other such thing.
If the character Jesus was to say the same but put the word Buddha in there, then it would also not be noble.
starasoris 2 years ago
Actually Hitchens mentions this comment in his debate with William Lane Craig (in early 2009). This was the only exception Hitchens made when referring to his statement made in this particular video.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
Stupid.
anime891 2 years ago
If you don't believe me get the DVD and check it out yourself.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
You don't make any sense. Hitchens was talking about morals in a sense that, if they really did come from God, would a non-believer have the same level of morality. Jesus asking God to forgive the people who condemned him to the cross is not a moral standard.
anime891 2 years ago
So then why would he make a response like the one I proposed in the debate with Dr. Craig?
The man you talking about who proposed the question validated my answer in his 2009 debate with Dr. Craig.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
Dude, you're not clear on what you're saying. Who made a response? What response? You proposed what response? The man I'm talking about is Hitchens and how can he validate something in which he came up with? It can't be validated for 1 obvious reason: morals is in a nature regardless of belief nor disbelief.
anime891 2 years ago
*human nature
anime891 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
OK let me make it easy for you.
A) Hitchens says: "Name me if you can a noble thought, or a noble action preformed, or a noble thought uttered by a believer in God that could not be uttered by a non-believer."
B) And I say:" it was Jesus when he was dying on the cross asking God to "forgive them for they know not what they do."
In a debate held at Biola University a few months earlier Hitchens addresses his comment (A) by stating that my comment (B) was the only exception to his comment (A).
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
It was only after I saw the debate between Hitchens and Craig on DVD that was recorded a few months before my comment that I realized I had put down the one exception Hitchens mentions.
Morals standards aren't part of Hitchens question. Forgiveness is indeed a moral standard and so is loving thine enemies. Forgiveness is a noble act based on morals which are pillar of Christianity.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
I still don't think you got what he said. What he asked of the audience was basically a rhetorical statement because there was obviously no answer to that. Why? Because the only difference between a believer and non-believer are the beliefs. We are all human and there is no one out there that has experienced such divinity to state any evidence whatsoever. Why? Because we have nothing in our possession to access the spiritual world. Never have never will.
anime891 2 years ago
I got what he said. I'm not going to argue with you about what he did and didn't say. To get further perspective on his comment (A) you need to watch the debate between Hitchens and Craig from 2009.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
As for this comment "there is no one out there that has experienced such divinity to state any evidence whatsoever" I would really beg to differ. There have been thousands of people in the Bible who have experienced the divinity of God. If you take one instance in the New Testament alone (which I believe holds more solid evidence than the old testament in my opinion) there were over 500 people alone that witnessed the resurrection first hand.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
All religious believers to some extent have experiences with divine moments, through the power of prayer, and certain events in their lives. These events are what belief is built upon.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
Divine moments like what? When do they even experience these divine moments? I guarantee you that a person on drugs can experience more divinity than anyone else.
anime891 2 years ago
I'm not talking about drug induced hallucination. People having divine moments are not on drugs nor are they delusional.
A divine moment differs from person to person, but they are moments where a belief is reassured that God is real.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
I believe in God, never said I didn't. But he does not intervene. How do I know this? Because if he did, 6 million Jews wouldn't have suffered in the Holocaust and thousands of people wouldn't have died in Haiti. Countless Massacres and killings out in the world of today including poverty, which children suffer the most in parts of 3rd world countries and child labor and prostitution active until this day.
anime891 2 years ago
I believe that God works in strange ways.
On one hand if you can see things as cause and effect, then down the road everything works toward the glory of God. It may seem sad no but these tragic events lead people to become believers, and if you believe in heaven then these people didn't die in vain and are now in heaven.
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
On the other hand God although being very paternal isnt going to treat us like infants and do everything for us. We need to take what we learn and make things right in the world ourselves. If something tragic like Haiti happens we as Christians need to take care of our brothers and sisters in Haiti. It helps us grow becoming better Christians and it also helps to show others the examples of good Christians
Thats what I believe from a religious viewpoint take what you will from it
MrShimasaki 2 years ago
Divine moments such as? Have you ever experienced it? I would assume that you have had these experiences since you're religious yourself. Please feel free to tell me at least one of the stories that would change the way I think about religion. Prayer? Amputees pray but it's just too bad for them I guess. It's weird that most of the devastating natural disasters happen to people who are poor and have nothing? Haiti for example? Hurricane Katrina? Typhoon in the Philippines? God does not intervene
anime891 2 years ago
@anime891 You should stop bullshitting because you are mentally challenged and wasting too much of the virual space.
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
I'm mentally challenged? Didn't you just read what you wrote to me at first? Talk about challenged, you're the ignoramus if that's the best you can come up with to reply to me. You call me these things without evidence to support it. Something of which your faith applies to as well. Dumbass.
anime891 2 years ago
hitchens , dawkin are Fart .
they make me smile .
thnx
as for mullah schmuckuley
u depress me
TheTattikarlo 2 years ago
The TRUE prophet, Christopher Hitchens. Let him enlighten you people.
Reiff444 2 years ago 19
@Reiff444 his audience are people who should be turned into inanimate material. From beginning to end, he's an expression of idiocy. question, why should people be honest? ANSWER: people should not be honest, but they should live in a society where OTHERS are honest. This is what hichens is about, all these people are about that. How many bad points does he make? none, He doesn';t make any points. religious people are bad because athiests are bad too?? err duur,. this works for him and you.
nVei06 1 year ago
@Reiff444 he would despise you for calling him a prophet btw
slickrickdarula 1 year ago
This comment has received too many negative votes show
Nowadays any scum becomes an atheist. Religion teaches morals - something atheists are protesting due to their amorality.
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Go straight to hell and rot Shmuley Boteach! You're a thief, liar and a crook who stoles hundreds from innocent children's. You're a money hungry devil worshiper! DON'T BUY HIS BOOKS!
MsSarcia 2 years ago
Wow Hypocrisy at its finest. Schmuley has some NERVE to talk and call himself a rabbi ever after HE STOLE BIG MONEY from HEAL THE KIDS FOUNDATION which is the reason why Michael Jackson severed ties with him! Schmuley, I hope you rot in hell for posing as a rabbi while robbing poor and sick children left and right. Self-righteous and self-serving ass-holes like you are made of pure rusted steel--YOU ARE SHAMELESS!!! Hope you snap in 2 very soon!
av427 2 years ago
av427: Wow! Why did you spent so much time writing this message. Sure: when you disagree with somebody the best way is to SLANDER a person. This comes from you a petty thief and an alcoholic.
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
Excuse me DO YOUR RESEARCH, are you kneeling to Shmuley?? YUKK!!! Do you know that your hero is prohibited from having a PULPIT in UK because of 2 cases of MALVERSATION of CHARITY FUNDS! Thats why he calles himself America's Rabbi-- coz in reality, he cannot practice anywhere else! Thank you, thats your idol in a GIST! ---If you cannot do research because you cannot handle the truth, thats your problem!
av427 2 years ago
:] white noise
DevJL 2 years ago
"You asked for this." Gotta love the Hitch.
pitbull103 2 years ago 2
Shmuley is a schmuck.
MrSalamander7 2 years ago 6
@MrSalamander7 boteach destroyed hitchens like an olympic boxer hitting a slow witted retarded guy who drank a lot of scotch. he put so much hurt on him, yet he felt soft warm. yet you think it went otherwise. when hitchens makes any of his statements, nothing he says is relivent or logical. his only point is 'boteach is stupid' you agree with him, but reality does not. Boteach is agile guy. his logic and utility is exceptionally high. Hitchens is slow witted, false, + doesn't use logic at all.
nVei06 1 year ago
@nVei06 LOL. Ok, good luck with that.
MrSalamander7 1 year ago
Hitchens is amazing and knows where to bite to do the most damage against such people.
Great debater. I'd give my right arm to have Hitchens' voice.
DanRYoung 2 years ago 5
Really the silliest of subjects about which to debate, as neither one of these debaters can ever prove themself correct in an absolute sense. However, Hitchens' engaging rhetorical style is always entertaining. Too bad for him he's fighting a losing battle.
petrina1022 2 years ago
So debates are only useful if you can be 'absolutely' correct.
That's a rather unique view. What CAN we debate about then?
BRtankbuster 2 years ago
You misapprehended my meaning. "...in an absolute sense" means it's not a "yes" or "no" argument; there is no way to prove that God either exists or doesn't exist, and therefore one can never make the most convincing argument because of a lack of concrete evidence (viz. facts) to support one's opinions. You can debate about anything you choose, but you'll never win a debate that's based on personal beliefs.
petrina1022 2 years ago
These kind of debates are not merely about personal beliefs though. Like most debates, they are about the facts underlying your personal beliefs.
The atheist says that no convincing case for the existence of God can be made. The theist disagrees and thinks he has a case. Right there you have the basis for a good debate.
The 'winner' will be the one who presents the most convincing argument and who is most likely to be right.
There are very few "yes-or-no" arguments.
BRtankbuster 2 years ago
Fair enough, yet I am still skeptical that one can win a war of opinions. There really are no facts involved when trying to prove or disprove the existence of God. Agnostics claim that since they cannot prove empirically that God exists, he doesn't until "proved" otherwise. A counter-argument would be that just because we cannot see or hear something doesn't mean it isn't there, as was the case before Benjamin Franklin proved that electricity exists.
petrina1022 2 years ago
(cont'd)
I do agree, however, that "winning" a debate involves presenting the most convincing argument, but in the case of actually proving whether or not God exists by philosophical debate? I'll never be convinced that there is a true "winner."
petrina1022 2 years ago
(Actually, that's not what agnostics at all. Read Thomas Huxley's essay where he coined the term for the correct definition.)
I think a war of ideas (not of opinions, as I said there are quite some facts to be interpreted) can be won, but I'm not sure whether we should try to. What the New Atheist movement means to be is a movement that wants religion to be open to criticism, and at the same time show that atheism is a reasonable position to have.
BRtankbuster 2 years ago
I have read Huxley's essay and I disagree that my understanding of the definition of Agnostic in incorrect. Please cite a quotation directly from that source. If I am incorrect, I'd like to have verification to avoid confusion in the future. I like what you said about the New Atheist movement. I agree that religion should be open to criticism and that Atheism is a reasonable position to have. Humankind's struggle with its impulse for religiosity is universal and should not be denegrated.
petrina1022 2 years ago
petrina - right. but then you listen to the voice of your heart.
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
USABOYMAN, You want to challenge me? I can send you the NEWS ARTICLES pertaining to Shmuley's THEFT--2 CASES in the UK and God Knows how many more in the US starting with HEAL THE KIDS! You are blinded by your lack of knowledge and frankly, its pathetic because you obviously dont know WHO you are talking about. Ignorant people like you hide behind religious beliefs because in reality, you dont want to find the TRUTH behind things! Take a Hike!
av427 2 years ago
Does not have anything to do with religious believe. It has to do with your SLANDER. I am sure I can find on the Internet fact that you personally are a child-molester recidivist. You confirm the Internet is a sewarage and indeed you stink, writing complete garbage.
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
The toxicity of radiation to organisms is well known. Ignore it at your peril. Radiation spawned by the Van Allen belts is lethal, as the Russians revealed, after the fact, when they admitted the loss of animals who flew through the lower bands of the magnetosphere.
ThingsBetweenTimes 2 years ago
did he say Euro science or Neuroscience 2:09 I think he said Euro but meant Neuro
Bellantoni 2 years ago
I would be too if I was a sane genius stuck in a loony bin like Hitchens is. To be fair, he puts himself in these situations willingly (i.e. debate after debate) and I'm thankful for that. He's a glutton for (dealing out) punishment.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
I've never seen Hitchens lose. Ever. And I watch A LOT of him.
I've seen him say he was offended and then rail against the use of the world offensive but that's pretty semantic.
Has anyone seen a video where he gets pwned? I'm not being facetious, I would really like to see that.
LazyIrish829 2 years ago
He's often inebriated.
ThingsBetweenTimes 2 years ago
Really?!!
ElectricSexPants 2 years ago
It doesn't exist. Will never exist.
lucy4cp3 2 years ago
You asked for white noise and you got it. So true. Absolutely a question designed to bolster the argument of the rabbi yet one that was detrimental to his argument when viewed by anyone but a die hard theist.
Pastorius124 2 years ago 2
we ought to establish specialized clinics that would treat christian and other religious delusions.
illbetilbake 2 years ago
'God is he who helps the helpless... God is he who I get angry at when he doesn't help the helpless...'
Rofl... our satire attempts really have to work hard to catch up to the things theists, themselves, actually say...
sam51092 2 years ago 12
yea! it's U dumass!
sneakysnakey10 2 years ago
God is my front lawn....I hella answered that question better than boteach lol, silly boteach
mathmexican4234 3 years ago
Boteach gave bullsht answers aka he doesn't actually know what God is.
This is more important than people realize, if you don't even know what "god" is then why are claiming it exists?
Sshelly34213 3 years ago
This has been flagged as spam show
Two arrogant pricks: one jewish, one half-jewish. Hitchens is a dork.
clash715 3 years ago
R. Boteach is brilliant and this Hitchens is an arrogant son of a bitch. He accuses R. Boteach in filibustereing while himself unable to stop talking.
DNAPROTEINN 3 years ago
Hitchens arrogant?..what because he does not believe the same belief as you? that's like complaining that others don't share your opinion.he is entitled to it so don't call him arrogant, if that's the case boteach is arrogant for not believing a non-believer.
prisspross32 3 years ago
priss: I am just expressing my opinion. You love Hitchens? No problem - it is your business. The problem with your amateurish atheists that you want people walk in a lockstep like soldiers on a parade. Why are YOU so much afraid of the opposite opinion. By the way I sincerely think that Hichens arguments are primitive and banal.
DNAPROTEINN 3 years ago
my business? so why do you parade your beliefs around then.....and love him? u imposing im gay as a pathetic debate?...who said im an atheist? and you use words like primitive and banal to improve your appearance....and who's afraid? everything you say to me applies directly to you..yes you can have an opinion but calling him a SON OF A BITCH is harsh, you don't know him, seems your getting defensive as a result of his brilliance and sense.
prisspross32 3 years ago
priss: This is not your space; when you are on a public forum be ready for different opinion otherwise you behave either as a little dictator or jist a coward. I am standing behind my words because I cannot stand when an arrogant goose with a haughty accent appeals to the low atheistic denominator. Any demogogue is SOB because he tries to control human mind.
USABOYMAN 3 years ago
you are amazing,,,,,everything you have said to me applies directly to yourself.....mind control?....religion does the same...i am ready for different opinions....so because i dont agree with your opinion means im a coward? again, same rules applies to you.
prisspross32 3 years ago
priss: the best possible rule might be to express honest opinion-which I do. It is you who criticize me, I tolerate your view wholeheartedely.
You change the subject: we speak of Hitches not of religion. Do you think that as long whoever is an atheist s/he automatically is right?
DNAPROTEINN 3 years ago
oh right you playing that one.........honest opinion you say, which you do so do i, make yourself sound loving by tolerating my view....ide rather you be honest and tell me what you think.....i am not right, i dont know why where here, or how we got here, i can admit that honestly , yet you claim to have an answer due to a belief !!......Do you think that as long whoever is an Theist s/he automatically is right?
prisspross32 3 years ago
priss. Thx. You are a Gentleman. I am not here to play. I have much more questions than answers, but this does not make me a relativist. I respect theologists and atheists who speak coherently and objectivelyy. As for "Theologists" there are not too many of them who are persuasive. That does not prevent me in my belief in the Author of the Beginning.
Hitchens upsets me because he is banal, speaks platitudes and continuously is trying to bully his opponents.
USABOYMAN 3 years ago
we should agree to disagree, we wont get anywhere were both stubborn in our views so lets leave it at that...thanx for the discussion.
prisspross32 3 years ago
priss - Lets
USABOYMAN 3 years ago
@USABOYMAN who do you believe created The Author of the Beginning? Where did The Author come from? Thanks.
jomper 2 years ago
@jomper God has no need to have been created, since He exists either outside time (where cause and effect do not operate) or within multiple dimensions of time ...
USABOYMAN 2 years ago
How can you know this? Is there any reason you can give me to believe what you say about God that doesn't involve a leap of faith? Wouldn't it be just as meaningful to say "the universe was created outside time" without involving the idea of God? And is it just your God that has no need to be created? What about other gods, like the Hindu gods? Are they also outside of time and and space, like the God you're talking about? Are all gods the same in this respect? Thanks.
jomper 2 years ago
You talk like you actually know how God came to be. Just stop, you're ignorant.
anime891 2 years ago
I believe in God. I just can't stand the fucker.
Carlisle3Leeds1 3 years ago
Who the hell picked that jew to represent religion in this debate, its like they want to lose or something. "For me god is he who watches while I make a fricking fool out of myself in front of thousands." Thats what he should have said
DeviantDespot 3 years ago 2
Boteach is so obviously full of shit...
heiyoulianglaohu 3 years ago 3
could the desire for a uptopian workers state under communism not have come from atheism though? Perhaps atheists need something else to fill the spiritual void left from their abandonment of religion and are more susceptable to human messiahs and radical politics.
More importantly, atheism doesnt prevent people from being killers. Atheistic regimes have been the most brutal of all regimes.. I doubt most nazi or communist prison camp guards were a bible thumbing churchgoing christian.
jjmcoates 3 years ago
again you missed the whole point of our debates, we aren't trying to convert you to atheism, it is not a religion no rules, no laws, no scripture....what do we need to fill in our so called void? i suppose by filling your void with an easy answer to the universe you must feel happy?i doubt you must lay in bed at night and think, maybe i should take responsibility for my own actions, and discover the real truth behind everything.Instead of giving up and accepting the easiest theory ever to grasp.
prisspross32 3 years ago
"You asked for white noise and you got it!" Thats hilarius. Well said! It is white noise. It is very emotional white noise.
7A35 3 years ago
Why do people argue for the existence of this fictional god character?
7A35 3 years ago 2
the very last point Hitchens made is a bit silly. He could also say that non-believers including the leaders of the Soviet Union have done wicked things. Acts of violence have been committed by religious and non-religious people. But the acts of believers and non-believers don't make their beliefs either right or wrong.
jjmcoates 3 years ago
Hi Jim, yes whilst leaders of say, the soviet union commited wicked crimes, they were not in the name of atheism. His point is that many wicked things have been commited in the name of religion, but not actually in the name of atheism.
tpw321 3 years ago 2
Well i don't think the soviet union imprisoned priests, leveled russian orthodox churches and killed innocent religious believers because of their russian nationalism or because communist economic theory calls for it....i think it was the atheism
jjmcoates 3 years ago
Communist Russia regarded religious organizations as a hinderance towards the creation of a worker's state. In that respect we are generally looking at threats to political idealogical issues, not a question of a sort of atheism v religion.
What people killed for in this respect was communism and any of the threats to it. The notion that they killed for atheism in particular is innaccurate as the cause and belief was a political ideology not a religious or irreligious one.
tpw321 3 years ago 2
This Rabbi Schmuley is an absolute nimrod. He has dedicated his entire life to God yet cannot properly answer a simple question. I am not a terribly religious person but could have provided a much better answer. There is not enough space for me to provide the answer here, but if anyone wants it, I will gladly e-mail you. This Rabbi should be ashamed of himself. Stupid, Stupid, Stupid!
anthmar35 3 years ago