Christopher Hitchens: Lite Fare for the Uninformed

[Ibanez]

The best thing I learned from Catholic school was that in order to reach heaven or salvation, a person does not need to belong to a religion. The Golden Rule goes a long way.

[D1B]

The best thing I learned from Catholic school was that in order to reach heaven or salvation, a person does not need to belong to a religion. The Golden Rule goes a long way.

There's that "long tradition of religious scholarship" working wonders again.

[D1B]

What has religion taught you, about our reason for being?

If you don't glean anything else from the bible and believe it's simply a bunch of disjointed stories, you can take away the ten commandments and the golden rule as a loose framework of how to live a decent life and respect those around you.

Is this "wisdom" worth a lifetime of Sunday mornings?

Really, the 10 commandments?

[D1B]

In fact, most present day christians are the same way: ignorant of the history behind the creation of the bible and reasons where books were and were not included

FIFY

True, but Joe is talking about roughly the 2000 years of theology that's been accumulated, not so much the bible. He'll be the first to admit most of the bible is questionable, on many fronts, include authorship.

The bottom line though is none of it proves the existence of god. The fact that you have to have an education on par with someone like Joe and a gargantuan appetite for self delusion that comes with a lifetime of indoctrination to even grasp a few pieces of unoriginal wisdom is further proof that the christian god is a fabrication orchestrated by the rich and powerful to control the weak.

No decent, loving god would hide behind such a theological phalanx and be only truly accessible to a select few...to use the words of Joe's Salon contributer, "To be intellectually shameful is to be dishonest, to tell less than you know, or ought to know, and to shape what you present in a way that misrepresents the real state of affairs. In this sense, and in Hitchens’s (or God's) own term, his book (the bible et al) lacks “decency.”

[ASUG8]

If you don't glean anything else from the bible and believe it's simply a bunch of disjointed stories, you can take away the ten commandments and the golden rule as a loose framework of how to live a decent life and respect those around you.

Is this "wisdom" worth a lifetime of Sunday mornings?

Really, the 10 commandments?

For some people it is worth a lifetime of church attendance. I don't necessarily think you have to darken the door every time the church lights are on like some folks. Some people need the weekly reinforcement of hope and morality or are trying to instill it in their kids. I get it, and I don't judge anyone for their choices one way or the other. I choose sporadic church attendance, but I don't think sitting in a church makes you any more of a Christian than sitting in a garage makes you a car.

As far as the commandments, I don't kill anybody, I don't cheat with their wives, I don't steal, I try not to lie any more than necessary , I honor my parents, you likely won't hear me dropping GDit, so yeah I guess I do pretty much adhere to them. I think you could probably observe the golden rule and cover most of them in the first place without having to enumerate the commandments.

[JoltinJoe]

Mission accomplished!

You're welcome Joe.

This thread is thriving beyond my wildest dreams -- respectfully -- all because of ignorant state school douchebags like you.

[D1B]

Mission accomplished!

You're welcome Joe.

This thread is thriving beyond my wildest dreams -- respectfully -- all because of ignorant state school douchebags like you.

What's funny about the thread is your Salon contributor waiting till Hitchens was dead before skewering him. Smart move and utterly hilarious.

[JoltinJoe]

This thread is thriving beyond my wildest dreams -- respectfully -- all because of ignorant state school douchebags like you.

What's funny about the thread is your Salon contributor waiting till Hitchens was dead before skewering him. Smart move and utterly hilarious.

I agree with this 100%.

Hitchens would have easily flamed this guy with big nasty words, which would have rolled off his tongue so fast that White would have been stuttering something like, "But wait ... Kierkegaard spoke to this issue ... in, oh what book was it?"

[JoltinJoe]

Respectfully ...

[ASUG8]

Mission accomplished!

You're welcome Joe.

This thread is thriving beyond my wildest dreams -- respectfully -- all because of ignorant state school douchebags like you.

Wow Joe. Elitist much?

[JoltinJoe]

This thread is thriving beyond my wildest dreams -- respectfully -- all because of ignorant state school douchebags like you.

Wow Joe. Elitist much?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

The only people concerned about elitism are those who are not elite.

Thank you for noticing.

[ASUG8]

Wow Joe. Elitist much?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

The only people concerned about elitism are those who are not elite.

Thank you for noticing.

"Concern" implies that I care that you believe yourself to be elite.

[JoltinJoe]

You say that like it's a bad thing.

The only people concerned about elitism are those who are not elite.

Thank you for noticing.

"Concern" implies that I care that you believe yourself to be elite.

Your sentence structure -- "you believe yourself" -- offends my elite sensibilities.

[houndawg]

I have said for years here that is it easy for me to dismiss Christopher Hitchens because of his dishonest, half-assed approach to genuine scholarship supporting the existence of God, and his callous ignorance of deeply reasoned philosophy and theology.

In fact, most present day atheists are the same way: ignorant of the intellectual tradition supporting the belief in God, and uninterested in reading the great philosophers and theologians who have eloquently explained the reasons for deism, or at least theism.

If Hitchens wasn't already dead, this article written by an atheist and recently published in Salon would have laid him out cold. I don't agree with this Curtis White's ultimate conclusions, but I can respect this guy and his opinions. I'll be on the look out for more of his writings.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/23/christo ... no_favors/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some people use dope, some people use a recycled Egyptian sun-god myth called Jesus. I'm embarrassed for their ignorance but if it helps them get through the day its no big deal.

Actually we aren't too far away from being able to solve the question of whether or not there really was a Jesus. Our intruments can now detect planets around other stars and they're getting better resolution every day. Since Jesus was supposed to have come out of his tomb and ascended bodily to heaven we know that having mass he was constrained by the speed of light and therefore can be no more than 2,000 light years away and likely a great deal less. We know roughly when this was alleged to have occurred so we can narrow down the part of the sky we need to be looking at. Our instruments develop better resolution continually, so we are approaching the time when we should be able to spot him on his way to heaven. When those pics become available I'll become a believer.

I'm wondering when their will step forth a believer smart enough to use the entropy argument. That's where I'd go if I were very interested in the question.

[JoltinJoe]

I have said for years here that is it easy for me to dismiss Christopher Hitchens because of his dishonest, half-assed approach to genuine scholarship supporting the existence of God, and his callous ignorance of deeply reasoned philosophy and theology.

In fact, most present day atheists are the same way: ignorant of the intellectual tradition supporting the belief in God, and uninterested in reading the great philosophers and theologians who have eloquently explained the reasons for deism, or at least theism.

If Hitchens wasn't already dead, this article written by an atheist and recently published in Salon would have laid him out cold. I don't agree with this Curtis White's ultimate conclusions, but I can respect this guy and his opinions. I'll be on the look out for more of his writings.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/23/christo ... no_favors/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some people use dope, some people use a recycled Egyptian sun-god myth called Jesus. I'm embarrassed for their ignorance but if it helps them get through the day its no big deal.

Actually we aren't too far away from being able to solve the question of whether or not there really was a Jesus. Our intruments can now detect planets around other stars and they're getting better resolution every day. Since Jesus was supposed to have come out of his tomb and ascended bodily to heaven we know that having mass he was constrained by the speed of light and therefore can be no more than 2,000 light years away and likely a great deal less. We know roughly when this was alleged to have occurred so we can narrow down the part of the sky we need to be looking at. Our instruments develop better resolution continually, so we are approaching the time when we should be able to spot him on his way to heaven. When those pics become available I'll become a believer.

I'm wondering when their will step forth a believer smart enough to use the entropy argument. That's where I'd go if I were very interested in the question.

Yes, you do that, Sherlock.

[houndawg]

I have said for years here that is it easy for me to dismiss Christopher Hitchens because of his dishonest, half-assed approach to genuine scholarship supporting the existence of God, and his callous ignorance of deeply reasoned philosophy and theology.

In fact, most present day atheists are the same way: ignorant of the intellectual tradition supporting the belief in God, and uninterested in reading the great philosophers and theologians who have eloquently explained the reasons for deism, or at least theism.

If Hitchens wasn't already dead, this article written by an atheist and recently published in Salon would have laid him out cold. I don't agree with this Curtis White's ultimate conclusions, but I can respect this guy and his opinions. I'll be on the look out for more of his writings.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/23/christo ... no_favors/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some people use dope, some people use a recycled Egyptian sun-god myth called Jesus. I'm embarrassed for their ignorance but if it helps them get through the day its no big deal.

Actually we aren't too far away from being able to solve the question of whether or not there really was a Jesus. Our intruments can now detect planets around other stars and they're getting better resolution every day. Since Jesus was supposed to have come out of his tomb and ascended bodily to heaven we know that having mass he was constrained by the speed of light and therefore can be no more than 2,000 light years away and likely a great deal less. We know roughly when this was alleged to have occurred so we can narrow down the part of the sky we need to be looking at. Our instruments develop better resolution continually, so we are approaching the time when we should be able to spot him. When those pics become available I'll become a believer.

[houndawg]

Some people use dope, some people use a recycled Egyptian sun-god myth called Jesus. I'm embarrassed for their ignorance but if it helps them get through the day its no big deal.

Actually we aren't too far away from being able to solve the question of whether or not there really was a Jesus. Our intruments can now detect planets around other stars and they're getting better resolution every day. Since Jesus was supposed to have come out of his tomb and ascended bodily to heaven we know that having mass he was constrained by the speed of light and therefore can be no more than 2,000 light years away and likely a great deal less. We know roughly when this was alleged to have occurred so we can narrow down the part of the sky we need to be looking at. Our instruments develop better resolution continually, so we are approaching the time when we should be able to spot him on his way to heaven. When those pics become available I'll become a believer.

I'm wondering when their will step forth a believer smart enough to use the entropy argument. That's where I'd go if I were very interested in the question.

Yes, you do that, Sherlock.

Nice dodge Joe. here I am trying to help you out and you duck and cover with nary a word of these millenia of religious scholarship. I think somebody isn't a true believer.

[JoltinJoe]

Yes, you do that, Sherlock.

Nice dodge Joe.

BTW, I missed the end of your comment.

If by the "entropy argument," you mean pointing out the orderly nature of our cosmos and how conducive it is to hosting our life form -- and how many departures from chance are necessary to create such a cosmos -- I appreciate your comment about how smart I am, since I have made that argument on this board several times. Thanks!

[JoltinJoe]

Yes, you do that, Sherlock.

Nice dodge Joe. here I am trying to help you out and you duck and cover with nary a word of these millenia of religious scholarship. I think somebody isn't a true believer.

Dude, you misunderstand my intentions. I am just trying to cause a ruckus here because this place has becoming a boring gentlemen's club. If you want harmony, try AGS.

[ASUG8]

Nice dodge Joe. here I am trying to help you out and you duck and cover with nary a word of these millenia of religious scholarship. I think somebody isn't a true believer.

Dude, you misunderstand my intentions. I am just trying to cause a ruckus here because this place has becoming a boring gentlemen's club. If you want harmony, try AGS.

Your grammar insults the sensibilities of those of us who were state schooled.

[death dealer]

I have no use for either fundamentalists or athiests - both are firmly entrenched and it will take several teams of Clydesdales to drag either even slightly toward middle ground. Religion IMO is best left to the individual and his/her personal beliefs - I don't need either view in my face unless I choose to engage it.

Tits have been ripped.

/thread.

[JoltinJoe]

Dude, you misunderstand my intentions. I am just trying to cause a ruckus here because this place has becoming a boring gentlemen's club. If you want harmony, try AGS.

Your grammar insults the sensibilities of those of us who were state schooled.

You mean because it was perfect??

[GannonFan]

I have said for years here that is it easy for me to dismiss Christopher Hitchens because of his dishonest, half-assed approach to genuine scholarship supporting the existence of God, and his callous ignorance of deeply reasoned philosophy and theology.

In fact, most present day atheists are the same way: ignorant of the intellectual tradition supporting the belief in God, and uninterested in reading the great philosophers and theologians who have eloquently explained the reasons for deism, or at least theism.

If Hitchens wasn't already dead, this article written by an atheist and recently published in Salon would have laid him out cold. I don't agree with this Curtis White's ultimate conclusions, but I can respect this guy and his opinions. I'll be on the look out for more of his writings.

http://www.salon.com/2013/06/23/christo ... no_favors/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Some people use dope, some people use a recycled Egyptian sun-god myth called Jesus. I'm embarrassed for their ignorance but if it helps them get through the day its no big deal.

Actually we aren't too far away from being able to solve the question of whether or not there really was a Jesus. Our intruments can now detect planets around other stars and they're getting better resolution every day. Since Jesus was supposed to have come out of his tomb and ascended bodily to heaven we know that having mass he was constrained by the speed of light and therefore can be no more than 2,000 light years away and likely a great deal less. We know roughly when this was alleged to have occurred so we can narrow down the part of the sky we need to be looking at. Our instruments develop better resolution continually, so we are approaching the time when we should be able to spot him on his way to heaven. When those pics become available I'll become a believer.

I'm wondering when their will step forth a believer smart enough to use the entropy argument. That's where I'd go if I were very interested in the question.

You really spent the time to type all of that? Seriously, for those who believe, you're trying to say that God, the entity that created the universe, is going to somehow be constrined by the laws of the universe? He's that feeble? Come on, you just typed all of that hoping that someone would think you were witty. Maybe someone will.

[GannonFan]

Wow Joe. Elitist much?

You say that like it's a bad thing.

The only people concerned about elitism are those who are not elite.

Thank you for noticing.

This is why you just have to like Joe - good stuff there!

See, this stuff is witty.

[houndawg]

Nice dodge Joe.

BTW, I missed the end of your comment.

If by the "entropy argument," you mean pointing out the orderly nature of our cosmos and how conducive it is to hosting our life form -- and how many departures from chance are necessary to create such a cosmos -- I appreciate your comment about how smart I am, since I have made that argument on this board several times. Thanks!

By entropy argument I'm referring to the fact that as time goes forward, entropy increases. As you wind the clock back the universe was more orderly yesterday than it is today. As you get closer and closer to the Big Bang the universe was in a state of higher order than it is now.