Archive for nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Nglreturns is a forum to discuss religion, philosophy, ethics etc...

NGLReturns Daily Quiz - Play here!
 



       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Atheist chat
genghiscant

Christopher Hitchens dies.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUGiWoCaR_0
genghiscant

One of the last things that Hitchens wrote.

http://www.vanityfair.com/culture/2012/01/hitchens-201201
Farmer Geddon

As a hint: if you enclose the links with [vidoe]http:www.whatever the video is[/vidoe]

For example:  

Link


Then it appears on the page without us having to open a new Window/Tab..

(Of course you spell video correctly, but for reasons that will become apparent I had to misspell it)
SceptiKarl

I wasn't too keen on the man, but he was certainly erudite and expressed himself eloquently. As for his no compromise with religious views, well I agree 100% with that!

No doubt he's now at that never closing bar in heaven, imbibing Jonhy Walker Black Label, and in vehement discussion with St Augustine and of course St Peter, (who let him in!)
Ketty

With apologies to Queen:  And another one's gone, and another one's gone; another one bites the dust. Death's gonna get you too . . .
SceptiKarl

I was wrong! Apparently Hitchens is in hell not heaven! Here's the evidence:

[video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0hVogaE5XeE[video]

As Mark Twain said the weather is better in heaven but the company is better in hell! (If the link doesn't work, please blame Farmer not me!)
The Boyg

SceptiKarl wrote:
(If the link doesn't work, please blame Farmer not me!)


No, it's clearly your fault.  
Lexilogio

Its a shame. He was a very intelligent man, who made significant contributions to the ongoing debate about belief.

I'd a lot more time for him than Dawkins.
SceptiKarl

Lexi:

Quote:
I'd a lot more time for him than Dawkins.


Heck, Lexi, we couldn't even agree today is Friday! At least Dawkins has never claimed that "religion poisons everything", he merely claims it is a mistaken belief, - a delusion. A POV I agree with.

But of course your choice of "favourite atheist" is up to you, not me!

Certainly in the mist enveloped land of Christianity, I would prefer Rowan Williams to Joseph Ratzinger. Both are vague, but "Holy Joe" is less vague about what will happen to non-believers like me. Yes indeed, Lexi, hell is real!

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rcc_salv.htm

Clear as mud, eh Lexi?
Lexilogio

SceptiKarl wrote:
Lexi:

Quote:
I'd a lot more time for him than Dawkins.


Heck, Lexi, we couldn't even agree today is Friday! At least Dawkins has never claimed that "religion poisons everything", he merely claims it is a mistaken belief, - a delusion. A POV I agree with.

But of course your choice of "favourite atheist" is up to you, not me!

Certainly in the mist enveloped land of Christianity, I would prefer Rowan Williams to Joseph Ratzinger. Both are vague, but "Holy Joe" is less vague about what will happen to non-believers like me. Yes indeed, Lexi, hell is real!

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rcc_salv.htm

Clear as mud, eh Lexi?


 I liked him because he was inordinately well read.
I didn't like his views, but I appreciated that he used a wealth of earlier works
Farmer Geddon

SceptiKarl wrote:
I was wrong! Apparently Hitchens is in hell not heaven! Here's the evidence:


Link


As Mark Twain said the weather is better in heaven but the company is better in hell! (If the link doesn't work, please blame Farmer not me!)


You forgot the slash [/] before the video in the 2nd box [/video]..


cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
"Holy Joe" is less vague about what will happen to non-believers like me. Yes indeed, Lexi, hell is real!

http://www.religioustolerance.org/rcc_salv.htm

Clear as mud, eh Lexi?


The link does not support your view at all. I assume you simply hoped no-one would read it!
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
The link does not support your view at all. I assume you simply hoped no-one would read it!


Perhaps cyberman would be good enough to explain the "correct" position regarding hell, seeing as I've apparently erred! In the meantime I quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia re hell:

Quote:
There is a hell, i.e. all those who die in personal mortal sin, as enemies of God, and unworthy of eternal life, will be severely punished by God after death. On the nature of mortal sin, see SIN; on the immediate beginning of punishment after death, see PARTICULAR JUDGMENT. As to the fate of those who die free from personal mortal sin, but in original sin, see LIMBO (limbus parvulorum).


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

Is Jesus frying tonight cyberman?
SceptiKarl

Farmer Geddon:

Quote:
You forgot the slash [/] before the video in the 2nd box [/video]..


Bah humbug! Why can't I stop making mistakes? I'll have to blame Adam, especially when cyberman picks me up on having a fart in the garden!
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
cyberman:

Quote:
The link does not support your view at all. I assume you simply hoped no-one would read it!


Perhaps cyberman would be good enough to explain the "correct" position regarding hell, seeing as I've apparently erred! In the meantime I quote from the Catholic Encyclopedia re hell:

Quote:
There is a hell, i.e. all those who die in personal mortal sin, as enemies of God, and unworthy of eternal life, will be severely punished by God after death. On the nature of mortal sin, see SIN; on the immediate beginning of punishment after death, see PARTICULAR JUDGMENT. As to the fate of those who die free from personal mortal sin, but in original sin, see LIMBO (limbus parvulorum).


http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/07207a.htm

Is Jesus frying tonight cyberman?


Do you have no comment at all on the fact that you have posted a link which does not support your position?

When did I say you had erred?

Above you have posted another quote - this time from the Catholic Encyclopaedia - which again does not support your position.
cymrudynnion

Re: Christopher Hitchens dies.

genghiscant wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUGiWoCaR_0
Having looked at the link one can see how misguided the poor man was. Oh well, at least he knows the truth about God and an rest in peace with Him.
genghiscant

Quote:
genghiscant wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUGiWoCaR_0


Quote:
Having looked at the link one can see how misguided the poor man was. Oh well, at least he knows the truth about God and an rest in peace with Him.


How on earth did you arrive at that opinion?
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
Above you have posted another quote - this time from the Catholic Encyclopaedia - which again does not support your position.


My position is that hell is a concept which has no basis in reality. The fact that I posted opposing, and contradictory Christian views to my own view, merely shows that I am aware of other views.

So is Jesus frying tonight? Or is that too metaphorical for you cyberman? Is Hitchens having a nice philosophical chat with St Peter; being tortured by Satan; or just dead?

What do you think, if anything, is happening to Hitchen's immortal soul?
cymrudynnion

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
genghiscant wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RUGiWoCaR_0


Quote:
Having looked at the link one can see how misguided the poor man was. Oh well, at least he knows the truth about God and an rest in peace with Him.


How on earth did you arrive at that opinion?
Its quite simple reeally. The man thought or believed he was an athiest and as been stated many times before by others of greater knowledge than myself Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest. Secondly since this man has died he has since found the truth and now rests safely with Our Lord and Saviour.
SceptiKarl

cymrudynnion:

Quote:
Its quite simple reeally. The man thought or believed he was an athiest and as been stated many times before by others of greater knowledge than myself Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest.


So presumably cymrudynnion is not clever enough to not believe in Allah, Thor, Vishna, Zeus or countless other gods? How about fairies or Harry Potter, Hamlet, David Copperfield? Do we need super intelligence not to believe in them too?

Or, as it seems more sensible to me, regard them all as fictional characters who can affect our emotions, without our having to believe them to be real?
genghiscant

cymrudynnion wrote:
Quote:
Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest.


Why not?
SceptiKarl

cymrudynnion:


Quote:
Secondly since this man has died he has since found the truth and now rests safely with Our Lord and Saviour.


Pure assertion! cymrudynnion is completely ignoring what the Bible says about what will happen to Hitchens, which is the fiery lake and eternal torture, and instead paints a happy ending!

Falsehoods? Nay problem for s true Christian! (BTW, don't forget that Commandment about not bearing false witness.)
cymrudynnion

genghiscant wrote:
cymrudynnion wrote:
Quote:
Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest.


Why not?
just fact
cymrudynnion

SceptiKarl wrote:
cymrudynnion:


Quote:
Secondly since this man has died he has since found the truth and now rests safely with Our Lord and Saviour.


Pure assertion! cymrudynnion is completely ignoring what the Bible says about what will happen to Hitchens, which is the fiery lake and eternal torture, and instead paints a happy ending!

Falsehoods? Nay problem for s true Christian! (BTW, don't forget that Commandment about not bearing false witness.)
No assertion. If one believes in Christ one knows the Lord will take you in his arms at death and forgive indiscretions.
SceptiKarl

Did Jesus take Hitler and Stalin in his arms and forgive them? How about the SS guards in the death camps? Or those Spanish RCC Conquistators in South America who butchered and tortured their way into the continent?

OK Hitchens did nothing like those people, but he sure as anything didn't believe in Jesus!
Lexilogio

SceptiKarl wrote:
Did Jesus take Hitler and Stalin in his arms and forgive them? How about the SS guards in the death camps? Or those Spanish RCC Conquistators in South America who butchered and tortured their way into the continent?

OK Hitchens did nothing like those people, but he sure as anything didn't believe in Jesus!


It's not for us to decide who has enough goodness to earn God's forgiveness and eternal blessing in heaven. I agree that it would be hard to understand if God forgave people like Hitler - or serial killers. But we don't know.

I find it hard to accept that God would reject people who were generally good - simply because they did not believe. Perhaps its because my Gran was a confirmed atheist. Plus I've met some lovely atheists on these boards. I think God can see through the front - and would accept those who have love in their hearts for others.
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
cyberman:

Quote:
Above you have posted another quote - this time from the Catholic Encyclopaedia - which again does not support your position.


My position is that hell is a concept which has no basis in reality. What do you think, if anything, is happening to Hitchen's immortal soul?


No, the position which you have stated and which you are attempting to jsutify is that we think that you are going to hell for being an atheist. We do not think that.

I have no idea what is happening to the man's soul, but I don;t suppose anything terrible!

I do not think that being an atheist gets you sent to hell. You have claimed that this is Catholic teaching, but you have failed to supply a source which supports your claim.
cymrudynnion

SceptiKarl wrote:
cymrudynnion:

Quote:
Its quite simple reeally. The man thought or believed he was an athiest and as been stated many times before by others of greater knowledge than myself Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest.


So presumably cymrudynnion is not clever enough to not believe in Allah, Thor, Vishna, Zeus or countless other gods? How about fairies or Harry Potter, Hamlet, David Copperfield? Do we need super intelligence not to believe in them too?

Or, as it seems more sensible to me, regard them all as fictional characters who can affect our emotions, without our having to believe them to be real?
By the same token Scep neither are you intelligent enough
cymrudynnion

SceptiKarl wrote:
Did Jesus take Hitler and Stalin in his arms and forgive them? How about the SS guards in the death camps? Or those Spanish RCC Conquistators in South America who butchered and tortured their way into the continent?

OK Hitchens did nothing like those people, but he sure as anything didn't believe in Jesus!
He may not have believed in Jesus during his earthly life but he sure knows differently now he rests with Our Lord in eternal life
trentvoyager

cymrudynnion wrote:
SceptiKarl wrote:
Did Jesus take Hitler and Stalin in his arms and forgive them? How about the SS guards in the death camps? Or those Spanish RCC Conquistators in South America who butchered and tortured their way into the continent?

OK Hitchens did nothing like those people, but he sure as anything didn't believe in Jesus!
He may not have believed in Jesus during his earthly life but he sure knows differently now he rests with Our Lord in eternal life


More supposition - you don't know that and neither do I. You might want that to be the case - but wanting something doesn't necessarily make it true.

There is another point about wanting not being the same as getting - but I'll leave that for another discussion.
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
what the Bible says about what will happen to Hitchens, which is the fiery lake and eternal torture,f


A question for you to refuse to answer: Where does the Bible say that Hitchens will be subject to eternal torture?
genghiscant

Quote:
cymrudynnion wrote:
Quote:
Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest
.

Quote:
genghiscant wrote:
Why not?


Quote:
cymrudynnion wrote:
just fact


A fact must be shown to correspond to experience & be scientifically verified by repeatable experiments. None of which applies to your  statement that "Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest."
Just saying it doesn't make it true, but I'm sure you're able to show your reasoning & prove that it's true? I await your reply.
Leonard James

Quote:
Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest.

It is an obvious fact to all but  fools that intelligence has nothing to do with being an atheist.

That there are intelligent and stupid men in both camps clearly demonstrates that.
cymrudynnion

genghiscant wrote:
Quote:
cymrudynnion wrote:
Quote:
Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest
.

Quote:
genghiscant wrote:
Why not?


Quote:
cymrudynnion wrote:
just fact


A fact must be shown to correspond to experience & be scientifically verified by repeatable experiments. None of which applies to your  statement that "Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest."
Just saying it doesn't make it true, but I'm sure you're able to show your reasoning & prove that it's true? I await your reply.
Wait on then
Those are not my words but try googling them and you will find out who actually said them.
cyberman

Leonard James wrote:
Quote:
Man is not intelligent enough to be athiest.

It is an obvious fact to all but  fools that intelligence has nothing to do with being an atheist.

That there are intelligent and stupid men in both camps clearly demonstrates that.


Leonard is entirely correct here. I'm not sure where you're going with this, Cym..?
genghiscant

Quote:
Wait on then
Those are not my words but try googling them and you will find out who actually said them.


It doesn't matter who originally said the words, you repeated them presumably knowing what they meant & were able to explain them. You didn't ascribe them to anyone else.
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
A question for you to refuse to answer: Where does the Bible say that Hitchens will be subject to eternal torture?


Well, obviously the prohphets were not well enough informed by God to name Hitchens by name so they generalised. You could look to inspiration from Revelation 20, 14

Quote:
Then death and Hades were thrown into the lake of fire. The lake of fire is the second death.


http://bible.cc/revelation/20-14.htm

Or if that is not to your taste, here's another piece of wisdom from the Bible:

Quote:
"But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death" (Revelation 21:8).  


As far as I gather, Hitchens, like me, was one of the "unbelieving". Now is my answer specific enough for you cyberman?
SceptiKarl

cym...:

Quote:
By the same token Scep neither are you intelligent enough


Oh dear cym, have you fallen into the trap of personal insults? I could be the biggest idiot in the world and still say "the speed of light is approximately 300,000 km per second in a vacuum", and it would still be true.

An intelligent man like Rowan Williams, (ABoC), could tell me that Jesus died on the cross, and came back to life on the third day and levitated Himself to heaven. I wouldn't believe it, and nor, I suspect, does he.
SceptiKarl

Lexi:

Quote:
It's not for us to decide who has enough goodness to earn God's forgiveness and eternal blessing in heaven. I agree that it would be hard to understand if God forgave people like Hitler - or serial killers. But we don't know.

I find it hard to accept that God would reject people who were generally good - simply because they did not believe. Perhaps its because my Gran was a confirmed atheist. Plus I've met some lovely atheists on these boards. I think God can see through the front - and would accept those who have love in their hearts for others.


Well, yes, I realise that hell is rather unfashionable among certain more "moderate" Christians such as yourself, but the fact is you are denying what the Bible actually says, and instead inserting your own moral guidelines into the texts that suit your position. Even accepting your position that, e.g. God would have Hitchens in heaven, where would people like Hitler or Stalin be? In a fiery lake for eternity? Does that sit happily with your conscience? You are in heaven on the balcony having a gin and tonic, enjoying eternally the music you like, looking down on the "fiery lake". There are Hitler and Stalin and Torquemedo desperately suffering amongst many others, including perhaps some of your/ my relatives. Would you enjoy your drink and think "Yes s/he deserved it", or like me, would you be appalled by the idea that the Creator of the universe could treat any of His creations in such a way?
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
No, the position which you have stated and which you are attempting to jsutify is that we think that you are going to hell for being an atheist. We do not think that.

I have no idea what is happening to the man's soul, but I don;t suppose anything terrible!

I do not think that being an atheist gets you sent to hell. You have claimed that this is Catholic teaching, but you have failed to supply a source which supports your claim.


Come on cyberman! Have you never read the Bible? The Jesus who wants you to turn the other cheek also came "not in peace, but with a sword"! He came to separate the believers from the non-believers, the sheep from the goats. Jesus is the first one to threaten the likes of me with the "fiery lake".

A few (?5) years ago the Vatican issued a statement confirming their view that hell is real. I will search for it and find it if you say I am lying, but tonight I have to do other things.


PS I don't believe in "souls". It's a relic of mysticism. When I am dead, "I" will be no more. Finished, extimct, devoid of life, kicked the bucket, pushing up daisies....

(Reminds me of that dead parrot scene from Monty Python!)
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
cyberman:

Quote:
I do not think that being an atheist gets you sent to hell. You have claimed that this is Catholic teaching, but you have failed to supply a source which supports your claim.


Come on cyberman! Have you never read the Bible?


Of good lord. Again, the RCC is not a fundamentalist church (that means we are not Biblical literalists). That's how come a Catholic priest came up with the Big Bang theory. That's how come a Catholic brother came up with genetics.

We eat pork. We believe in evolution. We are not fundamentalists. Pointing out that something is in the Bible is not the same as proving that we believe it.

I know this pisses you off. You wish we were all fundies because that would be so much easier for you to attack. But, rant and rail as you will, we are not. I
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
Of good lord. Again, the RCC is not a fundamentalist church (that means we are not Biblical literalists).


I accept that the RCC don't go with the 6 day creation and other silly notions put forward by the YECs. But they still believe that all humans are tainted because of Adam's sin and that a man who was God's son, came to Earth to "redeem" us, was executed and later came back to life on the third day and then floated off to heaven to join his father. From my POV a talking snake is more believeable.

Quote:
That's how come a Catholic priest came up with the Big Bang theory. That's how come a Catholic brother came up with genetics.


Thanks for the references to Lemaitre (big bang), and Mendel (what we now know as genetics). You forgot to mention that most brilliant of Catholic scientists, Galileo, without whom Newton, and modern science generally, would have had to do a lot more work.

Quote:
We eat pork. We believe in evolution. We are not fundamentalists. Pointing out that something is in the Bible is not the same as proving that we believe it
.

Yes, I accept that. But how do you know about which bits of the Bible are "right" and which bits to ignore? Previously we have crossed swords about the Biblical attitude towards: killing witches; slavery; taxation and probably a few others. In each instance I have given you Biblical citations. So how do you choose? As far as I know, there is no prohibition of artificial contraception in the Bible, yet the RCC, no doubt with the authority of St Peter's ring, has decided that Catholics sin if they use it. It seems that most Catholics in the more advanced countries simply ignore this prohibition, - but surely at the cost of their immortal souls?

Quote:
I know this pisses you off. You wish we were all fundies because that would be so much easier for you to attack. But, rant and rail as you will, we are not. I


Thank you very much for your permission, for me to express my opinions on this message board. Very Christian of you!
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:

Quote:
I know this pisses you off. You wish we were all fundies because that would be so much easier for you to attack. But, rant and rail as you will, we are not.


Thank you very much for your permission, for me to express my opinions on this message board. Very Christian of you!


Just to clarify, "rant and rail as you will" is not presuming to give you permission to do so, it is pointing out that doing so will make no difference.

Regarding Adam - you know that I do not believe him to have been an actual person (along with most other Christians), yet you still maintain that I believe he sinned...?
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
Just to clarify, "rant and rail as you will" is not presuming to give you permission to do so, it is pointing out that doing so will make no difference.


Sorry if I misinterpreted your "rant and rail" comment. I would hope that any person who is willing to think for themselves, would also be capable of changing their minds if fresh information came to hand. Certainly, the scientific method relies on the possibility of being shown to be wrong at any point. I am willing to be shown wrong, and admit my mistakes. Apparently cyberman's mind is made up and whatever I say will "make no difference".

There's "faith" in a nutshell.  "I believe it because I believe it!"
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
Apparently cyberman's mind is made up and whatever I say will "make no difference".

There's "faith" in a nutshell.  "I believe it because I believe it!"


No, Karl - again you have not read what I have written. If you provide compelling reasons for me to change my beliefs, of course that would make a difference. What I said was, ranting and railing about the fact that I do not believe the Bible to be literally true will not make me believe it to be literally true.

And now the question for you to dodge:
Can you specify any post of mine which you think can be justly paraphrased as  "I believe it because I believe it!" ?
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
What I said was, ranting and railing about the fact that I do not believe the Bible to be literally true will not make me believe it to be literally true.


Fair enough. Maybe I mistook your remarks to mean that whatever I said would have no influence on you. However, you seem to be saying that a change of mind might be possible. That's admirable, IMO.

Quote:
And now the question for you to dodge:
Can you specify any post of mine which you think can be justly paraphrased as  "I believe it because I believe it!" ?


If you look at my words, I was referring to "faith", not to cyberman in particular. So the need to specify any particular post of cyberman citing the above sentiment appears redundant.
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:

Quote:
And now the question for you to dodge:
Can you specify any post of mine which you think can be justly paraphrased as  "I believe it because I believe it!" ?


If you look at my words, I was referring to "faith", not to cyberman in particular. So the need to specify any particular post of cyberman citing the above sentiment appears redundant.


I have looked at your words, as per your suggestion. You referred to me and my response, then you said "There's faith in a nutshell". What did you mean by "there's"? I think you were indeed referring to me and my words. As predicted, you have dodged the question. And not very artfully either.
SceptiKarl

cyberman:

Quote:
I have looked at your words, as per your suggestion. You referred to me and my response, then you said "There's faith in a nutshell". What did you mean by "there's"? I think you were indeed referring to me and my words. As predicted, you have dodged the question. And not very artfully either.


Yes I'm sure Jesus will give you an extra dose of paradise for your shrewd dissection of my words. "Faith in a nutshell" means believing stuff for which there is no evidence. Now please present the evidence for the ressurection. Ta.  
Boss Cat

Is this for Cyberman or can we all join in?  Well, here's my twopennorthworth.

What evidence could there be? What people said?

Personally if I want to know what happened or what's happening I listen to what people say if I have to, but I pay more attention to who's saying it, why they are saying it and what they do.  I know I go on about it but I have listened to a lot - a LOT - of stories and I've learnt that people lie.

If I overhear Bill telling his boss he never touches a drop I believe him. But if, as I pass his house every Monday morning I notice that he is what we call 'an enthusiastic recycler' I tend to get suspicious.  If I see him handing out fivers and laughing like a maniac the next morning I tend to think he is being less than honest.

What the disciples tell us is unbelievable (if you are a complete materialist) or very hard to believe indeed (if, like me, you accept the possibilty of something outside the natural).  So I look at what happened and what happened is the church and a body of work in a uniquely innovative literary style.  And I look at motivation, and there was motivation for the disciples to lie, at least initially, before going home to obscurity.  They wouldn't look quite as silly.  But what did they get out of lying, and sticking to their lies in the long term?  Not a lot: persecution, imprisonment, torture and death.

Now this isn't proof, and  no evidence would convince you if you just don't believe in the possibility of any extra-natural influence (or other natural explanations, like Jesus being the next stage in evolution, which I have heard).  But to me the new, fast growing Church, the Gospels, the actions of the disciples, well that's evidence that something happened, something different, something astonishing and yes, that could have been Resurrection.
cyberman

SceptiKarl wrote:
Now please present the evidence for the ressurection. Ta.  


I often ask you for evidence to back up your assertions. It is only fair you do the same.

So, produce the post wherein I have asserted the ressurection to be a fact, and I'll be right there with the evidence.

       nglreturns.myfreeforum.org Forum Index -> Atheist chat
Page 1 of 1
Create your own free forum | Buy a domain to use with your forum