Even though he feels he's not obliged to wear it, it seems there's just a sense of plain, old-fashioned courtesy running through Hitchens. As he said himself, "When I go to the mosque, I take off my shoes. When I go to the synagogue, I cover my head."
When I accuse someone of misquoting the Bible, I am referring to the misuse of a quotation NOT the common misquote of copyist error. I am pointing out that the quotation is in error as a premise. If you want, I'll use the proper term, eisegesis. However, it is a lot of letters for posts that are limited.
This just proves, that Christopher is explicit in only attacking the fundamental faith based claims of religion, the metaphysical ones, and has the utmost respect for tradition and culture. No other atheist thinker that I know of would wear a yarmulke even if they said he had to. They probably cancel the interview instead. Hitchens is a man of his word, and of his convictions.
on the website you can read: "This interview took place in a Shul (A place of prayer for Jews) and it is customary for even non-believers to wear a yarmulke on the premises."
God has ALWAYS been there for me. When I had problems "feeling" Him or hearing Him was when I rejecting His way for my own. If you seek through Jesus, God incarnate, you will find Him. But, if you hold some arbitrary system up to God, you deny Him.
In "God is not Great" Hitchens wrote "if I visit a church I take off my hat..." and he also said that he leaves desecration to the religious fanatics. To respect this harmless custom is a matter of politeness, just as taking off your shoes when you visit a mosque or a temple. Beeing atheist doesn't mean to be crude.
The fact that he would wear a kippah at all, even when in a synagogue, is extremely telling of the tolerance Atheists tend to have for religion. You wouldn't be able to convince a religious person to take off their religious garments in your presence, as an atheist. RIP Hitchens, you are missed.
This rules; the interviewer is awesome for having the gumption to be doing this type of shit so young, and Hitchens is awesome for agreeing to do an interview that isn't for a major network or big webcast.
In India, under the British Empire, the British rulers also used the idea of a distinct Aryan race in order to ally British power with the Indian caste system. It was widely claimed that the Aryans were white people who had invaded India in ancient times,[8] subordinating the darker skinned native Dravidian peoples, who were pushed to the south.
@nordhorny also, despite Christopher's dislike of religious dogma and the dangers it can entail, he stated in his writings (and demonstrated in person) that he was always respectful of those religious practices when he was in those environments. He wasn't out to spit in the face of religion like a lot of people think, he just didn't want it to encroach on his life and personal freedoms and rights, and spoke out against for that reason
I mentioned laws based on religious beliefs infringing on the rights of others, and that homosexual rights don't infringe on the rights of others, so I don't understand what your problem is. What kind of limits to rights do you think the Constitution "intends?" Why do you think it's disingenuous to speak out for the rights of others? What do you mean by the "tyranny of the minority?"
It just sounds like Hitchens asked God for something as a child and then felt let down when he didn't get what he wanted. A lot of atheists lost faith in God when someone they loved died or they failed to receive something from God.
Fear of alligators is logical. Fear of lightning is logical. Fear of God is logical but unlike lightning which is to be avoided, God can be approached with fear but not terror. God calls us to Him. In Him is freedom from fear. Alligators don't offer that freedom by equal proximity, air.
Yes, Rainy is correct. While Einstein did watch a film on creationism and the existence of God as Princeton, he never formally or publicly acknowledged God. That is a common error of reading into his taking literary license in various statements that could be constrewed as theistic.
The interviewer is one lucky fella! He has Hitchen's and can ask him anything. I'd love a couple of brandy's and the chance to fire questions at the man.
Homosexuals having equal protection of the laws isn't an encroachment on the rights of others. Civil laws based on religious beliefs not only violate the religious freedom of those who don't choose to adhere to the religion, they're unconstitutional. Hitchens said he'd never support laws that limit religious freedoms, but that religious freedom doesn't extend to infringing on the rights of others. Capisce?
Air, I do not object at all if you are busy. I am 40+ books behind in my own reading, so, like you I am shelving Dawkins a bit longer and focusing on the priority list. Though I do read atheist literature & many authors with whom I disagree. I just ask that you withhold judgment until you have read the work yourself. Merry Christmas to you as well. May you have a wonderful time with your friends and family & a happy New Year
Actually i think i heard somewhere that vaders lid was a combo of a stahlhelm and a samurai mask with kind of a techno makeover. But yeah darth vader is a hard son'bitch.
I hate and love this kid. He's what? 15? And here he is interviewing one of my heroes. At that age I was listening Alanis Morrisette and playing POG everyday.
@frasian78 Does he actually listen to the response and engage in discussion or just read a list of questions and wait for his turn to ask the next one?
I've never said that some Republicans don't like Obama because of the color of his skin, although some have certainly made statements that would lead to that conclusion. For instance, some Republicans, e.g. Santorum and Bachmann, signed a document that included the claim that black families were better off during slavery. Don't believe me? Google: Republicans black families were better off during slavery
That kid is a terrible interviewer -- even for his age. When you ask a question, at least pretend to be a bit interested in hearing the response. You're just glancing around, looking down at your paper as if you're more concerned about preparing for the next question. Total disrespect.
This styling of an "Aryan invasion" by British colonial fantasies of racial supremacy lies at the origin of the fact that all discussion of historical Indo-Aryan migrations or Aryan and Dravidian "races" remains highly controversial in India to this day, and does continue to affect political and religious debate. Some Dravidians, and supporters of the Dalit movement, most commonly Tamils,
The young gentleman seems rather nervous. Who could blame him? I'm sure if he cherishes the thought of meeting a great mind such as Christopher Hitchens as much as I do, then I'd expect nothing but anxious outlook.
@05lowell05 Yes I am aware that Hitchens is of Jewish descent (although his mother never revealed that to him in her lifetime), but I was wondering why he would wear it. He rejects even the most cultural aspects of the Jewish faith, so I don't think he would go around wearing it for fun. Perhaps he was visiting a Jewish school. I know it is customary for people to wear kippahs in certain buildings or temples; the are handed out to everyone that comes in, even non-Jews.
Then what are you commenting on??? i have answered all Air's claims and the few arguments he made. I did not deny things, I post arguments. Read the arguments.
Air, until you have read the entire book, you can't fully comment on all its arguments! And, if you still need help from others after reading it, you don't know enough to understand the book. However, I think you are smart enough to understand the book & that you just haven't read it. Further, the only help you need from others is that you aren't smart enough to reason away plain truth, so you will need some help blocking out the light of truth and reasoning that the sun don't shine.
The Bible is a most scholarly work and worthy of absolute trust given the reception it has by scholars both believers and unbelievers. However, we are answering your challenge to the thought that the Bible stands as the sole account or source of Jesus of Nazareth. I hope you will review Habermas's book. I look forward to your review of it.
Air, before answering any passages, first you must prove that God can do evil or commit sin. That means you have to present that argument before you can use the Bible. Until you have argued the nature & abilities or inabilities of God from the scripture, you cannot use the rest of the scripture against God. If you argue as you have, you have posited truth upon the scripture. Having done that, you have to accept the whole Bible with equal validity. That undermines your claims.
Huge, huge misconception right there. I have yet to meet or talk to a single atheist who does not believe in the existence of God as a result of something, comparatively speaking, as overwhelming insignificant as the early death of a loved one. That sort of crap is only in the movies.
Further, can be considered atheistic as he was acting on (as was his staff and confidants that embraced his occultic practices) hinduisms atheistic principles of reincarnation and such which preclude a creator God and embrace god as a force or power not an entity.
CONT However, as God has sought out man for relationship & suffered & died to save man(man cannot save himself through works or deeds as no one can pay an infinite debt who is not infinite by nature) it is clear that God doesn't desire a cowering fear that drives men from Him but the respectful fear that reminds us of our weakness & nakedness before an all-knowing, holy Being. Contrivances aren't needed as Biblical Christianity unlike R.Catholicism is freedom from sin not enslavement to God.
God gave human beings the equitable gifts of wisdom and power to intervene by their selves using the gifts given by God. So every intervention, being good or evil, had been achieved by the use of God Given Gifts , which is Intelligence making a difference within a ruled universe. So to say God does not intervene in our lives, is a repudiation of the notion of each person being a Free Willed Individual, who then is an extension of God, as the Actor on the Stage, having any power to act.
I know, the bus/subway thing is sooo cliche. Let's work together to try and come up with something a little more inventive for you. Personally, I've always liked to see people drive themselves off cliffs, but that seems to only really happen in the movies (not many cliffs around, ya know?). Ok, so let's use the cliff idea as a starting point and work from there. Your turn.
This whole god-thing is nothing but boring. Everyone who spends time on it wastes his time and misses the riddles that nature provides us to think about, such as the riddle, why so many people are wasting their lifes on questions as boring as the god-thing.
An atheist who uses the Bible to prove the nature of God (if he is honest) will have to inevitably admit that the Bible proves God is Holy & perfect (complete). It cannot prove Him evil as it establishes that God has the right of life over man's mortal body. It shows that the Creator logically has the right (sovereignty) over the created things. It is willful ignorance of the highest level to take verses out & reject the rest to make a bogus claim about God that is contrary to the text quoted.
Fighting4air, read the entire book, then, we can talk. Browsing a chapter or two of the Origina of Species, Preservation of Favored Race in the Struggle for Life, does not give one a complete understanding of his claims or the supposed evidence that he based his theory on. You need to completely read the book.
It is irrelevant, Air. First, basic Christianity is simply defined in scripture and is easily discerned by those who seek relationship with God. Secondly, disagreement and poser false Christians DO NOT give you any comfort from the guilt in your own hearts. You will not escape judgment with excuses. God exists and you are personally accountable to Him regardless of what ANY OTHER human being does or says. So, this claim does not solve your problem.
@luarionte You're both wrong. He is Jewish by genealogy, undoubted- but he's wearing the kippah because the interview took place...in a synagogue! NOT because he's Jewish...lol.
Air, the Bible clearly states AND demonstrates that God is holy and righteous by nature. It further asserts His right as Creator to take away mortal life as He gave it. You cannot call Him evil for killing bodies that He gave life to. It doesn't follow. Further, as the Bible teaches He gave us free will, He can hold us accountable for our actions & discipline us according to our actions as He has holy right over His creation. Your argument is false according to the Bible.
NO ARGUMENT, Air. Present an argument to support your claims or they are just opinion and smoke and mirrors. We're going in circles simply because you can't logically argue your claims or present valid premises that prove your conclusions. You just keep throwing out claims. Claims are meaningless. I can claim there's a spaghetti monster out there but it just a claim.
yeah maybe so but what I was referring to is that he finally conceded that there had to be a creator..ahh God.. which is the only point I was making...
My gay housemates and coworkers would beg to differ. But come on now... anyone who puts "x" (or a couple of them) around their username deserves to be ridiculed.
@nordhorny Not wearing one would be disrespectful to who? God? Well Hitchens as an athiest clearly isn't worried about that. Religious People? Please, this guy flipped off Bill Mahers audience because they had the audacity to be right about the occupation of Iraq. He has no qualms about offending religious people. That answer explains nothing.
I am covering Vitz's work, "Faith of the Fatherless". You should read it. And I have known people who turned on God over deaths and suffering, then, tried to deny Him over it. You should review the work above and do more interviews before assuming the generality you assert. There is evidence to the contrary, coolguy.
Actually he is only a very small percent jewish from his mothers side (i think thats what he said). Besides wearing the had is a religious thing not a racial one.
I can quote Dawkins in context or out of context and you will not accept him. However, if I want the quotation to be meaningful & support my arguments, I must quote him IN context not mistquote him on purpose, pants. You have made NO argument to me YET. All you have done is make claims.
I agree and disagree, crazyboy. Yes, you can't prove a negative. Yes, the burden of proof is on the claimant. NO, the proof of Jesus is VOLUMES by eyewitnesses. Therefore, the burden on proof is on those who deny God, Jesus the Christ, not on those who are following all the evidence. Christian theists have faith in the accounts and empirical evidence of Jesus, God the Son. Atheists have blind faith in a thing that can't be proved while ignoring clear evidence of God.
What a catch to be able to interview Christopher Hitchens!
Hitchens is always fascinating. Recommend reading "No One Left to Lie To."
Even though he feels he's not obliged to wear it, it seems there's just a sense of plain, old-fashioned courtesy running through Hitchens. As he said himself, "When I go to the mosque, I take off my shoes. When I go to the synagogue, I cover my head."
He said, "Ah, very good question." That is so cool!
When I accuse someone of misquoting the Bible, I am referring to the misuse of a quotation NOT the common misquote of copyist error. I am pointing out that the quotation is in error as a premise. If you want, I'll use the proper term, eisegesis. However, it is a lot of letters for posts that are limited.
This just proves, that Christopher is explicit in only attacking the fundamental faith based claims of religion, the metaphysical ones, and has the utmost respect for tradition and culture. No other atheist thinker that I know of would wear a yarmulke even if they said he had to. They probably cancel the interview instead. Hitchens is a man of his word, and of his convictions.
Thanks, Hagen.
on the website you can read: "This interview took place in a Shul (A place of prayer for Jews) and it is customary for even non-believers to wear a yarmulke on the premises."
God has ALWAYS been there for me. When I had problems "feeling" Him or hearing Him was when I rejecting His way for my own. If you seek through Jesus, God incarnate, you will find Him. But, if you hold some arbitrary system up to God, you deny Him.
In "God is not Great" Hitchens wrote "if I visit a church I take off my hat..." and he also said that he leaves desecration to the religious fanatics.
To respect this harmless custom is a matter of politeness, just as taking off your shoes when you visit a mosque or a temple. Beeing atheist doesn't mean to be crude.
The fact that he would wear a kippah at all, even when in a synagogue, is extremely telling of the tolerance Atheists tend to have for religion.
You wouldn't be able to convince a religious person to take off their religious garments in your presence, as an atheist.
RIP Hitchens, you are missed.
This rules; the interviewer is awesome for having the gumption to be doing this type of shit so young, and Hitchens is awesome for agreeing to do an interview that isn't for a major network or big webcast.
I wasn't aware you presented one.
I was just thinking that lol. He probably had a debate in a synagogue
In India, under the British Empire, the British rulers also used the idea of a distinct Aryan race in order to ally British power with the Indian caste system. It was widely claimed that the Aryans were white people who had invaded India in ancient times,[8] subordinating the darker skinned native Dravidian peoples, who were pushed to the south.
some of your questions were well thought out , compared to all the other interviews i've seen-you've gone beyond..
Christopher always respected the situation. Notice he is wearing a Yamaka here...
I'm surprised Hitchens agreed to that given his strong viewpoints. I would have predicted him to say, "Interview Cancelled!"
@nordhorny also, despite Christopher's dislike of religious dogma and the dangers it can entail, he stated in his writings (and demonstrated in person) that he was always respectful of those religious practices when he was in those environments. He wasn't out to spit in the face of religion like a lot of people think, he just didn't want it to encroach on his life and personal freedoms and rights, and spoke out against for that reason
Not to be trivial or petty, but I just couldn't help but notice, that kid has the longest arms I've ever seen
You're right, that was a bit harsh. Well, I guess you'd at least expect his teacher or someone to prep him on the basics.
I mentioned laws based on religious beliefs infringing on the rights of others, and that homosexual rights don't infringe on the rights of others, so I don't understand what your problem is. What kind of limits to rights do you think the Constitution "intends?" Why do you think it's disingenuous to speak out for the rights of others? What do you mean by the "tyranny of the minority?"
I gave an argument to refute your claim, Air. I didn't just say false. I am a Biblical Christian.
The kid keeps looking around while Hitch talks. Check 0:48 and 1:08.
just watched the whole interview; great questions, great interview.
Where is that posted?
No, that looks like his house...or at least his bookshelf.
It just sounds like Hitchens asked God for something as a child and then felt let down when he didn't get what he wanted. A lot of atheists lost faith in God when someone they loved died or they failed to receive something from God.
Fear of alligators is logical. Fear of lightning is logical. Fear of God is logical but unlike lightning which is to be avoided, God can be approached with fear but not terror. God calls us to Him. In Him is freedom from fear. Alligators don't offer that freedom by equal proximity, air.
Yes, Rainy is correct. While Einstein did watch a film on creationism and the existence of God as Princeton, he never formally or publicly acknowledged God. That is a common error of reading into his taking literary license in various statements that could be constrewed as theistic.
The interviewer is one lucky fella! He has Hitchen's and can ask him anything. I'd love a couple of brandy's and the chance to fire questions at the man.
Homosexuals having equal protection of the laws isn't an encroachment on the rights of others. Civil laws based on religious beliefs not only violate the religious freedom of those who don't choose to adhere to the religion, they're unconstitutional. Hitchens said he'd never support laws that limit religious freedoms, but that religious freedom doesn't extend to infringing on the rights of others. Capisce?
Air, I do not object at all if you are busy. I am 40+ books behind in my own reading, so, like you I am shelving Dawkins a bit longer and focusing on the priority list. Though I do read atheist literature & many authors with whom I disagree. I just ask that you withhold judgment until you have read the work yourself.
Merry Christmas to you as well. May you have a wonderful time with your friends and family & a happy New Year
See video description.
Actually i think i heard somewhere that vaders lid was a combo of a stahlhelm and a samurai mask with kind of a techno makeover. But yeah darth vader is a hard son'bitch.
@JayGatsbyOdysseus no not a hypocrite, just respectful
freaking cool that you got to talk to the guy :)
I hate and love this kid. He's what? 15? And here he is interviewing one of my heroes. At that age I was listening Alanis Morrisette and playing POG everyday.
@frasian78 Does he actually listen to the response and engage in discussion or just read a list of questions and wait for his turn to ask the next one?
I've never said that some Republicans don't like Obama because of the color of his skin, although some have certainly made statements that would lead to that conclusion. For instance, some Republicans, e.g. Santorum and Bachmann, signed a document that included the claim that black families were better off during slavery. Don't believe me? Google: Republicans black families were better off during slavery
That kid is a terrible interviewer -- even for his age. When you ask a question, at least pretend to be a bit interested in hearing the response. You're just glancing around, looking down at your paper as if you're more concerned about preparing for the next question. Total disrespect.
Very good point
This styling of an "Aryan invasion" by British colonial fantasies of racial supremacy lies at the origin of the fact that all discussion of historical Indo-Aryan migrations or Aryan and Dravidian "races" remains highly controversial in India to this day, and does continue to affect political and religious debate. Some Dravidians, and supporters of the Dalit movement, most commonly Tamils,
True enough. Plus there's a bottom shelf there that isn't present here.
@nordhorny why is the interviewer not wearing one? chill out by the way.
The young gentleman seems rather nervous. Who could blame him? I'm sure if he cherishes the thought of meeting a great mind such as Christopher Hitchens as much as I do, then I'd expect nothing but anxious outlook.
I'd be shitting my pants if I was that kid..
What kind of statement is he trying to make wearing the kippah?
@05lowell05 Yes I am aware that Hitchens is of Jewish descent (although his mother never revealed that to him in her lifetime), but I was wondering why he would wear it. He rejects even the most cultural aspects of the Jewish faith, so I don't think he would go around wearing it for fun. Perhaps he was visiting a Jewish school. I know it is customary for people to wear kippahs in certain buildings or temples; the are handed out to everyone that comes in, even non-Jews.
Search "Hitchens Home" in youtube, don't think it's his house - his book shelves look thicker,no black lining and less organized :)
god bless Christopher Hitchens.
Then what are you commenting on??? i have answered all Air's claims and the few arguments he made. I did not deny things, I post arguments. Read the arguments.
Top tip - when you are going to record an interview, and you have a squeaky door in the room which people are going to use, OIL THE HINGES!
Air, until you have read the entire book, you can't fully comment on all its arguments! And, if you still need help from others after reading it, you don't know enough to understand the book.
However, I think you are smart enough to understand the book & that you just haven't read it. Further, the only help you need from others is that you aren't smart enough to reason away plain truth, so you will need some help blocking out the light of truth and reasoning that the sun don't shine.
The Bible is a most scholarly work and worthy of absolute trust given the reception it has by scholars both believers and unbelievers. However, we are answering your challenge to the thought that the Bible stands as the sole account or source of Jesus of Nazareth. I hope you will review Habermas's book. I look forward to your review of it.
"I enjoyed meeting you."
Same here.
that bass track was most definitely from the good old garage band. Am I right or am I right. Yeah Im right.
That kid did a really good job. If I were doing it, it would've looked like "The Chris Farley Show".
Hes probably in a synagogue for a debate ( he does remove his shoes in a mosque ) - and he is half jew by birth ( dunno )
Please learn how to put hyperlinks in your info. Nobody is typing in names of websites anymore, trust me.
@boscoblack No, he's probably just really nervous.
Air, before answering any passages, first you must prove that God can do evil or commit sin. That means you have to present that argument before you can use the Bible. Until you have argued the nature & abilities or inabilities of God from the scripture, you cannot use the rest of the scripture against God. If you argue as you have, you have posited truth upon the scripture. Having done that, you have to accept the whole Bible with equal validity. That undermines your claims.
Huge, huge misconception right there. I have yet to meet or talk to a single atheist who does not believe in the existence of God as a result of something, comparatively speaking, as overwhelming insignificant as the early death of a loved one. That sort of crap is only in the movies.
Wow, Hitch looks all wrong in that yarmulke. At least now we know what it would look like on him....
Further, can be considered atheistic as he was acting on (as was his staff and confidants that embraced his occultic practices) hinduisms atheistic principles of reincarnation and such which preclude a creator God and embrace god as a force or power not an entity.
wow! what an interviewer!
I think those might be his sunglasses propped up there.
@adlerbr12
His mother was Jewish. He learned that late and life and seems to do things like that out of respect for his heritage.
@fongfongy he engages them, go to notable interviews and you can see it for yourself
@Exvictus, just for the record, I don't have STD or any other "consequence of promiscuity."
:-)
CONT
However, as God has sought out man for relationship & suffered & died to save man(man cannot save himself through works or deeds as no one can pay an infinite debt who is not infinite by nature) it is clear that God doesn't desire a cowering fear that drives men from Him but the respectful fear that reminds us of our weakness & nakedness before an all-knowing, holy Being. Contrivances aren't needed as Biblical Christianity unlike R.Catholicism is freedom from sin not enslavement to God.
God gave human beings the equitable gifts of wisdom and power to intervene by their selves using the gifts given by God. So every intervention, being good or evil, had been achieved by the use of God Given Gifts , which is Intelligence making a difference within a ruled universe.
So to say God does not intervene in our lives, is a repudiation of the notion of each person being a Free Willed Individual, who then is an extension of God, as the Actor on the Stage, having any power to act.
I know, the bus/subway thing is sooo cliche. Let's work together to try and come up with something a little more inventive for you. Personally, I've always liked to see people drive themselves off cliffs, but that seems to only really happen in the movies (not many cliffs around, ya know?). Ok, so let's use the cliff idea as a starting point and work from there. Your turn.
@boscoblack
Are you kidding me? He was an intimidating figure to say the least, this kid did a great job. Man humanities ego sucks.
This whole god-thing is nothing but boring. Everyone who spends time on it wastes his time and misses the riddles that nature provides us to think about, such as the riddle, why so many people are wasting their lifes on questions as boring as the god-thing.
An atheist who uses the Bible to prove the nature of God (if he is honest) will have to inevitably admit that the Bible proves God is Holy & perfect (complete). It cannot prove Him evil as it establishes that God has the right of life over man's mortal body. It shows that the Creator logically has the right (sovereignty) over the created things. It is willful ignorance of the highest level to take verses out & reject the rest to make a bogus claim about God that is contrary to the text quoted.
Fighting4air, read the entire book, then, we can talk. Browsing a chapter or two of the Origina of Species, Preservation of Favored Race in the Struggle for Life, does not give one a complete understanding of his claims or the supposed evidence that he based his theory on. You need to completely read the book.
@folkhippy,
Yes, Christopher Hitchens is of Jewish descent.
It is irrelevant, Air.
First, basic Christianity is simply defined in scripture and is easily discerned by those who seek relationship with God.
Secondly, disagreement and poser false Christians DO NOT give you any comfort from the guilt in your own hearts. You will not escape judgment with excuses. God exists and you are personally accountable to Him regardless of what ANY OTHER human being does or says. So, this claim does not solve your problem.
@GiantSandles Oh, I'm glad you know. Did you ask him?
@luarionte You're both wrong. He is Jewish by genealogy, undoubted- but he's wearing the kippah because the interview took place...in a synagogue! NOT because he's Jewish...lol.
is he wearing a fucking kippa? lol!
Air, the Bible clearly states AND demonstrates that God is holy and righteous by nature. It further asserts His right as Creator to take away mortal life as He gave it. You cannot call Him evil for killing bodies that He gave life to. It doesn't follow. Further, as the Bible teaches He gave us free will, He can hold us accountable for our actions & discipline us according to our actions as He has holy right over His creation. Your argument is false according to the Bible.
NO ARGUMENT, Air. Present an argument to support your claims or they are just opinion and smoke and mirrors. We're going in circles simply because you can't logically argue your claims or present valid premises that prove your conclusions. You just keep throwing out claims. Claims are meaningless. I can claim there's a spaghetti monster out there but it just a claim.
@luarionte Yes!
And more importantly, secularists.
Who’s your dad? that he passed you these interviews?
And here comes the PC brigade, trying to tell people what they think and feel.
yeah maybe so but what I was referring to is that he finally conceded that there had to be a creator..ahh God.. which is the only point I was making...
why the hell is christopher wearing a yamaka.
My gay housemates and coworkers would beg to differ.
But come on now... anyone who puts "x" (or a couple of them) around their username deserves to be ridiculed.
@nordhorny Not wearing one would be disrespectful to who? God? Well Hitchens as an athiest clearly isn't worried about that. Religious People? Please, this guy flipped off Bill Mahers audience because they had the audacity to be right about the occupation of Iraq. He has no qualms about offending religious people. That answer explains nothing.
What's he wearing on his head?
@luarionte Well, that's what I meant! He has Jewish blood but he does not observe Judaism. Clear enough?
I am covering Vitz's work, "Faith of the Fatherless". You should read it. And I have known people who turned on God over deaths and suffering, then, tried to deny Him over it. You should review the work above and do more interviews before assuming the generality you assert. There is evidence to the contrary, coolguy.
Actually he is only a very small percent jewish from his mothers side (i think thats what he said). Besides wearing the had is a religious thing not a racial one.
Oh Dear Christopher,
now you've donned some gay apparel.
I can quote Dawkins in context or out of context and you will not accept him. However, if I want the quotation to be meaningful & support my arguments, I must quote him IN context not mistquote him on purpose, pants. You have made NO argument to me YET. All you have done is make claims.
is Hitchens wearing a yamika??? what the heck!
Not evil, pants. Where's the evil in God??? You have not made a case. Make an argument or admit all your post was simply an opinion.
I agree and disagree, crazyboy. Yes, you can't prove a negative. Yes, the burden of proof is on the claimant. NO, the proof of Jesus is VOLUMES by eyewitnesses. Therefore, the burden on proof is on those who deny God, Jesus the Christ, not on those who are following all the evidence. Christian theists have faith in the accounts and empirical evidence of Jesus, God the Son. Atheists have blind faith in a thing that can't be proved while ignoring clear evidence of God.
that kid is so lucky