-
What Violent Extremists?
November 10, 2012 | 0 comments
-
Uncle Sam and the Chinese Dragon
February 16, 2012 | 18 comments
-
Crammed Onto Buses
June 22, 2011 | 12 comments
-
Tiananmen Twenty Years Later
June 4, 2009 | 23 comments
-
Obama’s Global “Narrative”
April 5, 2009 | 1 comment
Feature
Can Civilization Survive Without God?
In Washington, the Hitchens Brothers disagree, but with a poignant friendliness.
If it wasn’t the philosophical equivalent of the Gunfight at the O.K. Corral, the distinguished journalists who waited in eager anticipation around the square-shaped table at the offices of the Pew Forum on Religion and Public Life on Washington’s M Street in late October may well have anticipated fireworks. The Washington Post’s Sally Quinn, the Economist’s Peter David, the Guardian’s Timothy Garton Ash, the Washington Examiner’s Michael Barone, and a handful of others had been invited to witness an unusual public debate between Christopher Hitchens, enfant terrible of the New Atheism and author of the best-seller God Is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything, and his brother, Peter Hitchens, author of the more recent The Rage Against God: How Atheism Led Me to Faith. The two brothers had clashed in public debate before, often acrimoniously, but this event was special: it was the first major discussion between them in public since Christopher, 61, was first diagnosed with metastatic (usually fatal) esophageal cancer in June 2010. Would natural fraternal sympathy prevail over the two men’s deep, and long-lasting, philosophical disagreement?
There were no fireworks in the large meeting room on M Street, just flashes of wit (mostly from Christopher), seriousness (mostly from Peter), and the sense that this encounter, between an ailing champion of unbelief and his still-energetic brother, might turn out to be historical. Nobody could fail to observe that Christopher, in a pale-blue open-neck shirt characteristically left unbuttoned at the top two buttons, was completely bald from chemotherapy treatment and understandably tired-looking. His brother, Peter, 59, also wearing a tieless shirt of very pale blue color, looked much younger and fresher than Christopher, though only some 19 months separate their birthdays. The disagreements, of course, surfaced early at the conversation, yet there was a surprising overlap in attitudes between the two men. Skillfully moderating the event, Michael Cromartie, vice president of the Ethics and Public Policy Center, gracefully referred to Christopher Hitchens’s reputation, in spite of his strong opinions, of being a lifelong loyalist to his personal friends. He quoted a reviewer of Hitchens’s latest book, an autobiography called Hitch-22: A Memoir, as saying of Christopher that he was “one of the most purely alive people on the planet.” Some of the audience must have wondered at that choice of words; with characteristic bluntness, the older Hitchens brother has told recent audiences flatly that he was “dying.”
THE PEW FORUM had posed the debating question to the two brothers as this: “Can Civilization Survive without God?” Christopher opened with a short statement, in which he, perhaps surprisingly, invited his listeners to contemplate what he felt had been the sad demise of a once-powerful notion, that of “Christendom.” This word, Christopher said, used to be employed by people without irony. It meant, he said, that “there was a Christian world. It had been partly evolved, partly carved out by the sword, partly defended by the sword, at some points giving way, at other times expanding. But it was a meaningful name for a community of belief and value that endured for many, many centuries-and has many splendors to its name.” Now, he insisted, it was “all gone,” leveled by the madness of World War I. Its loss, he insisted, had left all kinds of questions about civilization and culture. “We’ve had to wrestle,” he said, “for a very long time with the idea, what will we do about civilization; what will we do about values, ethics, morals; how will we teach them; how will we learn to live with one another in the absence of any real religious authority, any credible one, any one that’s worthy of the name, worthy of respect? This absence has been felt for a very, very long time, long before I was able to start writing about it.”
Peter didn’t demur at this description of the great loss. Rather, he insisted, what was civilization? He felt he knew what it wasn’t, like his experience of arriving in Mogadishu shortly before the arrival of the U.S. Marines in 1993 and experiencing the shock of a society that had broken loose from all constraints of civilization; no passport control, baggage claim, or the normal paraphernalia of international travel. Peter said that he’d instantly had to hire AK-47-equipped bodyguards and, before going to sleep on the concrete floor of a compound rented by a German TV crew, had listened “to the cries of dying people and the chatter of gunfire outside and hearing, in effect, what would have happened to me if I hadn’t found my way into the German compound.” For Peter Hitchens, the thing that struck him about societies that were not intolerable to live in was “the rule of law.”
He added, “This seems to me to be the distinction between a tolerable free society and one which is not, which is the most decisive.”
Yet even in the English suburb of Alverstoke, near Portsmouth in England where the Hitchens brothers had grown up, a plague of violence and even barbarism had crept into the community, Peter said, with one ordinary citizen being kicked to death by hooligans whose destruction of his yard fence he had attempted to stop. “How has this decline in civilization come about?” Peter asked. “Well,” he said, “I think it has come about at least partly-and I’m not a single-cause person-but at least partly because there is no longer in the hearts of the English people the restraint of the Christian religion, which used to prevent this sort of behavior.”
Claiming to be shocked to hear of the Alverstoke incident, Christopher riposted that quite as frightening horrors were occurring in cities like Glasgow in the 1950s, at a time when the authority of the Church of England was certainly greater than in subsequent years. In fact, in Glasgow, Christopher said, “people would kill you over what kind of Christian you were, as a matter of fact.” Of course, they did, said Peter, because of the problems of Catholic and Protestant sectarianism. “But in terms of the lives which people led, the way in which they behaved towards their neighbors, the way in which children were brought up, the manners which people displayed, I don’t think you will find that the effect of Christian upbringing was small in the 1950s or 1960s.” What had happened, Peter asserted, was that English society had been invaded “by trash culture and all that kind of teaching.”
WHEN JOURNALISTS WERE INVITED to ask questions, NPR’s Barbara Bradley Hagerty inquired gently if Christopher’s illness had led to a greater warmth between the two brothers. Almost visibly bristling over the suggestion that intimations of mortality might have softened his attitudes toward religion, Christopher responded, “I mean, if you want to know, if anything, my contempt for the forced consolation of religion has increased since I became aware that I probably don’t have very long to live.” He added that he found the idea of deathbed conversions “wholly contemptible.” Perhaps trying to tamp down any tension, Peter shortly afterwards waded in with a comment of his own: “it would be quite grotesque” to imagine that acquiring cancer might enable one “to see the merits of religion. It’s just an absurd idea.”
Washington Post columnist Michael Gerson wondered about “the challenge of Friedrich Nietzsche,” who argued that, in the absence of transcendent values, all one was left with was “ferocious human will.” Christopher replied that he thought the religious impulse was merely “an expression of the will to power.” “Who could deny it?” he said, all but challenging his listeners to respond.
Peter responded. “I think that you would be hard put to claim,” he said, “that the Christian Gospels gave you a license to order people about. And it seems odd that the center of Christian worship is someone who is indeed tortured to death by the powerful.” Peter added that he thought Nietzsche had focused on an issue atheists seldom were honest about: they wanted liberation from constraints. “This constantly comes up,” he said, “and immediately swirls down the circle of the atheists’ refusal to accept that there is actually no absolute right and wrong if there is no God and that therefore, they are liberated.” Besides, Peter added, how on earth could atheists explain conscience if there were no transcendent moral values? “If morality evolves, then morality changes,” he said. “Then the things of which we most strongly disapprove now could be things which are permitted later, in which case it’s not really morality, as far as I’m concerned. And who’s evolving it?” Christopher ignored this sally, but came back later with one of his own. “If anything could prove what I so much believe,” he said, “which is that we are not made by God and never were and could not have been, but that many, many gods have been made by men and women and it is precisely the other way around, the basic claim of materialism — if nothing else could persuade me of that obvious truth, the behavior of religion itself would be enough.”
Christopher conceded that, as far as civilization was concerned, people hadn’t yet conquered the problem of alienation or of anomie or of spiritual waste or of the fear of death. “That,” he said, had “to be worked on.” There was, he said, also a continuing problem of “moral relativism.” He nevertheless insisted, “But I don’t think it’s really true to say that we live less civilized a life than those of our predecessors who felt that there was a genuine religious authority that spoke with power.”
GIVEN A CHANCE both to sum up his views and to admit to any doubts about his faith he might have had, Peter said that the moments of doubt occurred often when he was reading either the Old Testament or the Letters of Paul, because, he said half-apologetically, “as you will see, I’m not terribly orthodox in my belief.” He insisted that religion was “absolutely necessary” in order for a person to be moral. “Morality,” he said, “is what you do when you think nobody is looking.” “This tremendous civilization in which we live,” he said, “which has been bequeathed to us and which in my country we’re determined not to bequeath to our own children, is the most extraordinary piece of good fortune, if nothing else. And it does seem to me derived — as I say, this combination of order and liberty almost unique in human history and unique on the face of the planet — does arise, actually, from Protestant Christianity.” To this idea, Christopher riposted. “Morality is not learned by orders. It’s acquired by experience, by moral suasion, and by comparing and contrasting different ways of resolving these questions.”
Christopher Hitchens, however, repeatedly expressed gratitude for the greetings he had received from Christian well-wishers expressing, as he said, “solidarity” with him. His pugnacity during the debate was as evident as ever, yet he showed an unexpectedly conciliatory attitude toward the faith that he had rejected as a child, and to which Peter, having raged through much of his life as an atheist, had returned.
Asked if he could think of anything positive to say about religions, Christopher replied, “The greatest contribution of Christianity in my life is the reminder of the complete ephemerality of human power, and indeed of human existence — the transience of all states, empires, heroes, grandiose claims, and so forth. That’s always with me, and I dare say I could have got that from Einstein — I would have — and from Darwin, too. But the way I got it and the way it’s implanted in me is certainly by Christianity.”
Civilization certainly survived the debate on M Street. So indeed did God.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (132) | Leave a comment
More Articles by David Aikman
More Articles From Feature
http://spectator.org/archives/2010/12/23/can-civilization-survive-witho
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
Ret. Marine| 12.23.10 @ 7:13AM
The first thing that comes to mind after having read this is, what sort of arrogance does one need to doubt their very existence to a moral code if not for that code they knew not how to respond to every day circumstances between good and evil. I'd say God will not be mocked. I'll pray for both of these ignorant souls.
Bruce Michael Anderson | 12.23.10 @ 11:57AM
I am is creation without Creation the free will they use to think to Dis Count Creation Would not be.....
To those that think the darkness is with out light forgets even the darkness is light to the One that "is"
So Mote it be ....it is so
Dennis| 12.23.10 @ 3:28PM
What?
Lucy| 12.23.10 @ 1:52PM
Ah yes, the arrogance of not believing that one is the center of the universe!
Graeme| 12.23.10 @ 2:35PM
Religion is just superstition institutionalised. It's pathetic that some believe the drivel of religion in these days of universal education, but of course many have been brainwashed from early childhood by parents and especially the odious 'faith' schools. 'Faith' is simply belief in something with no evidence, which sums up the naivety of the 'faithful'. I bet there is not a single so-called 'religious' person who actually believes they will 'live forever'.
Fanatics can have sufficient intellectual and material resources to build a nuclear bomb and still believe that he will get seventy-two virgins in Paradise.
The cause of their confusion is simple: They don’t know what is like to REALLY believe in God.
Fanatics are about as "sincere" as faith gets. Faith is not a virtue and its time to stop pretending that it is.
Purple Lips| 12.23.10 @ 2:58PM
You're right Faith isn't a virtue. You need to return to Sunday School and get your categories right before rendering an opinion.
George True| 12.23.10 @ 4:02PM
So, Mr Scientist, yo have not isolated God in your test tubes yet, eh? I suggest a new experiment. Examine your own thoughts unremittingly for twenty-four hours. Then you may begin to experience a scintilla of enlightenment.
Gilbert Schumpert| 12.23.10 @ 4:19PM
Actually, I definitely believe that those who accept Christ as their personal savior WILL live forever, just not here on our so called Earth, but in Heaven with Him!!
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 5:49PM
Now, now. You all are scolding the poor soul!
idalily| 12.24.10 @ 3:13PM
So, according to Graeme, there are no secular fanatics. Got it.
Fredrick Ward| 12.24.10 @ 10:11PM
Graeme, you are the picture of arrogance, and ignorant commentary turned on itself. Of course, that is the essence of Atheism, though. They think there is no god, therefore, they are god in their own mind. You call religion foolish, and I call your religion the most foolish since your "god" is obviously the most fallible of all created.
Alan Brooks| 12.27.10 @ 8:35PM
Civilization can survive without God- but not religion.
Don't argue with me about it, argue with agnostics in your families
Kelly Staples| 12.23.10 @ 7:34AM
Mr. Aikman's credulity survived.
Alan Brooks| 12.29.10 @ 9:11PM
Ignoring God's existence or nonexistence, one might postulate that belief in God will wither away, while religion shall remain.
Say (merely hypothetically) if Mitt Romney became POTUS someday, his Mormon faith would be a stimulus for economic activity (Mormons being superb at commerce) but otherwise largely an empty spiritual vessel.
The LDS will offer medical referrals, employment counseling, and other services.
Talk about one-stop shopping!
Mike Gantt | 12.23.10 @ 8:15AM
Thanks for the poignant portrait of two brothers who are in agreement about morality but in disagreement about its source. If society could be a macrocosm consistent with this microcosm, then morality would always trump religion. I believe this is God's will. Consistent with this I believe that both brothers are going to heaven, as we all are, and have written Christopher as much in this open letter: http://bit.ly/fVWa7C
Yikes!| 12.23.10 @ 9:57AM
Mr. Gantt you cantt be serious, unless you have not read the Bible, or you don't believe the Bible. You obviously don't know God's will at all, or your definition of heaven is a stewpot in the sky. The God of the Bible demands repentance, that one accept him as the soverign and only God. In Deuteronomy he sets before the people an offer of life or death (If all go to heaven, why bother?), a blessing or a curse. You must choose which path you will take. It is your choice. You cannot choose neither, nor both, because you are already standing on the path to perdition. Choose wisely Mike Gantt. Beware, if what you believe is not consistant with what God demands, you lose.
PJ| 12.23.10 @ 10:21AM
You're absolutely right-----we need to repent before our own judgement takes place.
That said, who are we to know what happens after death & how God judges? Could there be a small time frame after an individual's death & before his/her judgement? Maybe God will give those who denounce him 1 more chance to believe & repent.
Jim-in-kansas | 12.23.10 @ 3:09PM
The Bible is the "inspired word" not the clouds opening up and Charlton Hesston's voice booming forth..... Perhaps Yikes! you should put your snakes back in the basket and not speak in tongues.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 3:17PM
Actually, Yikes! spoke the truth, according to the Bible"
For as it is written:
"He who believes in Him is not condemned; he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the Name of the only Son of God." Jn. 3:18.
idalily| 12.24.10 @ 3:24PM
Ah, but there are many of us who believe in God without believing in the Bible, myself included. I know Bible believers think the two are inexorably linked; I do not. Therefore, to use the Bible as proof of God or of God's will doesn't do it for me.
On another note, I do find it a rather offensive concept that one cannot be moral without believing in God. While I draw strength and moral reinforcement from my faith in God, my husband, an atheist, is one of the two most moral, brave, strong, kind men I have ever known. The other is my father, who is a skeptic agnostic. They are my living proof that one does not need God in order to be moral. The Spanish Inquisition and Rev. Baker both, in their way, prove one does not have morality just because one believes in God. The two concepts are not joined at the hip, IMO.
john knox| 12.24.10 @ 5:57PM
-Depends on your definition of 'morality'
Orthodox Christianity asserts that God Created and enforces a moral law, which we are all guilty of and sinful by nature, thus we need a savior. -Christ took the punishment for our law breaking on the Cross. Therefore, with faith in Him, we are justified before God and made new. He then send the Holy Spirit to guide the believer in His actions. We still are affected by our sin and therefore still sin, but it is acknowledged and forgiven. In addition, our good moral works are inspired by God.
-Yes, there are many atheists who have probably 'lived better' or 'given more' than I have. Either way, all men are guilty by nature
Ultimately, if there is no God, there is no enforcement of any universal Moral order & any 'morality' is rendered meaningless, including the supposed 'good' your atheist husband has done. Without God, what does 'good' mean other than to be an adjective we use to describe what we think is good, but deserves neither absolute, universal, condemnation or approval.
Margie| 12.24.10 @ 11:48PM
Correction: You cannot believe in God while rejecting God's words, as that is calling Him a liar.
And also, being moral doesn't get you to Heaven. But being forgiven does.
No matter how moral we think we are, it's not enough. The Bible says that all our good deeds are a filthy rags before God. (Is. 64:6).
Otherwise Jesus wouldn't have had to die for us.
We can't make ourselves good.
In fact, the more we admit what ruined sinners we are, the more Grace He gives:
"For by Grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not your own doing, it is the gift of God-- not because of works, lest any man should boast." Eph. 2:8 & 9.
idalily| 12.25.10 @ 2:11AM
The idea that without a belief in God, there is no morality is, IMO, simply not borne out by the facts of my experience. As I said, morality can exist independent of belief in God, and my husband and my father are living proof. Their morals are steadfast without that belief. While I am sometimes saddened that neither of them find the comfort of God that I do, I see their morality every day and do not need to tie it to God in order to know it exists in their hearts.
Margie| 12.24.10 @ 11:40PM
idalily,
Actually, it is offensive to God if you do not believe in Him and His words, and His words are found in the Bible. His words may not suit you, but He's the Creator, not you.
"For whoever is ashamed of Me and of My words in this adulterous and sinful generation, of him will the Son of Man also be ashamed, when He comes in the glory of his Father with the holy angels." Mk. 8:38.
"Then He said to them, "These are My words which I spoke to you, while I was still with you, that everything written about Me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled." Lk. 24:44.
"He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine but the Father's who sent Me." Jn. 14:24.
Better to get your thinking in line with His thinking. I know I must, every single day.
We all have our own ideas about what we think is right and true and best, but God has His.
While I made no such argument as the one you said I did in your reply to me, you simply cannot reject God's words while at the same time calling Him a liar.
idalily| 12.25.10 @ 2:05AM
Margie, my reply was not specifically to you, but a general observation on the conversation in general. However, I do take offense to your arrogance in presuming to lecture me about God as if you know more about God and my relationship with Him than I do. Simply because you believe the Bible to be God's word and I do not, that doesn't mean I am not in touch with God. I assure you, God is a part of my daily life, and who are you to presume otherwise? Isn't a sense of humility and humbleness part of being a Christian? Please exercise a bit of that humility and do not presume to tell me what God's thinking is. God and I communicate quite well without your help, thank you.
Margie| 12.25.10 @ 10:49AM
The arrogant one says this:
"Ah, but there are many of us who believe in God without believing in the Bible."
The arrogant one says this:
"Therefore, to use the Bible as proof of God or of God's will doesn't do it for me."
The arrogant one says this:
"..one does not need God in order to be moral."
God says this:
" The fool says in his heart, "There is no God." They are corrupt, they do abominable deeds, there is none that does good." Ps. 14:1.
God says this:
"All these things My Hand has made, and so all these things are Mine, says the LORD. But this is the man to whom I will look, he that is humble and contrite in spirit, and trembles at My word." Is. 66:2.
Edward White| 12.23.10 @ 10:34AM
As a Christian who is not afraid of words and ideas, I want to express my deep admiration of both Christopher and Peter Hitchens.
I have read Christopher's two best sellers: God is Not Great, and Hitch-22, his biography. I think Christopher is forceful and tenacious and blazingly brilliant and compassionate in his humanity. I hope he has many more years of writing ahead of him, though this is unlikely.
As an Anglophile, I frequently read The Daily Mail Online, and I read Peter's column, which is always eloquent and brave. He is a frequent critic of the decline of British civilization, which on my frequent trips to London, I have witnessed firsthand.
Chritopher's early demise will be a tragedy, and when he goes world intelligentsia will have lost one of its most stalwart members.
Anthony| 12.23.10 @ 8:43PM
You should read crissy hitchens treatise on Mother Theresa just to get an idea what a prissy little punk he actually is.
Alan Brooks| 12.30.10 @ 6:29PM
One can say religion is labor control as well (with such a big topic as religion/spirituality, there's naturally more to it than all of you write above): religion cons a guy to get out of bed at 8 AM to work, say, at a miserable, Godless factory--because the worker
might think he is doing it for God.
Religion-- as everything else-- is motivated by both positive & negative intentions.
Alan Brooks| 1.25.11 @ 10:20PM
"Can Civilzatiion Exist Without God?"
Aikman's error is in not knowing that civilization doesn't itself exist. Life is still barbaric.
Ryan| 12.23.10 @ 8:21AM
I am continually baffled by people who claim they are opposed to what Paul wrote in the NT. It makes me wonder if they ever really read him, in context, with understanding.
Marksman| 12.23.10 @ 9:42AM
Disagreeing with Paul is either to justify the continuation of a lifestyle inconsistant with the Bible, or it is a rite of passage experienced by each person struggling with leaving the dark path, and striving for the path to light.
John Hinds | 12.23.10 @ 8:44AM
Of course it can. Just know that when it's all said and done you end up with what you believe in. Believe in nothing? That's what you get.
The fact is God really doesn't 'exist'. That is what 'things' do. God isn't in that class of being. He's not an object. Atheists are unable to distinguish the principle of being from the objects in being insisting that if it doesn't fit the metrics of their own being in the world then it doesn't exist. Rationality can't limit God. That's why we have Faith. As Blaise Pascal famously said, "the heart has its reasons which reason cannot know."
Vern Crisler| 12.23.10 @ 11:26AM
This sounds like apophatic methodology run amuck.
Steve A| 12.23.10 @ 9:24AM
What one believes has absolutely no bearing on truth. There either is, or is not God. My belief, or lack thereof, alters this fact not one bit.
Henry| 12.23.10 @ 10:09AM
I think it was Chesterton who said: if there was no God there would be no atheists.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.23.10 @ 10:12AM
I always get a chuckle.....;
when these kinds of articles come along.
The one single thing that drives agnostics and so-called atheists absolutely bonkers is when we "little Christs" declare absolutely that we have simply met Jesus.
Everything else flows from that meeting.
"Faith" has nothing to do with it.
I don't have to have "faith" that you guys are out there somewhere typing away. Duh, I read your posts from every possible perspective that you each bring to the conversation.
For me to pretend otherwise would simply be insane denial.
We Christians use the word " faith" as a sort of shorthand, but what we try to live for, and are willing to die for, is the "relationship" with our Maker.
Jesus is the only man in history that ever...ever...offered us a "Son, (or Daughter of course), "relationship" with a loving, living, Creator.
Yes,
we can be arrogant, or presumptious, or self righteous, or a scold, at times, but beneath all of that we are deeply humbled every single time we measure ourselves against the "Man, Jesus of Nazereth".
Some folks nodd knowingly and grant that he was a "good" man, but they are in deep denial. Either He was a raving lunatic.....or.....He was precisely who, and what, He said He was.
No other options, folks, and his words and knowledge passed down to us are the source of every respectable "counseling" therapy known.
Those words are summed up of course:
"Respond in love to God who loves you, and love (agape), one another."
Those just don't sound like the words of a raving lunatic or meglomaniac do they?
For me, I rejoice in celebrating his birth.
Perusha| 12.23.10 @ 11:40AM
Ken (Old Texican)---you write:
“Jesus is the only man in history that ever...ever...offered us a "Son, (or Daughter of course), "relationship" with a loving, living, Creator.”
How do you know Jesus is the ONLY human who EVER offered us this? Have you studied ALL the religious literature and teachings? For ALL time? Everywhere?
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.23.10 @ 12:58PM
Perusha,
As a matter of fact I have studied them all...SIX years worth at Baylor University in comparative religion classes from the (arguably) best proponents of those religions/philosophies on earth.
Merry Christmas
Perusha| 12.23.10 @ 2:40PM
So, you took “..SIX years worth at Baylor University in comparative religion classes from the (arguably) best proponents of those religions/philosophies on earth.”
I’m glad you inserted “arguably” into your claim, because I have to argue with you.
First, any professors who teach comparative religion classes are far from being “proponents” of those religions/philosophies, let alone the “best” on “earth”!
They are somewhat like sports writers, who MIGHT HAVE played the game they TALK about when they were young, but are nowhere near accomplished PRACTITIONERS of the game.
Also, I beg your pardon in advance for mentioning this, but isn’t Baylor a Christian university? I wonder if there was any bias in the religious studies department.
”Head” knowledge isn’t enough.
You can probably spout e = m c (squared), and think you “know” what Einstein was all about.
Happy Light-In-Everybody-Day!
Occam's Tool| 12.23.10 @ 11:41AM
Let's take a Darwinian approach here---does anyone know of one secular society that is breeding at, or above, replacement rates, other than, perhaps, New Zealand (NZ birthrate is led by the Maori, who tend to be more religious than the Pakeha (Europeans), which is questionable?
Any takers? My point is, secular humanism is a counter survival trait.
Perry de Havilland | 12.23.10 @ 8:39PM
Exquisite... an entirely utilitarian defence of religion! So we must believe in God because it is a survival trait... not because it is true (and on that score I put God on the same level as the Easter Bunny and the Loch Ness Monster), but because it improves our propensity to have babies.
Wonderful :-)
GW| 12.23.10 @ 11:52PM
God's first commandment to Adam and Eve is "go out therefore and multiply." When secularism runs amok, as it has in the West, the first thing that happens is the society begins to die out. So, yes, atheists have a way of not reproducing their own arguments in a sense.
Occam's Tool| 6.23.11 @ 12:50AM
There will be no religious arguments when the species is dead.
By the way, Perry, you have not answered my utilitarian argument. That is because you can't. It is also not simply utilitarian.
Cindy| 12.23.10 @ 12:32PM
Ken,
I am glad to see that someone has finally mentioned Jesus in all of this. To the person who thinks that we are all going to Heaven...they are sadly mistaken. Read the Bible. Jesus tells us that there will come a day when we have used up all of our chances and God will no longer hear us. Read the parables of the virgins. Also, Jesus tells us that the only way to the Father (God) is through Him (Jesus). Merry Christmas to all
Herb Tarlek| 12.23.10 @ 3:51PM
That is not entirley correct. Revelations shows us that 144,000 Jews are in Heaven. Clearly they did not get there through the Lord.
Bible College Man| 12.23.10 @ 6:38PM
144.000 Jews
There will be 12,000 from each of the 12 tribes of Israel , they will be spreading the gospel news of Christ through out the world, and yes they will be saved believers . They will be joined by others who missed the rapture because they didn't believe but then believed after it was all over and too late for them to go.
The rest of the Jews will burn in hell for eternity.
Chris| 12.23.10 @ 1:42PM
"Either He was a raving lunatic.....or.....He was precisely who, and what, He said He was. No other options, folks, ..."
There is at least one other option, which is that he never existed at all.
Mark| 12.23.10 @ 2:27PM
That other option is easy to dismiss. Might as well argue that Julius Caesar, Napoleon. Queen Elizabeth never existed. Are you seriously proposing we entertain that proposition?
cdc| 12.23.10 @ 3:46PM
There are plenty of people locked up in institutions right now who adamantly claim to be God or the son thereof. Some of them are quite pleasant people and even come across as quite sensible and erudite. Yet they are still locked up tight.
David T| 12.23.10 @ 10:21AM
Aikman said Christopher referred to "a continuing problem of 'moral relativism.'" Why should an atheist concern himself with the problem of moral relativism? As Peter said, atheists, if they truly believe there is no God, are liberated. Yes, indeed--they think they are free to impose their order on the rest of us. Moral relativism leads to power struggles. Atheists and de facto atheists (i.e., religious and political liberals) want control or, as the totalitarians would say, "peace.""
Perry de Havilland | 12.23.10 @ 8:48PM
Are you really under the impression that there are no ethical philosophies other that God based ones? That the options are either morality-from-God or moral relativism? I take it you have not read (for example) Rand then. You do not have to agree with her (indeed I generally don't) but the notion that atheism inevitably involves moral relativism is factually incorrect.
Are you seriously saying that if someone is, say, a libertarian (i.e. someone who wants a political order that does NOT go around 'imposing views' on people) that they must *perforce believe in God? If that is really what you think, you are misinformed.
logmank| 12.23.10 @ 10:24AM
Christopher Hitchens will discover, one millisecond after his spirit and soul exit his body, that God does indeed exist.
Jesus Christ said to Nicodemus (a man who was both good and extremely religious), as recorded in John Chapter 3, "you must be born again".
Further, He said that the way that leads to life is narrow and that there would be "few" who found it. (Matthew Chapter 7, vv. 13-23). Those who argue that "we are all going to heaven", as one poster above, are calling Jesus a liar.
Toto| 12.23.10 @ 11:35AM
The promise of everlasting life in heaven is what motivates so many Christians to "accect Jesus Christ as their Lord and Savior."
Believing and worshiping Christ for a REWARD is utterly repulsive to me. It is operating at the lowest level of moral reasoning.
And as for Christian ethics, I see little of it reflected in the AmSpec posts. Too many of the regular posters are full of the most vile hatred and bigotry.
Both Christopher and his brother, Peter, are, in my opinion, good men, and I wish them the best.
And Merry Christmas, everyone.
Ted| 12.23.10 @ 12:06PM
Toto, I can see how it would be repulsive to do something only for the perceived "payoff".... Kind of like the suicide bombers and their 50 virgins. But most Christians love God for different reasons.
And not everyone who posts here professes to be a Christian, or even a good Christian. I profess to be a Christian, but as to whether I am a good one or not I will have to leave for God to decide. I anticipate that will be a rather uncomfortable conversation.... Why? Because we try to model our lives on Jesus' life. And we all fall short.
Eric Cartman| 12.23.10 @ 12:11PM
Eat sh*t and die, Tootoo.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 12:15PM
ToTo loves Obama and will get no reward from his serving him.
That "One" is a phony.
Anna K. from Emory U.| 12.23.10 @ 1:26PM
Ted,
I appreciate your polite response to Toto's post, and I agree with what you said about all of us falling short of trying to model our lives after Jesus. But all we can do is keep trying, just as Peter Hitchens is doing.
Toto, however, does make a valid point. It troubles me also that too many Christians are just "looking for a payoff," as you say.
And like Edward White (scroll up to see his post) another reasonable man, I, too, think that Christopher Hitchens--although I disagree with his premise--is a good man and an intellectual giant.
A Merry Christmas to all, and let's keep the faith and continue to look for opportunities to do good deeds!
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 2:02PM
"And without faith it is impossible to please Him. For whoever would draw near to God must believe that He exists and that he rewards those who seek Him." Heb. 11:6.
Panis Angelicus| 12.23.10 @ 5:01PM
Note how Margie--always preaching her fundamentalist poison--ignores Eric Cartman's crude and unChristian response to Toto.
Instead, she attacks Toto's innocuous ideas.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 5:46PM
Toto is a Leftist hack and a liar. His ideas as those of his leader, Obama are not innocuous.
Some Christians. so-called that is, do not appreciate the preaching of the gospel.
So now, innocuous troll~ be on with your lies as you wish.
And if you didn't like Cartman's response you should have responded yourself to it, instead of using it to do your nasty knocking of me.
Okeedokee?
Paul| 12.23.10 @ 7:50PM
Being born again is as easy as accepting the gift Jesus, our Saviour gave us when he died on the cross. We just have to step up and thank Jesus and his father for taking our sins when dieing on the cross.
There is proof of the after life. People who have been clinically dead for a time and then brought back. There are thousands of these stories people tell as I do. Most stories are different but all have certain similarities. The afterlife is real.
I believe part of "There is only heaven". I read once that hell is the absence of God. When these people die they are in heaven but far away from God and cannot feel the wondrous love and peace. There is no fire for them, just the absence of feeling Gods love and a chance to repent and move closer to God.
The two brothers seemed to be talking about organised religion, not the individual humans with their own faith in God who has accepted Jesus as our savior. All that is needed is is a silent prayer accepting Gods gift to us.
Richard Baker| 12.23.10 @ 10:57AM
Christopher will rue a lifetime of brilliant and witty atheism. "Only a fool says in his heart there is no God." Psalm 14.
Walkthetalk| 12.23.10 @ 11:01AM
I realize that David Aikman gave only a snippet of the debate between the brothers, but from that it seems no one actually addressed the central figure of the Bible, Old and New Testament – Christ. Peter was quoted as talking about Christianity, as though it were a college degree. He said, “…the way it's implanted in me is certainly by Christianity." I suppose this benign approach was chosen because his brother is dying, but then, aren’t we all slowly succumbing to the deterioration of our bodies. If I had been debating my brother like that, I would have made an aggressive Christian appeal to him, and focused on Christ and life in him. I would have explained that life is only in and of Christ. Apart from Christ there is only death, physically, and spiritually. (See www.christforamericans.com) I understand my brother probably wouldn’t repent at this juncture, but I would have tried to tell him that God is love, and that love is the motivation for an everlasting God to want us ever-dying humans with him. In fact, there is no real love in the human heart; it is only a divine trait. God showed his love by sending his Son to pay the price we owe (death) for our rebellion against him. Jesus died in our place. So now we can freely accept God’s offer of life in Christ Jesus. We can leave the broad path of death and walk on the narrow path of life. The Holy Spirit, who invigorates us when we believe, is the guarantee of that life; and what’s more, that spirit is what implants in us the morals, the attitudes, the hope by which we live here and now. I would have said that as long as you have breath you have the chance to accept the life God offers in Christ. I would have made one last appeal to my brother to turn to Jesus (repent). Turn away from the self-centered, self-justifying spiritually dark path of death and turn to life. Give up your rebellion against God. Life is only found in Jesus Christ. Brother, turn and live!
Jon | 12.23.10 @ 11:04AM
There was an interesting TED Talk by Sam Harris on how science can provide all the moral guidance that is needed to make a society function effectively and humanly. Worth a look. It is on YouTube too: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj9oB4zpHww
Ted| 12.23.10 @ 11:46AM
Science can provide all moral guidance... Indeed, that was a tenet of both the Communists and the Nazis.
Mendorf| 12.23.10 @ 1:12PM
So, you either believe in Jesus whole hog or you're a Nazi or Communist? How anti-intellectual, how stupid.
Toto| 12.23.10 @ 5:08PM
You should know this about the Nazis, Ted:
The Nazis's claim that their 'work on the Jews was done on the word of god. The Nazi soldiers had it inscribed on their belt buckles: Gott Mit Uns. With God on our side.
Look it up.
Who Knows?| 12.23.10 @ 11:52AM
Yet AGAIN, we are offered another chance to observe and understand people who merely BELIEVE this and that.
Why, even the proud atheist, Christopher Hitchens, admits that he BELIEVES what he BELIEVES---
"If anything could prove what I so much BELIEVE," he said, "which is that we are not made by God and never were and could not have been, but that many, many gods have been made by men and women and it is precisely the other way around, the basic claim of materialism -- if nothing else could persuade me of that obvious truth, the behavior of religion itself would be enough."
Also, AGAIN, isn’t it obvious that all you believers, who so “faithfully” and passionately express your agape love for WHAT you believe about the deity, God, are stuck in the CREATOR assumption?
That is, you BELIEVE, since you, and not-you, EXIST, or that there indisputably EXISTS “a” creation, obviously there must BE “a” creator---ergo, call “him” or “her” by the name of God.
If God created this creation, who created God?
Where does the buck stop?
Is stopping an option?
I prefer Wittgenstein---“Whereof one cannot speak, thereof one must be silent.”
I’ll shut up.
You don’t have to tell me to!
Ted| 12.23.10 @ 11:55AM
"If God created this creation, who created God?"
Check out St. Thomas Aquinas. He dealt with this very question in the Summa. I believe Mamonides also treated the topic as well, but I am not as well versed in his work as I would like to be.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 12:10PM
"I am the Alpha and the Omega," says the Lord God, who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty." Rev. 1:8.
I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the Beginning and the End." Rev. 22:13.
Who Knows?| 12.23.10 @ 2:46PM
Your bible quotes harbor a hidden teaching, and I just wonder if you understand it---
There is ONLY God.
If God is the alpha and the omega and everything in between, what is NOT God?
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 2:59PM
"There is ONLY God."
Are you trying to tell me that you don't exist?
Who Knows?| 12.23.10 @ 3:19PM
Your head is spinning, admit it.
God IS existence, so while I exist and you exist, and everything else exists, for a while, God is the coming, Being, and going of it all.
Indeed, Jesus nailed the Only God-ness of It All with His “love your neighbor as yourself” and “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” sayings.
Would “you” use the right hand to cut off the left hand?
NO. True loving human morality is BASED on the Absolute unity, despite appearances and feelings, of us all.
Humanity is ONE---in Only God.
Of course, only crazy people go around in public, and proclaim THIS, in the Western world!
In India, though, it is common---well, not THAT common!
Read “In The Vision of God”, by Swami Ramdas, (not the American Ram Das!), 1963, which chronicles his holy life as he wandered India, greeting everyone as God, or “Ram”, in his word.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 3:35PM
"God IS existence".
No, God is God.
Creator & Father. For as it is written:
"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." Gen. 1:1.
"So God created the great sea monsters and every living creature that moves, with which the waters swarm, according to their kinds, and every winged bird according to its kind. And God saw that it was good." Gen. 1:21.
"So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them.: Gen. 1:27.
"These are the generations of the heavens and the earth when they were created. In the day that the LORD God made the earth and the heavens.." Gen. 2:4
"For ask now of the days that are past, which were before you, since the day that God created Man upon the earth, and ask from one end of heaven to the other, whether such a great thing as this has ever happened or was ever heard of." Duet. 4:32.
"Do you thus requite the LORD, you foolish and senseless people? Is not he your Father, who created you, who made you and established you?" Duet. 32:6.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 4:31PM
Dear Mr. or Miss "Who Knows":
The Bible tends to scold us sometimes because our thinking doesn't match up with God's thinking.
However, I present it to you because I love you.
God called me to preach the gospel, in season and out.. meaning, whether or I not I might feel up to it.
Someone almost 40 years ago preached God's words to me from the Bible, too. They loved me enough to show me His truth.
And let me tell you, I didn't like it at first!
But then, here's what I chose to do. This was in 1975. I chose to listen to His words as presented in the Bible. I humbled myself, got on my knees and prayed.
I doubted. But I did it anyway. I prayed and admitted I was a sinner. I asked Him to please forgive of all my sins and to please give me His Holy Spirit, in my heart, like He promised to, in the Bible.
The rest is history.
It wasn't Religion that saved me, it was Christ Himself.
Jesus is a living Person. He is the only begotten Son of God.
He loves you dearly. More than you could know right now.
Like my friend (is he still?) Ken (Old Tex) said to me, below:
I will pray for you to know Him, too.
You are much beloved.
He died for you, too.
The Bible says that His words are "living and active~ sharper than any two-edged sword. Piercing to the division of soul and marrow."
This I know first hand.
And that is why I present them here. So that other's hearts may be pierced like mine was.
It is called God's love.
He does it by speaking His words to others.
Of which I have passed on to you. With a little personal testimony now mixed in.
God bless.
John Hinds | 12.23.10 @ 6:04PM
@Who Knows? That's it! The whole thing is an Apotheosis, all of creation is a self actualization/realization of the divine creative spirit. We little sentient creatures are mere instruments of this, in a way, "G_d's" eyes, ears, hearing, feeling, tasting.
Ted| 12.23.10 @ 11:54AM
Christopher Hitchens strikes me as a man who is or was at some point an idealist who felt he got mugged by the real world and either lost his faith or concluded that religion was false because of the state of the world. There seems to be, in his "anger" (for lack of a better word) a certain longing for that faith. For some reason he always reminds me of the Book of Job, as if he is demanding from God and explanation or searching for an explanation. Perhaps in his life he felt he put his faith in God and things didn't go the way he felt they should have. God has his own ways (see Isaiah 55: 8-9)
Anger and love are flip sides of the same coin.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 12:04PM
"We love, because He first loved us." 1 Jn. 4:19.
"..for God is love." 1 Jn. 4:8.
I pray that before he dies, Christopher Hitchens will realize that God IS love.
He isn't Religion, He is God, and He is love. And He is Christ Jesus, who died in His place, for his sins.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 1:19PM
Also, I should add that I had an egg salad sandwich for lunch and I am blasting out the nastiest egg-salad farts you ever heard or smelled. They are loud and raunchy.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 1:21PM
Literally I just ripped another one right after I wrote that. It's making me dizzy. If I write something later that sounds confused, or like I have amnesia or something, you'll know why. I've been stupidified - or should I say "poopified"? - by my own rancid and explosive bum-gas.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 1:31PM
^^To the trolls posting under mine and others' names for the rest of the year:
Have fun.
A friendly Editor here told me today that your time may be short.
Coward.
sam| 12.23.10 @ 1:46PM
yeah! 1 John! whoop!
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 12:12PM
..That should have been, above, "died in his place", small 'h'.
Notary Sojac| 12.23.10 @ 12:38PM
I think it's safe to say that "civilization cannot survive without people who -believe- in God".
It's beyond questioning that the Western statesmen whose outlook was infused with the Judeo-Christian worldview have been better stewards of liberty, even for unbelievers, than the criminal heads of state who rejected that worldview.
However, as one of those unbelievers, I separate the questions of "is Christianity beneficial?" from "is Christianity true?" and answer them differently.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 1:58PM
Dear Notary,
I too, appreciate what you said. An honest soul you are!
The question to be asked though, is not whether Christianity is true.. but whether Christ is true, because after all, He's the One who made us His followers and if it weren't for Him there wouldn't be any Christians.
He reveals Himself to all who call upon Him honestly. That's what He did for me, and all who are called by His name, that is "Christian."
"You will seek Me and find Me; when you seek Me with all your heart.." Jer. 29:13.
"And I tell you, Ask, and it will be given you; seek, and you will find; knock, and it will be opened to you. For every one who asks receives, and he who seeks finds, and to him who knocks it will be opened." Lk. 11:9 & 10.
Mark| 12.23.10 @ 3:58PM
I agree separating the questions is important.
Indeed, phrasing the question "Is Christianity true?" biases the enquiry. Phrasing the question that way make "truth" the ultimate metric. We have erred my making Certainty our God and Reason our Christ. Through Reason we will find Certainty. While this is a great way to do mathematics, physics, and chemistry, it fails miserably when applied to living a good life or building a good civilization.
A more practical question to ask is "What would Christ have me do?" Let us table the whole question of belief.
Belief is a distraction. Action is what matters. Lenin had it right when he said: "What is to be done?"
Christianity is not an intellectual debate, it is a way of life. It is the basis by which we imperfect humans choose one action over action day in and day out. Live your life as Christ would have you live it and belief will follow.
For the individual, Christianity is a decision, not a debate. To become convinced, one must first become a Christian. The belief follows the decision, not the other way around.
Addressing the question "Is Christianity true?" we find that the only people who can answer in the affirmative with authority are Christians. Atheists (and others) must answer "no", because (by choice) they will not have accumulated the life experiences or necessary perspective on Christianity to answer otherwise.
idalily| 12.24.10 @ 3:37PM
Notary, this is a very perceptive and important distinction. Well said.
Ralph| 12.23.10 @ 12:59PM
Folks are always, like a line in the sand they are daring you to step across if you've got the balls to do so, throwing out C.S. Lewis' observation that, for Christians and those wishing to become Christians, Jesus either was who he said he was or else a raving lunatic.
Okay, dare accepted.
Jesus was a lunatic.
Albeit a very wise lunatic. He was also a Jew like me. He was the world's first reform rabbi. Since Jews believe in the utter incorporeality of God and that idolatry is a grave sin, well, you might see why some of us may be reluctant to drop everything just because St. Paul told us to do it.
sam| 12.23.10 @ 2:07PM
I have a serious question, because I do not know that much about Judaism, nor do I know what your canon includes. Where does the Talmud end? In relation to the books included in the Bible, I mean? Does it include the books of prophecy in the Old Testament?
If the Jews do not accept the books of prophecy then I understand. But I thought the the books of prophecy were accepted. How do Jews understand the prophecies of a Messiah? The Jews were the chosen people through whose lineage the Messiah was prophecied to be born.
When you say that Jews believe in the incorporeality of God, that makes me wonder how Jews understand the coming of the Messiah that was prophecied to them.
Christians believe the Christ was the Messiah who was prophecied in the Old Testament, and also believe that He was "True God, yet very man," to quote a hymn that I have sung, recently. And the words to the hymn were taken from the books of Isaiah (chapter 11.1).
What do Jews think about Isaiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Daniel and all the prophets?
I think C.S. Lewis is correct in his assertion. And I do not know how one could call someone a wise lunatic; that is oxymoronic and duplicitous (and not in the same way that Christians believe in the triune Trinity, either, I would argue. Actually, I would argue that the triune nature of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit isn't duplicitous).
But still, my questions is about the prophets and I am very curious to understand what a Jew believes.
Thank you,
In Christ,
Sam
Occam's Tool| 6.23.11 @ 12:52AM
Sam---figure the first five books, or the Torah, is the most important. That is the focus of the talmud.
Occam's Tool| 6.23.11 @ 12:52AM
Sam---figure the first five books, or the Torah, is the most important. That is the focus of the talmud.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.23.10 @ 1:08PM
Notary,
A splendid...and brief....(smile)...rational stance.
It simply leads me to think that you just haven't met Him yet. Here's hoping and praying...
Steve A| 12.23.10 @ 1:16PM
Ralph, Jesus was a lunatic as demonstrted by?????? Please expand.
Ken (Old Texican)| 12.23.10 @ 2:13PM
Steve,
Ralph hasn't the depth to pursue the discussion any further...heh, but I do.
In Genesis, God made a covenant with mankind. In effect, He promised not to blast mankind away with His glory, thus effecting free will.
Then Abraham was introduced to "God providing the sacrifice" rather than Abraham sacrificing HIS son whom he dearly loved.
In Ralph's own "holy scriptures", the first prophesy for the advent of Christ took place upon that mountain when God "stayed his hand".
Ralph is also sadly lacking in his knowledge of the words of the great prophet Isaiah foretelling the "suffering servant" advent of Jesus....the perfect sacrifice for Sin....(rebellion against God is the definition of capital S Sin singular.)
Jews had been sacrificing seemingly endless animals for centuries.
Interestlingy enough, shortly after Jesus' sacrifice, the Jews were prevented from sacrificing animals...ever after, and even until today.
Fascinating huh?
I have read reams and reams of thought on the subject...(heh, written and published some serious reams as well.)
Suffice it to say here, most of the tribes of Israel are no more. The Jewish tribe remains, and we decent (and educated) Christians consider ourselves merely adopted children of Israel....heh...without all the rules the Israelites took upon themselves.
Finally, we Christians accept Jesus' words in their simplest form: "I and the Father are one."
Merry Christmas, Steve
Herb Tarlek| 12.23.10 @ 4:05PM
My understanding of Matthew 5:18 is that the law is unchanged until all is fulfilled. The Christians are not except from the law.
Steve A| 12.23.10 @ 2:32PM
Ken, Much thanks. Those who accept the sacrifice & have been washed know, it is like discovering a hidden treasure that has been lying in plain view. You are unable to prevent yourself from sharing the treasure & then the world again begins to wear you down, again.
It is an amazing journey & incredible to even contemplate that He would elect to pay our price, in full, if we would, in turn, simply reach out & accept the gift.
Merry Christmas to you & your family. Be safe.
Graeme| 12.23.10 @ 2:43PM
Christianity is a dangerous cult of fear, death and self-loathing, projecting/shoving their delusions on others and actively seeking to bring about the end of this World through self dianostic Doomsday prophecies.
Religion is for people who have determined they have no use for education or intelligence, i.e., the 'consciously un-evolved.' Faith in dogma is BLIND SUBMISSION to ignorance.
Reason obeys itself. Ignorance submits to what is dictated to it.
Bear in mind that you were convicted and found guilty before you were conceived of crimes in which you couldn't have possibly been involved and you have all the burden of proof at your own defense and you have been found guilty. But to make up for that role of horrible indictment you can be reassured that the entire cosmos is designed with you in mind. False translation, and that he has a plan for you, on condition that you agree to be a serf forever.
I don't wish for a world without god, because that's what I already live in. A world without ANY bloody religion will suffice to enable the primate species to achieve progress and PEACE.
JP| 12.23.10 @ 3:09PM
"Religion is for people who have determined they have no use for education or intelligence, i.e., the 'consciously un-evolved.' Faith in dogma is BLIND SUBMISSION to ignorance."
Funny that 2 of the giants of science and mathematics (Newton and Pascal) were deeply religious people. For both men religion was far more important than thier science or math studies.
People like you just mimick talking points put out by others. Your posts lack intelligence, humility, and betray a rather juevinille personality akin to a 10 year old who boasts to his younger brother that there is no Santa Claus.
Ryan| 12.23.10 @ 3:12PM
You've missed Christianity on so many levels, it's actually a little sad.
Yes, we believe that we are Fallen - but that there is a perfect God Who made a way for us to know Him anyway.
It's not that the cosmos was designed with me in mind - it was designed by God with Himself in mind.
If I desire to serve an Almighty, perfect, incorruptible God, what greater good can there be?
ken (Old Texican)| 12.23.10 @ 3:25PM
Graeme,
I will pray for you now. (pause)
"Father, please...one more time...please extend your Holy Spirit to this man yet one more time.
"You told us that if we asked...You would hear our prayers. Put your money where your words are. Heal this man's darkness if he is willing to be healed.
In Jesus' name, Amen.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 3:04PM
"Reason obeys itself.:
You and I were created to obey God. He is the God of Reason:
"Come now, let us reason together, says the LORD: though your sins are like scarlet, they shall be as white as snow; though they are red like crimson, they shall become like wool." Is. 1:18.
Who Knows?| 12.23.10 @ 3:08PM
"Absolutism is committed to the doctrine of two truths; for, it makes the distinction between the thing as it is, unrelatedly, absolutely, and how it appears in relation to the percipients who look at it through views and standpoints.
The Real as the Noumenon has to be contrasted with phenomena, which are but appearance. The distinction is implicit in all philosophy.
Categories of thought and points of view distort the real. They unconsciously coerce the mind to view things in a cramped, biased way; and are thus inherently incapable of giving us the Truth."
"The Central Philosophy of Buddhism" by T.R.V. Murti, 1955
Absolutely TRUE!
JP| 12.23.10 @ 3:10PM
Sounds like Murti borrowed quite a bit from Immanual Kant and his Critique of Pure Reason.
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 3:23PM
Did somebody say truth?
For as it is written:
"Jesus said to him, "I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father, but by Me." Jn. 14:6.
Now what do you think of that?
Ken (Olde Texican)| 12.23.10 @ 3:28PM
MARGIE... PLEASE DON'T SCOLD!
Pray for these lost ones instead!
Merry Christmas to you and your loved ones.
Ken
Margie| 12.23.10 @ 3:39PM
Ken,
Please don't scold!
I wasn't, and yet you scold me?
I simply asked what he or she thinks of that.
It's called asking a question.
John Hinds | 12.23.10 @ 6:16PM
@Margie, "I am the W/T/L..." means the way the truth the life pre-existed Christ and he identifies himself with them not the other way around. If Christ never existed, say on another world, the W/T/L do, nevertheless. And, therefore, he is "there" in that form. The principle comes before the Lord.
Margie| 12.24.10 @ 1:32PM
Mr. Hinds (I knew a Hinds family from New Jersey),
Dear Sir, I must as a Christian and therefore called by his Son to speak the truth (as every one who calls themselves a Christian is also commanded by Him to do), to you out of L-O-V-E the following message. It may just save your soul. In fact I hope it does.
Did you know that God says that the preaching of His words are like seeds that actually become sowed into one's heart upon hearing them?
Yes, it is a wonderful thing. To the heart that receives His words, your faith actually grows, just upon hearing it! How do I know this, and what can possibly make me so sure? I will tell you. It's because this following verse from the Bible proved true in my own life. It actually happened to me:
"Therefore put away all filthiness and rank growth of wickedness and receive with meekness the implanted word, which is able to save your souls." James 1:21.
I chose to receive the His words. They grew in my heart and so my faith became stronger and stronger every day, by the Grace of God.
So can you, and so can anyone. With meekness, though. Like a child. Simply listen and believe and receive!
Now, as to your comment, I think you are seeking the truth. But here's the thing about what you said about "The principle comes before the Lord."
The principle IS the Lord. How? Simply because He says this:
"Jesus said to them, "Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am." Jn. 8:58.
Because Jesus Himself always was. I'm going to give you a few more verses to go by. Since the Bible is the authority, and not me. I always let His words speak, not mine. It really irks some people, but too bad. (Not you, but some others).
Here are the verses I will love sharing with you to show you what I'm talking about, or rather He means when He claims to be the I Am:
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God; all things were made through Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made. In Him was life, and the life was the light of men." Jn. 1:1-4.
See how Jesus was there, in the very beginning.
Also in Genesis it says this:
"Then God said, "Let us make man in our image, after our likeness.." Gen. 1:26.
"I am the Alpha and the Omega, the First and the Last, the beginning and the end." Rev. 22:13.
So, Jesus IS the principle you speak of, He IS the Way, the Truth and the Life. He's a real person who was born into the world to die for the sins of the world, rose from the dead, and still lives to make intercession for us. For as it is written:
"Consequently he is able for all time to save those who draw near to God through Him, since He always lives to make intercession for them." Heb. 7:25
I am not scolding when I ask you this question: What do you think of all of this? I truly would like to know.
Who Knows?| 12.23.10 @ 3:31PM
Good connection!
However, Murti is simply the author of his best take on what’s known as Madhyamika Buddhism, admittedly not hardly known in the West. It is the “Central” philosophy of Buddhism, first began by Nagarjuna, around the 8th century A.D..
In the appendix, Murti compares and contrasts Kant with Nagarjuna.
The use of the negative dialectic is AWESOME!
PattyMor| 12.23.10 @ 4:27PM
You could probably have a thriving civilization without God (although I really can't think of one), but a society must have values. Our Declaration of Independence says we have life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, but what about all the fetuses killed? Or partial birth abortion (infanticide)? Or with the coming health care, rationing, so you die instead of getting treated.
If we don't value our Western heritage of freedom, what do we now value? A trip to the shopping mall, botox, or an i-pod and someone else to pay for our stuff? In the end, its an empty promise, as newness of the stuff soon fades.
Read Revelations and all the exhortations of Babylon? Everyone thought that it referred to Rome. Could it be the United States?
I am afraid we have sold our freedoms for thirty piece of silver. That didn't end too well for Judas either.
Bill Sundling| 12.23.10 @ 6:09PM
Atheists believe in God but because of their hatred for God they refuse to acknowledge Him. If atheists didn't believe in God they should still encourage others to do so because a religious society is an honest, hard working society. Like Wisconsin in 1960.
Big Leo| 12.23.10 @ 8:55PM
Boil down the universe and analyze every atom for it for love, beauty, grace, generosity, truth, justice, freedom, God, or faith. You will find nothing.
Now, tell me what life would be worth without those allegedly 'unreal' things.
Sonny| 12.23.10 @ 9:52PM
Only at a point of a Gun.. as per Chairman Mao, Karl Marx, V. Lenin, and so on..
Borkholt| 12.24.10 @ 12:54AM
The proofs for Christianity from the Hebrew Bible are necessarily circular. They interpret every verse as pre-figuring a Christ as they already assume that Jesus was the Christ. As for the Greek Testament - well, what do Christians think of Mary Baker Eddy or Joseph Smith?
Walkthetalk| 12.25.10 @ 12:24AM
Borkholt, actually, the are proofs are linear. Let me explain - the whole Old Testament is about God, what he will do, how he will do it, and with whom. Using that info Jews identified Yeshua as the Messiah. Matthew made a record of the fulfilled identifications of the Messiah. Read Luke/Acts and you shall see that the Jews (who identified the Messiah from their own scripture) were the ones who told the gentiles who Yeshua/Jesus was and what the signs of his coming were. Since the gentiles now know this they can easily spot the proofs the Jews used to identify the Messiah. So, don't blame the Christians; they only begin after Jesus rose from the dead.
Now concerning MBE and JS, Christians on the right do not think of them much at all. But if you are interested in those personalities and you should research the corpus of each. If you want to know more about the Bible and the proofs about the Messiah see www.christforamericans.com It will also help you if you want to know the theme of the Bible; or why the Messiah had to come during the Roman times; or how the Messiah is God; or what it means to be "in" Jesus; or what happened before God created the heavens and the earth. Merry Christmas.
autopoet| 12.24.10 @ 5:12AM
"Can Civilization Survive Without God?"
wrong question. it should be: can civilization survive with god?
probably not:-)
Who Knows?| 12.24.10 @ 12:28PM
Margie, our designated “Jesus saved me” driver, please enjoy the following, along with any others of your ilk. And, those inclined to harbor even a scintilla of doubt about her obduracy, in drag, maybe you’ll get off on it, as well.
Perhaps the most useful split, quite near to the initial “Fall” from ONE into self-otherness, is the exoteric-esoteric one.
So, pertaining to the dominant religion of Christianity in the USA of 2010, soon to be 2011, what we have is an exoteric form of teaching, and BELIEF, practiced, or mouthed, by the vast majority of people who claim to belong to this cult.
Any esoteric remnants of this True Religion established over 2,000 years ago? I’m trying to think of who and where they are, and drawing a blank.
Surely, it is NOT in Rome, as the pope is just the latest high priest leading the exoteric church.
Actual practitioners of what Jesus preached, and demanded of His followers, these days are surely underground, since the memory of what happened to Bruno and his types is burned into their brains!
What about the gist of “Jesus saved me”?
Margie happily and proudly trumpets, for all the world to know, that SHE was saved by Jesus. And, oh, how SHE wants YOU to get HER message, so YOU, too, can be thus saved.
This is where the esoteric-exoteric split is most easily seen.
Whoever and whatever the hell SHE is, or takes HERSELF to be, in the exoteric realm, it’s all about saving the poor lost soul, the born once person, which is called being “born again”.
As if the ever changing ME could be saved!
Can YOU, now, save the YOU of a minute ago?
Why, if I could have, I would have saved the ME of around 20, full of energy and sexual desire and ability, and lacking any pain!
What about Jesus’ esoteric Teaching?
Essentially, it seems to ME that it is encapsulated in His admission, “The Lord God and I are ONE.”
What is refused, and even considered blasphemy, is His Absolute prevailing and ongoing permanent commandment, that this is ALSO true for YOU.
Not the YOU, as ego, which is what you take yourself to be, but the Truth of your appearance as a body-mind.
Paradoxically, to be born again primarily demands that one return to one’s unborn “state”. In short, the first act is to undo your bodily birth, in SPIRIT!
That is, instead of BELIEVING that you were really born at such and such a time in the past, Realize that this is not true. The ego-I wasn’t born, anyway, but created around the age of 2 or 3, and such a “one” is merely a useful fiction, to enable us all to function in lively order.
Any who, you were never born as a body-mind, who maybe has experiences of a Spiritual kind, but in TRUTH, you are Absolutely Spirit seeming to have a body and mind.
Beside, you don’t HAVE a body and mind!
You are the body mind. If you believe that you do have a body-mind, well, who has this I? If I can have a body-mind, why can’t there be another I that has this I? Ad infinitum.
Excuse me as I riff on my bad-assed put down side, in memory of my parents and youth---
Remember “Jesus saves Green Stamps”? Most people are too young to know about such advertising promotions.
They were coupons, essentially.
My parents smoked Raleigh cigarettes, each pack of which contained an official-looking coupon, and if you SAVED enough of them, you could redeem them for things you wanted.
Well, you can probably imagine where this is going.
The end results of my parents being SAVED by saving these coupons, besides getting the things they paid for, was, as for a lot of smokers, bodily hell, as the years passed by.
Father had his voice box removed, leaving a hole on his throat, so he finally HAD TO stop being saved by smoking, and later died a most painful death as a golf-ball sized tumor grew out of the side of his neck.
What a SAVING!
Grace.
Who Knows?| 12.24.10 @ 12:46PM
When I was awakening as a young person and becoming hot to be on my own, in those years of rebellion in which one questions what has been drummed into one by society and elders, it became obvious that there was a whole lot of shucking and jiving going on.
In short, the smarter and more informed I became, the more blatant the fact became that most of what putative “experts” claimed to be true was grounded on shifting sands.
And, this was well before I even grasped quantum mechanics' essence!
But, I DID, without understanding the math, devour the essence of Einstein, taking the name of “The Theory of Relativity” all the way home, and back.
Soon enough, I was reduced to a total bore, because, whenever engaged in arguments or discussions with friends, I’d blow it all up by childishly saying that “it’s all relative”.
Well, hey—up is relative to down, here to there, then to now, etc etc etc.
Eventually, I “refined” this deadly habit, by using the more anodyne query, “Who Knows?” Because, at the end of ANY rational consideration, it always seemed to me that this was an unanswered and unanswerable question.
Humor being my nature, I then jumped the grammatical shark, by “answering” my own question---it went like this:
Questing with “Who Knows?” led to a flipped around statement:
“Who KNOWS!”
It ended with, I’d sure like to meet this WHO, because HE knows!
WHO WHO WHO!!!
HO HO HO!
Happy Light in Everybody Day, every day!
Margie| 12.24.10 @ 1:41PM
I am sure that many "got off on it" as you say, as they rejoice with you in hurling false accusations my way.
But your comments reveal your vileness.
God's words do not agree with you, and that is a shame for you. I pity you.
Jesus is still Lord. He still uses the low and despised in the world to preach His gospel, whether you like it or not.
"So faith comes from what is heard, and what is heard comes by the preaching of Christ." Rom. 10:17.
PJB/| 12.24.10 @ 6:38PM
Margie says:
"Christianity is not an intellectual debate, it is a way of life."
Hmm. A way of life. So now we have an answer for why the Inquisition happened, along with all the myriad other horrendous and bloody acts of "god-fearing people". Hey! It's a way of life! Get used to it!
The phrase "god-fearing" is a most apt one, and goes far in explaining much.
PJB/| 12.24.10 @ 6:43PM
...and by the way...the Inquisition and similar outrages were not brought about by a few nutbag
christians. They banded together en masse and carried out their evil designs as the 'body of christ'.
It was not some random John David Hinckley amongst the fervent that instigated and carried out these monstrosities - it was the very CHURCH itself.
Margie| 12.24.10 @ 11:19PM
You're so eager to beat the crap out of me that you aren't reading straight.
1. I didn't say what you attributed to me, above.
However, it IS the truth.
2. Sorry to disappoint but I had nothing to do with the Inquisition, nor did actual Christians. You ought to check your history on that.
Christians do not murder their fellow men. Insane people who follow false Religion do, though. Again, check the history.
I'm not a Catholic, I'm a Christian. Two very different things.
joerobo| 12.25.10 @ 1:10PM
How the the Jesus Myth People know that the imaginary things they believe are superior to the "72 virgins" gig that the Mohammed Myth folks subscribe to? How about the L. Ron Hubbard nuts? Bizarre made up Christian sects like the Mormons and J. Witnesses that "real Christians" know are ridiculous? The whole premise of organized religion is "My God is better than your God". Past the point of sillyness .
Jesus Loves You| 12.25.10 @ 2:30PM
There seems to be a lot of proudly self-proclaimed atheists, and followers of eastern religions posting on this string. Any self-respecting atheist should simply ignore anyone who believes in a god. Since there are no god they are worshiping nothing. What do atheists care? Despite this, you certainly expend a lot of effort in attacking Christians. And the eastern mystics - what are you doing here? Why do you waste your time attacking Christians. With so much esoteric etc. understanding you should pity them. It seems these two groups have something in common. You both actually believe in the God of the Bible - and hate him. You feel you have valid grievances against God that must be redressed. But God doesn't respond to you in a manner you demand, and deserve. You want everyone to know you are innocent and thus justified in your vitriol. You can't attack God, so you attack those who follow him. You post on this non-leftist site so you can justify yourself and your anger to those on the right; so all there will know you are victims of the God of the Bible. You can't attack him personally so you take it out on him by attacking those don't hate God. Christians are easy targets. They don't seem to understand your righteous anger. But the opposite is also true. You don't understand their happiness with God. In fact, you resent it. The reason for this is that there are two spiritual paths in this world. One leads away from God, the path you have chosen, and the other is the path ordained by God for all people. But God does not order all to follow it. Each person is permitted to select the path that suits his preference. God sends his people out to call to those walking in the other direction. "Repent," they cry, "change paths." Those on the path leading away from God frequently respond to the call with antagonism. They attack the messenger. But they should know that no matter what they hope to accomplish by their self-justified attacks, Jesus wants you to have life. There is life only in him. There is spiritual death apart from him. The choice is always yours. So, turn to Jesus and live. He won't turn away from you as you have from him. Jesus loves you.
T1Brit| 12.25.10 @ 4:57PM
You post a long and reasoned argument.
Here is an answer:
There was indeed a man called Jesus, or Jeshua to be more accurate. And he did preach something - of that there is also no doubt.
But the mythology that you describe was invented by ordinary men much later on, at the first council of Nicea in AD 325.
We do not know what Christ said - anymore than we know what Moses might have said, if he did actually exist.
All the information you present was cooked up by a gathering of priests many hundreds of years after the events.
Personally I believe that what Christ taught was almost identical to what Buddha taught. And the remnants of that message can be found in the scrambled texts that have passed down to us.
If you read between the lines, you can extract the essence of it, and it is a noble and profound call to selflessness and genuine personal spiritual growth towards an ideal that might very well be described as heaven on earth.
The Buddhists are well aware of it and teach it daily.
All the other stuff about sons of God and holy smoke are pure nonsense created to impress small minds.
Wake up and smell the coffee.
Jesus Loves You| 12.26.10 @ 12:29AM
T1Brit, The Council of Nicea invented the a way to see Jesus that was compliant with power and control of an empire. The real portrait of Christ is found in the Old Testament. Yes, even the sons of God stuff, and the bit about life in the Messiah. But God doesn't require you follow his Bible. He says the choice is yours. You post to tell everyone you have chosen Buddah? Then you try to justify yourself by equating Buddah with Jesus. If you want Buddah, run with him, but leave Jesus out of it. Take your medicine like a man. Buddah promises nothingness. Jesus promises life.
T1Brit| 12.28.10 @ 5:52AM
Again, he doesn't say anything. You are talking about scribbles on a page.
It is the writings of ancient middle eastern sages and priests gathered together in a compilation to which you refer.
And your hostility doesn't sound very christian either. Is personal nastyness a part of your religion?
You are a typical 'christian' fake. You talk the talk but do not walk the walk. You are in fact a seething mass of rage and hostility, covered by a thin layer of hypocritical cant.
"Christianity promises everything, but delivers nothing, Buddhism promises nothing - but delivers" - Nietzsche.
Occam's Tool| 6.23.11 @ 12:53AM
Didn't Nietzsche end his days banging his head on a piano?
T1Brit| 12.25.10 @ 4:36PM
Yes.