Christopher and Peter Hitchens debate religion against brutal backdrop

Never heard of Peter Hitchens. Lots of brothers feel such resentment that another one of their siblings has made it and they have not ... somehow it seems so unfair to them, as if luck were at play. This way they can excuse their own failure, in fact it's an alibi.

Trying to have a professional life as the anti-Christopher is just as pathetic a thing as I can think of.

I've watched my siblings waste a lot of their lives on petty arguments like this. I certainly hope that their estrangement is based on something more serious than whether or not God exists.

To assume that this conflict was the center of their lives is rather naive, while Christopher has always had a bit of a chip on his shoulder as many atheists seem to do. The contributions of both Peter and Christopher go way beyond this one point of argument.

Its not religion but reason which makes us better human beings. It is reasoning and intelligence which makes us realize the economic and human benefits of fairness and honesty.
The main reason we are suffering economically and as a society is because we have become unfair and hypocritical. We wage unfair lies based wars and support other tyrannies and occupations as long as it is our "allies" who commit them.
We have not really understood that crime does not continue to pay.
This realization requires reason not religion.

I rather like BThomas's comments. We can always find examples that contradict some of his/her comment but the truth is religion can be as desruptive to a civil society as no religion at all. We need only to look as far as our own back yard for an example. Always enjoyed listening to Christopher wheither I agreed with him or not. Never heard Peter but I can surmise their conversations didn't conclude with a cup of coffee and good natured ribbing. Maybe they should have stuck to politics.

QUOTE:"Never heard of Peter Hitchens. Lots of brothers feel such resentment that another one of their siblings has made it and they have not ... somehow it seems so unfair to them, as if luck were at play. This way they can excuse their own failure, in fact it's an alibi."

So you think everything in life is about title, paycheck and class?

If you want to attack Peter Hitchens for bad arguments, I am fine with that, but attacking him for not being as well known as his brother demeans the middle class and poor.

I am a college educated dishwasher and not the least ashamed of it. People complain all the time that everyone should get an education. I hate to burst your bubble, but even if everyone did get an education, we would STILL have a three class system.

Attack Peter for his defense of Santa, not is paycheck.

I hate jaded people who think that if you don't live in a mansion or make billions, you are a loser.

Tell me, when you are on your own deathbed, are your really going to be concerned with the material things you collected throughout life?

QUOTE;" as if luck were at play."

For every Tom Cruise their are hundreds of thousands in Hollywood, just as good, if not better, that will remain unknown.

For every player that makes it to the NFL with only 45 slots per the 32 teams, there are 100s of thousands and millions, from pee wee league age, that will NOT make it and will have to fall back on something else.

I am so sick of people like you equating poverty as being lazy or class as equating to morality.

The issue here is not about how many books Peter sells vs his Brother. The issue is the existence of god.

QUOTE:"The main reason we are suffering economically and as a society is because we have become unfair and hypocritical. "

When you ask anyone of any class if they came across a car accident, would they ask the person's class or religion before rendering aid, the rational and humane person says no, they would just lend the aid.

BUT, some people hypocritically will let a guy in a cubical allow you to die because of your inability to pay.

I say be consistent, if you don't want to pay for the heath care of others, then the next time you see someone bleeding to death, and they are poor, screw em, they got what they deserved, right?

And why not stop at just letting them die. Why not have them arrested and jailed for merely not having what you have. After all, they are mooches, right?

Yet the rich have no problem taking tax deductions the middle and poor have to subsidize. If the money is not going into the pot, someone has to make up for it.

The fact is that the class war fare is being waged by the corporate class who won't be satisfied until American workers are making cell phones for 40 cents an hour 16 hours a day like China.

@Shadow27 - you "hope that their estrangement is based on something more serious than whether or not God exists"?

Wow.

Please give us all the enlightenment of what could be MORE serious than the debate over the existence of God.

Of course there is NOTHING more serious than the existence of God since logic tells us that matter cannot create itself. Duh.

the4millerz write
"Of course there is NOTHING more serious than the existence of God since logic tells us that matter cannot create itself. Duh."

Well then what is god made of? Matter? Energy..which is interchangeable with mass or matter? Then who created him/her since your logic says matter cannot create itself?
Fact remains that religion is very divisive. Just see what is happening in the middle east as one religion claims to be superior to another.

Of course Christopher is right, if all of the treasure spent on Religious cathedrals, mosques, synagogues, and religious wars since humans emerged from caves was spent on education, think how much more evolved humans would be.

Voltaire was right:

"The first clergyman was the first rascal who met the first fool".

"Churchs are built by rascals for the benefit of rascals".

Of course Christopher is right, if all of the treasure spent on Religious cathedrals, mosques, synagogues, and religious wars since humans emerged from caves was spent on education, think how much more evolved humans would be.

Voltaire was right:

The first clergyman was the first rascal who meet the first fool.

Churchs are built by rascals for the benefit of rascals.

QualQuan asked The4MillerZ : "Well then what is god made of? Matter? Energy..which is interchangeable with mass or matter? Then who created him/her since your logic says matter cannot create itself?"

=====

QualQuan,

My prediction: The4MillerZ will not repond because you have exposed the fallacy of the uncaused cause.

Nice work.

It is always amusing to hear the God Squad tell us, with infinite condescension, that matter cannot create itself. On the other hand, God (unlike, of course, Allah, Zeus, the spirit of the 3rd volcano from the left and all the others who are mere human inventions) does not need a creator.

As kids we all wondered, and even said aloud until it was beaten out of us: who made God? Answer came there none. (Yes, I know that is from Alice in Wonderland not Jesus in Wonderland, but it fits just as well here.)

It's "Grand Valley State University." For the record.

My sister was an atheist. I am not. That difference of opinion never got in the way of our relationship. On the other hand, neither of us was Christian....

Peter Hitchens is quite well known in the UK and has a column in the Mail. He's an award-winning journalist and author who doesn't show up much in the US but is a significant media figure in Britain.

The fact that you've not heard of him, EEZMAMATA, says less about Hitchens' prominence and more about your provincialism.

yesterday I had a really bad day. Any one who would have witnessed it would not think me much of a christian. It is life and death the battles are mind go thru to find some truth that we believe initself. falling is hard when the ideals you believe in seem higher than you can reach.and falling only helps the non believer look at you and say see not so this God what hypocrites to believe such nonsense but you see I breath so very much better with God than I ever have here were opionions get mired in intellect and lost for lack of faith of some higher power once Mr Hitchens some one made a mockery of something I loved simple this thing was but so spiteful it became and if ever I hated the most it must have been then until thinking myself dying lungs burning barely able to hold up my head I looked up and saw an entire sky filled with that spiteful thing its true and whether we rise to his occasion or fall so is this Christ I don't ask you to believe me but I tell you with what you are facing if you were to seee what I saw so sick when I looked up you might feel faith flow thru your body and feel the possibility of infinite endless hope what would you have to loose here is my prayer for you that you experience that for it is pure grief to never know that but more that with this revelation you tell someone else so that a harder heart then what yours has been would believe and you could know a peace that whispers everything is going to be all right and run you right into forever honest

It's not "Valley State University in Grand Rapids, Michigan", it's "GRAND Valley State University (gvsu.edu) in State Valley Rapids, Michigan". Sheesh!

It's not "Valley State University in Grand Rapids, Michigan", it's "GRAND Valley State University (gvsu.edu) in State Valley Rapids, Michigan". Sheesh!

Hey Freestinker - nice name - you lose your own bet.

This blog is called 'On Faith'.

Uncaused cause - whatever.

Look around - is all of life and the known universe just some random accident? Really?
All the complex cells that make up organisms and different species - it's all just a coincidence right?

What about love? Are emotions simply some result of our evolved brains?

I believe in evolution but I also believe in God. They two are not mutually exclusive. God can create any way he chooses.

All of you condescending non believers have made my point.

Nice work.

Does anyone care what their neighbor puts in his coffee? Or which sock he puts on first as he dresses? Of course not.

Then why are people so concerned about which god (if any) he leans to too or what he does in his bedroom with another consenting adult?

NOne of these idiotic evolutionists can say how their eyes, ears, nose , lungs, brains evolved using the laws of science.

They just don't realize how crazy they are until they will face the ONE who knows how it all came into being.

Good if they won't burn.

Science follow a set of rules. Physics, Chemistry, Math, etc have their set of rules. Darwinian Evolution has no rules because it is not science but a science of fools.

How did the eye, ear, brain, nose, lungs evolve? These idiots have no answer. Of course, because they have no set of rules. It's all random stupidity to them. They just say what they want like stupid babblers.

@the4millerz

>>I believe in evolution but I also believe in God.
>>They two are not mutually exclusive. God can create any way he chooses.

Although I think this moderate belief goes a LONG WAY to soothe the troubled waters between religion and science, I just don't get it?

At what point during mans evolution from its ape ancestor did 'Sin' apparently enter into us?

At what point in the slow gradual change from Ape to Man did the soul suddenly arise?

This suggests that at some point in time in our evolutionary past, a 'Man' had 'Ape parents' and the parents never had a soul, or any 'sin' and couldn't get to heaven (assuming animals don't go to heaven). Meanwhile, the child Human did have a soul, apparently sinned, needed Jesus to be saved, and was the first to have the option of going to Hell / Heaven! That must have led to some interesting conversatins around the campfire, and a lot of parental / child resentment! Oh, what if this first 'Soul human' had brothers/sisters from the same 'soulless' parents who didn't have souls either!

OK, maybe I am being unfair, or maybe I am too literal, but scientific detail (especially evolution) just keeps on smashing religious beliefs to pieces!

I personally don't think you cannot be both a Scientist and a Xian unless you manage to somehow keep your religious views protected by some 'virtual reality', or are not a very good scientist! This virtual reality defence never ceases to amaze me (and trust me as an ex fundamentalist mine was very finely tuned!)!

Please come up with a new theology / Xian religious explanation for how the scientific detail of evolution can be resolved against Xianity?

The more I read, and listen to other peoples opinions and questions, the more I realise that NO RELIGION can explain our universe, and that we have to accept the reality that there is just not enough evidence for a personal god of any sort - and I really wish there was better news! The sooner mankind abandons dogmatic religion, and aknowledges that all religions are just wishful thinking the better! As wishful thinking, religions are not harmful, as long as the propenent recognise the dire need for faith, and accept that belief in fairies at the bottom of the garden is just as valid as their own beliefs!

There are so many inconsitencies and bad science in the bible, how can anyone take it seriously - other than as a poetic form of history!

0penM1nded,

Bear in mind that the4millerz wrote, "I believe in evolution..."; he/she did not write that he/she actually understands all of the nuances of the theory of evolution.

It is very easy to believe something; it is generally more difficult to actually understand that thing.

robertajkaufman3:
". . .and falling only helps the non believer look at you and say see not so this God what hypocrites to believe such nonsense but you see I breath so very much better with God than I ever have here were opionions get mired in intellect and lost for lack of faith of some higher power once Mr Hitchens some one made a mockery of something I loved simple this thing was but so spiteful it became and if ever I hated the most it must have been then until thinking myself dying lungs burning barely able to hold up my head I looked up and saw an entire sky filled with that spiteful thing its true and whether we rise to his occasion or fall so is this Christ I don't ask you to believe me but I tell you with what you are facing if you were to seee what I saw so sick when I looked up you might feel faith flow thru your body and feel the possibility of infinite endless hope what would you have . . . "

Wow, that was a true labor to read... please accept my small gift of some spare punctuation marks:

,,,,,,,,,
;;;;;
. . . . . . . .
!!!
? ? ?

Seriously, I tried to understand your point(s) but was simply unable.

Regards.

spidermean2:
"They just don't realize how crazy they are until they will face the ONE who knows how it all came into being."

Q: "How did it all come into being?"
You: "Only God knows!"
Me: "I don't know."

Q: "How did lungs come about?"
You: "Only God knows!"
Me: "I don't know."

And the difference is?

You: "You're an idiot!"
Me: "You're an idiot!"
Who won?

Spidermean2:
It occurs to me that as a True Christian you are probably just following the great commission (spread the joy) as best you can. I feel it necessary though, as a heathen infidel, a true target for your witnessing of the good news, to point out that your tactics and methodology might need a little polishing to be more effective.
I read a book once, “How to Win Friends and Influence Enemies” and your strategery of calling people idiots, fools, and threatening them with an eternity of brutal torture just doesn’t show up in the top ten recommendations.
If you’re going to get people to drop their nets and follow you, you really need to be a bit more gentle, go after their hearts and minds with a little dignity, respect and compassion. You know, as Jesus did.
If however you are just zealously and piously chastising the enemy, well that’s fine as well, just not consistent with any form of Christianity that I am familiar with.
I Hope this helps.
Peace be with you;

Christopher Hitchens's brother, Peter, nearly seemed capable of sharing the same table until that last comment, "morality is what you do when you think nobody is looking, and there's a lot of things I would do if I didn't believe in god." That statement of course assumes the worst of humanity, and a void where consciousness should be, not to mention how tentative and contrived Peter's morale software really is. To imply we all need belief in an invisible, supernatural, omniscient dictator in the sky to hit the brakes on decisions that would otherwise unnecessarily and adversely affect yourself or others is of course ridiculous, as we see secularists make generally defined "moral," and even altruistic decisions like this every day without believing things on bad evidence.

As is often the case when pitting others against Christopher Hitchens, Peter is outclassed here.