Originally posted by jaywill

You mention Hitchens and someone "throwing [Christians] in jails" in the same breath.

I took a few breaths inbetween.

I was speaking about the level of vehemence. I was not saying each opposer to the Gospel was identically the same down to every detail.

Thanks to the enfluence of Judeo / Christian ethic on Western civilizatio ere obsessed with an intention to destroy the Christian faith - obliterate it.

Sounded like you were trying to smear Hitchens. Didn't come across as common decency or respect for the dead at all.

Anything you find in that comparison unfair to Christopher Hitchens is probably exaggerated.

What was all the stuff about dragging women out of their homes and throwing them in jail? It was a "fair comparison" was it?

Shabby stuff, jaywill.

LOL.

Originally posted by FMF
Sounded like you were trying to smear Hitchens. Didn't come across as common decency or respect for the dead at all.

[b]Anything you find in that comparison unfair to Christopher Hitchens is probably exaggerated.

What was all the stuff about dragging women out of their homes and throwing them in jail? It was a "fair comparison" was it?

LOL.[/b]

As I said, I did not say they were identical in every respect. Just the level of their vehemence was meant to be compared. Since we do not have the debates of Paul except after he became a disciple, I used his record of pulling people out of their houses as an indication of his level of opposition.

Get it now ? His physical activity was only alluded to to indicate the level of his hatred for the Christian church.



Now, if I asked you what you thought about the death of the Son of God on His cross for your sins, I wonder what your reaction would be.

You're really really sensitive about how I should think about the death of Chris Hitchens.

I wonder how you feel about the Son of God voluntarily delivering Himself to the torturers and the carrying of your sins to His cross that you might be saved.

Do you have any sensative feelings about that ?

Originally posted by jaywill
As I said, I did not say they were identical in every respect. Just the level of their vehemence was meant to be compared. Since we do not have the debates of Paul except after he became a disciple, I used his record of pulling people out of their houses as a indication of his level of opposition.

Hitchens was a staunch advocate of human rights and an opponent of religionist tyranny his whole life long and in marking his death you compare him to some tyrannical religionist thug who dragged people from their houses and imprisoned them to punish and persecute them for the nature and content of their conscience. Classy stuff, jaywill. Not "identical", not "identical"! you say. Just a "comparison", that's all, you say! So a smear job, then. A clumsy one at that. And it came right after you asserting that you meant the man no disrespect. As I said before, ugly stuff.

Originally posted by jaywill

You mention Hitchens and someone "throwing [Christians] in jails" in the same breath.

I took a few breaths inbetween.

I was speaking about the level of vehemence. I was not saying each opposer to the Gospel was identically the same down to every detail.

Thanks to the enfluence of Judeo / Christian ethic on Western civilizatio ...[text shortened]... may get something from it.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IXbw06bVix8

Thanks to the enfluence of Judeo / Christian ethic on Western civilization. Hitchens had the freedom to speak his mind, and we ours. without either going to jail.

Elaborate on that one please jaywill.

Originally posted by jaywill
I wonder how you feel about the Son of God voluntarily delivering Himself to the torturers and the carrying of your sins to His cross that you might be saved.

So now you need me to pretend I believe the same things as you do?

Originally posted by RBHILL
well if he is nowhere then he is not at peace, because he is nowhere.

But i do hope he did repent from Jesus's point of view.

But i do hope he did repent from Jesus's point of view.
YouTube&feature=related

Originally posted by FMF
So now you need me to pretend I believe the same things as you do?

Shortest answer is "vica versa".

Originally posted by jaywill
Shortest answer is "vica versa".

Nope. There is no answer, "shortest" or otherwise, because I won't pretend that I believe the same things as you do.

Originally posted by Proper Knob
[b]Thanks to the enfluence of Judeo / Christian ethic on Western civilization. Hitchens had the freedom to speak his mind, and we ours. without either going to jail.

Elaborate on that one please jaywill.[/b]

Check out and make up your own mind from this great debate between Tony Blair and Christopher Hitchens.

Its about the positive effects of religion on culture. In many respects I agree with the former Prime Minister of Great Britain. One of the those respects is that Christianity has furnished a tolerant atmosphere allowing Hitchens to say the kind of things he does without being persecuted. That is a freedom of speech he enjoys to write what he wishes.



[b]"Is religion a Force for Good in the World?" [b]

YouTube

Originally posted by jaywill
Now, if I asked you what you thought about the death of the Son of God on His cross for your sins, I wonder what your reaction would be.

So what is it now? You're comparing Hitchens' criticism of Christianity to you being tortured and nailed to a cross just like Jesus, or to you being dragged from your house and thrown in jail?

Originally posted by jaywill
Check out and make up your own mind from this great debate between [b]Tony Blair and Christopher Hitchens.[/b]

Its about the positive effects of religion on culture. In many respects I agree with the former Prime Minister of Great Britain. One of the those respects is that Christianity has furnished a tolerant atmosphere allowing Hit ...[text shortened]... s religion a Force for Good in the World?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddsz9XBhrYA

I've seen parts of that, you do realise that here in the UK blasphemy was punishable by death until 1697 after that people were just sent to jail. I would say it's the rise of liberal secularism that has brought about the level of tolerance inspite of the Christian traditions.

Originally posted by jaywill
Check out and make up your own mind from this great debate between [b]Tony Blair and Christopher Hitchens.

Its about the positive effects of religion on culture. In many respects I agree with the former Prime Minister of Great Britain. One of the those respects is that Christianity has furnished a tolerant atmosphere allowing Hitchen ...[text shortened]... s religion a Force for Good in the World?"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ddsz9XBhrYA

all the positive effects of religion in society can be gained without religion. on the other hand, all the negative aspects of society can be made worse by religion. ergo, religion is not beneficial enough to justify its negativity and it has largely become obsolete.

Originally posted by VoidSpirit
all the positive effects of religion in society can be gained without religion. on the other hand, all the negative aspects of society can be made worse by religion. ergo, religion is not beneficial enough to justify its negativity and it has largely become obsolete.

But without God none of it matters.

Originally posted by jaywill
The only comment I read was that of RBHILL about hoping that Hitchens repented. Your being all bent out of shape because of that, I can think of no other good reason for.

So he wished that Hitchens repented at the end. You can't convince me that he wished some disrepectful and unhuman thing, whatever your motive is.

RBHILL dies, and I say I hope RBHILL rejected his christian beliefs as he was dying, and saw intellectual light, relief, and freedom free of religious superstition.

Respectful of me to say? Of course I would never say that, but is that respectful? Espcially if I believe a person to be more fulfilled and better off if free from religion.

Christopher Hitchens saw the blight and horrific hindrance place on humankind by religion and superstition. He was provocative in his explanation and challenge. He wanted the best for humankind to shed to the superstition of religion. And RBHILL hopes he repented and rejected his life's work as he was dying?

RBHILL dies, and I say I hope RBHILL rejected his christian beliefs as he was dying, and saw intellectual light, relief, and freedom. Ok?

Originally posted by moon1969
RBHILL dies, and I say I hope RBHILL rejected his christian beliefs as he was dying, and saw intellectual light, relief, and freedom free of religious superstition.

Respectful of me to say? Of course I would never say that, but is that respectful? Espcially if I believe a person to be more fulfilled and better off if free from religion.

Christopher ...[text shortened]... ed his christian beliefs as he was dying, and saw intellectual light, relief, and freedom. Ok?

As a believer in Jesus you must hope that on everyone. For if you don't then why follow Jesus?