"God Is Not Great"

til661 · Post by **til661** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:30 pm

I've never seen evidence that he cared about the loss of American lives either, so no. I suspect it has little to do with race as such.

But anyway, this is somewhat off-topic

nekokate · Post by **nekokate** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:54 pm

til661 wrote:It's unproductive to throw around such loaded terns

Is that a Histor's Eye based Freudian slip? (inside joke that only til will get)

til661 · Post by **til661** » Fri May 18, 2007 7:59 pm

he said egg...like a bird's egg

We should probably start a lee and herring quotes thread especially as i'm telling others off about being off-topic

til661 · Post by **til661** » Fri May 18, 2007 9:29 pm

Hitchens on Falwell

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/UIviufQ4APo"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/UIviufQ4APo" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/RAGUCSMC1A0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/RAGUCSMC1A0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

til661 · Post by **til661** » Sat May 19, 2007 1:05 am

https://fora.tv/fora/fora_clip.php?cid=923#

Good debate between Hitchens and Al Sharpton which covers quite a few of the things we discussed

Post by **faceless** » Sat May 19, 2007 1:54 am

I've never actually watched any of those Hannity and Colmes bits before - I'm not sure which is which, but the guy with the dark hair is such an ignorant fool that I ended up supporting Hitchens... I must say he did look a bit gin-soaked in the first clip all the same. haha

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Sat May 19, 2007 10:44 am

Regarding "Hitchens on Falwell" (1st YouTube Video), I agreed with what Hitchens said. Falwell was a pro-war neo-con con-artist. Indeed, I agree with Hitchens that Falwell wasn't really a religious man, but a fraudster.

However, I wouldn't then accept this supports Hitchens' views that all religions are bad. You get fraudsters and extremists everywhere

Colston · Post by **Colston** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:26 am

Hitchens is such an unlikeable man.

He lacks class and his argument is couched in almost infantile cliche.

Whatever I may or may not think about Falwell Hitchens' lack of grace in making his argument is crass.

To quote FZ... If there is a hell, its fires wait for Hitchens, not us.

til661 · Post by **til661** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:43 am

faceless wrote:I've never actually watched any of those Hannity and Colmes bits before - I'm not sure which is which, but the guy with the dark hair is such an ignorant fool that I ended up supporting Hitchens... I must say he did look a bit gin-soaked in the first clip all the same. haha

I'm pretty sure that is Hannity and from what i've read about him he's even more insane than the clip suggests. Hitchens Always looks pretty gin-soaked to me

Mandy wrote:Regarding "Hitchens on Falwell" (1st YouTube Video), I agreed with what Hitchens said. Falwell was a pro-war neo-con con-artist. Indeed, I agree with Hitchens that Falwell wasn't really a religious man, but a fraudster.

However, I wouldn't then accept this supports Hitchens' views that all religions are bad. You get fraudsters and extremists everywhere

Of course, nobody disputes that.

Colston wrote:Hitchens is such an unlikeable man.

He lacks class and his argument is couched in almost infantile cliche.

Whatever I may or may not think about Falwell Hitchens' lack of grace in making his argument is crass.

To quote FZ... If there is a hell, its fires wait for Hitchens, not us.

When I look at the suffering that the doctrine of the Falwell's, Robertson's etc of the world, Hitchens was spot on. As he said are we supposed to forget what a crook he was because he's dead...that would be hypocrisy. I have no idea who FZ is but that statement is absolutely ridiculous on many levels. And one that Hitchens himself uses as a joke...

Colston · Post by **Colston** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:48 am

til661 wrote:...there is no such thing as sin.

The concept of 'sin' has been much abused and we are now misinformed generally on its true nature.

It is the separation from God... not an evil or wrong act. In my mind this stretches to anything that we do or think that separates us from our sense of our true nature and interactions with others and with the world.

St Paul listed some of the things that were pertinent to his time and his culture. I believe that some of those things transcend time and culture and some don't.

Adultery for me is a good example. It is not a crime per se but the damage it causes to all concerned is undeniable. We then have a separation from our 'perfect' selves and function less well. Being in the Kingdom of God we are not separate and we function well. Being outside of that we are in a state of 'sin.'

til661 · Post by **til661** » Sat May 19, 2007 11:56 am

Colston wrote:
til661 wrote:...there is no such thing as sin.
The concept of 'sin' has been much abused and we are now misinformed generally on its true nature.

It is the separation from God... not an evil or wrong act. In my mind this stretches to anything that we do or think that separates us from our sense of our true nature and interactions with others and with the world.

St Paul listed some of the things that were pertinent to his time and his culture. I believe that some of those things transcend time and culture and some don't.

Adultery for me is a good example. It is not a crime per se but the damage it causes to all concerned is undeniable. We then have a separation from our 'perfect' selves and function less well. Being in the Kingdom of God we are not separate and we function well. Being outside of that we are in a state of 'sin.'

I don't even know where to start with that. What you are saying is so far out of my frame of reference you might as well be writing in Japanese. Nobody knows the 'true nature' of humanity and it's supreme arrogance to believe you do. Adultery is no ones business except those involved. I don't accept the concept of God let alone a kingdom of God.

Mandy · Post by **Mandy** » Sat May 19, 2007 12:08 pm

George Galloway debates Christopher Hitchens: Part 1
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/INy2ysHhgYM"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/INy2ysHhgYM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

George Galloway debates Christopher Hitchens: Part 2
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="https://www.youtube.com/v/zH_BULU2vcM"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="https://www.youtube.com/v/zH_BULU2vcM" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Colston · Post by **Colston** » Sat May 19, 2007 12:10 pm

til661 wrote:
Colston wrote:
til661 wrote:...there is no such thing as sin.
The concept of 'sin' has been much abused and we are now misinformed generally on its true nature.

It is the separation from God... not an evil or wrong act. In my mind this stretches to anything that we do or think that separates us from our sense of our true nature and interactions with others and with the world.

St Paul listed some of the things that were pertinent to his time and his culture. I believe that some of those things transcend time and culture and some don't.

Adultery for me is a good example. It is not a crime per se but the damage it causes to all concerned is undeniable. We then have a separation from our 'perfect' selves and function less well. Being in the Kingdom of God we are not separate and we function well. Being outside of that we are in a state of 'sin.'
I don't even know where to start with that. What you are saying is so far out of my frame of reference you might as well be writing in Japanese. Nobody knows the 'true nature' of humanity and it's supreme arrogance to believe you do. Adultery is no ones business except those involved. I don't accept the concept of God let alone a kingdom of God.

Your response is so typical of one who is so stuck in empirical thinking that they are unable to think clearly when they encounter language that describes spiritual or religious concepts.

I'm not claiming to know the things you claim I have supreme arrogance to do... they are culturally and personally specific.

...that separates us from our sense of our true nature and interactions with others and with the world...

The Kingdom of God is just a metaphor for living a life free from self imposed constraints brought about by wrong thinking and wrong actions. Some people refuse to accept that they make mistakes or that some thoughts or actions bring about disabling consequences. In fact they squeal when it is suggested to them. THAT'S NOT TRUE... THAT'S NOT FAIR...

I'm not claiming that adultery is the 'business' of any specific person or societal niche but that the consequences of adultery are disabling whether people think it is a crime or not, cool or not, acceptable or not. Likewise a lot of the things St Paul lists in Corinthians.

Post by **faceless** » Sat May 19, 2007 12:54 pm

til661 wrote:
Colston wrote:
til661 wrote:...there is no such thing as sin.
The concept of 'sin' has been much abused and we are now misinformed generally on its true nature.

It is the separation from God... not an evil or wrong act. In my mind this stretches to anything that we do or think that separates us from our sense of our true nature and interactions with others and with the world.

St Paul listed some of the things that were pertinent to his time and his culture. I believe that some of those things transcend time and culture and some don't.

Adultery for me is a good example. It is not a crime per se but the damage it causes to all concerned is undeniable. We then have a separation from our 'perfect' selves and function less well. Being in the Kingdom of God we are not separate and we function well. Being outside of that we are in a state of 'sin.'
I don't even know where to start with that. What you are saying is so far out of my frame of reference you might as well be writing in Japanese. Nobody knows the 'true nature' of humanity and it's supreme arrogance to believe you do. Adultery is no ones business except those involved. I don't accept the concept of God let alone a kingdom of God.

I think it makes perfect sense within the realms of faith. I'm fairly sure it would be in a first-year philosophy class, but never having studied it I couldn't say for sure. 'Sin' means 'without' in Spanish.

Colston's point was interesting as it suggests that altered-states of mind are sinful and while I was told that when I was going through all sorts of drugs in my 20s I didn't understand why. Now I do. Maybe it just takes time to come to that realisation. I'm not saying that drugs are wrong though - but I do know now why they are against 'God' as they give the user the possibility to glimpse ideas that simply wouldn't occur to someone who'd never experienced that altered state. Of course, this process can be compared to the various mind-altering methods used in the bible such as starvation in the desert for 40 days, so it's a tricky thing to nail down without accepting that those who went before did those things so we didn't have to. How peculiar.

Colston · Post by **Colston** » Sat May 19, 2007 1:10 pm

faceless wrote:
til661 wrote:
Colston wrote:
til661 wrote:...there is no such thing as sin.
The concept of 'sin' has been much abused and we are now misinformed generally on its true nature.

It is the separation from God... not an evil or wrong act. In my mind this stretches to anything that we do or think that separates us from our sense of our true nature and interactions with others and with the world.

St Paul listed some of the things that were pertinent to his time and his culture. I believe that some of those things transcend time and culture and some don't.

Adultery for me is a good example. It is not a crime per se but the damage it causes to all concerned is undeniable. We then have a separation from our 'perfect' selves and function less well. Being in the Kingdom of God we are not separate and we function well. Being outside of that we are in a state of 'sin.'
I don't even know where to start with that. What you are saying is so far out of my frame of reference you might as well be writing in Japanese. Nobody knows the 'true nature' of humanity and it's supreme arrogance to believe you do. Adultery is no ones business except those involved. I don't accept the concept of God let alone a kingdom of God.
I think it makes perfect sense within the realms of faith. I'm fairly sure it would be in a first-year philosophy class, but never having studied it I couldn't say for sure. 'Sin' means 'without' in Spanish.

Colston's point was interesting as it suggests that altered-states of mind are sinful and while I was told that when I was going through all sorts of drugs in my 20s I didn't understand why. Now I do. Maybe it just takes time to come to that realisation. I'm not saying that drugs are wrong though - but I do know now why they are against 'God' as they give the user the possibility to glimpse ideas that simply wouldn't occur to someone who'd never experienced that altered state. Of course, this process can be compared to the various mind-altering methods used in the bible such as starvation in the desert for 40 days, so it's a tricky thing to nail down without accepting that those who went before did those things so we didn't have to. How peculiar.

My concept of wrong thinking would not necessarily include altered states but be focussed more specifically on thinking that promotes resentment, greed, envy and the like. Negative mind states that produce... 'sin and death' to quote the Bible...

I'm not a big fan of the concept of a 'despotic' or 'altruisitc' supreme 'Ming-like' being.... but do believe in an underlying order that we can be guided through by spiritual principles... a lot of which were uncovered by mystics... such as Meister Eckhart.