It most certainly was about God. When an atheist thinks of the afterlife WITHOUT connotations of heaven/hell, supernatural events, Higher Beings, then you can start getting all precious about the fine distinction between God and life after death.
There you go again, bringing the afterlife into it ... because it's you that's doing that. There is no mention of the afterlife in either the question or the answer.
...So while he said what you claimed, it wasn't in response to the question you claimed.
Yes it was. (Hey, waddya know. That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.)
Evidence? here's your evidence:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SMdRiLVmbco
No mention of the afterlife. The question is about the existence of a god, nothing more, nothing less.
...Secondly, it wasn't, as you claimed, that he had "apparently softened".
I expect you can prove your opinion is truer than my opinion?
Can you also prove that chocolate ice cream tastes better than vanilla?
I can go by what I see and hear, for a start. Watch the video, then come back and claim Hitchens was sincere about the "surprises". You'd have to be very, very bad at reading facial expressions, tone of voice, etc., to watch it and come out the other end telling anybody he had softened towards the idea of a god.
BTW, chocolate ice cream is an abomination. Give me vanilla every time.
... It wasn't even that he was "just being a good open-minded skeptic as usual", although that would seem to be part of it.
Yeah...just as I predicted. Straw clutching. Spin doctoring. Anything to deny Hitchens his prerogative to seek God at the very time when God so wishes we turn back to Him.
So you know what "God" wishes now? You must feel very privileged, having that communicated to you, when nobody else has heard from him. And what you call "straw clutching" and "spin doctoring" is simply my reasonable, and reasoned, interpretation of what is in the interview. If there's any straw clutching or spin doctoring happening here, it's from those who seek to claim, on the basis of a throwaway line, that Hitchens turned over his long-held opinions to join their "side".
What's it to you if Hitch converted? Mind your our business!
I can ask the same question: what's it to you? Why do you feel the need to claim Hitchens "converted", especially when it's manifestly not true? And why does this happen so often when an atheist/agnostic/skeptic dies? It's no wonder the phrase "Liars for Jesus" has entered the lexicon.
...You won't get this from the bare print version abbadon posted, but if you see the video of the interview (which I now have), the smile on his face when he says it will swiftly disabuse you of that notion.
LOL. A smile.
That's your idea of proof?
In many cultures a smile is how you camouflage what you're really thinking.
And in the culture Hitchens lived in, a sardonic smile such as he gave is an indication that the accompanying remarks are not to be taken too seriously.
...Far from expecting you to "play Google bus-boy", I expect you to provide some kind of support for your claims, and not leave the legwork to those who don't take them at face value.
I don't drop everything and provide citations for stuff I think is true.
If you want to contest my opinions - knock yourself out.
If you want to present your
opinions as fact, you'd better be prepared to have them challenged. And if you want to be prepared for that, the best way is to back them up with some evidence, not to leave that task to those who challenge your
opinions. As you yourself quoted "that which is asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence".
...That way, you won't need to have people asking for the citations or links that you, as the one making the claim, should be providing in the first place. Also, if you check things beforehand, you might be able to make a more accurate claim.
You greatly overestimate my care factor in respect to whether or not you believe me. I think Hitch was desperately reaching out to the great unknown in his last months, weeks, days. And I find it profoundly touching that he was reading about the life of GK Chesterton in last remaining days.
And I think you're full of shit. I also think you're fulfilling a "prophecy" of Hitchens, when he said that there would be Xian vultures hanging round his deathbed to pick up on any seemingly ambiguous remark to falsely claim he's converted. Hitchens a prophet ... who'd have thunk it?
I said I thought it was 60 Minutes - that was true. I did think that.
Moreover, the interview WAS on on 60 Minutes.
Whoop-de-doo! You got one bit right.
I said I think his exact words were "I like surprises." That was true. I did think that. Moreover, the exact words WERE "I like surprises."
Oh, my. You got two bits right. Pity You didn't pick up on any of the nuances involved- facial expression, tone of voice, body language, etc - and realise that, far from "softening his stance", Hitchens was gently mocking the idea he'd have a deathbed conversion.
Not that I wish him dead, but in a way, I can't wait till Richard Dawkins dies, to see this bullshit happening all over again. The Liars for Jesus will once more descend on his deathbed, picking apart every word he ever said, in order to claim him as "one of their own". Lying for Jesus ... it's a great Xian tradition, started by Paul ...
Romans 3.7 said:
"For if the truth of God hath more abounded by my lie unto his glory, why yet am I also adjudged a sinner?"
