Historical Jesus

[bilby]

No, it doesn't.

It might seem that way if you take a very local and parochial point of view; But the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that order tends to become disorder in a closed system, and we have good reason to think that the universe is an adequately closed system for this Law to hold true.

It's also obvious that Nature Abhors a Vacuum - but again, that's only true if you take a local, planet-bound perspective. Most of nature IS a vacuum; and most of nature IS undifferentiated chaos. We just happen to live in a bit that is neither - and from what we know of how life works, we couldn't live anywhere else.

Once again, religion gives us fundamental rules about the universe that turn out to be exceptions that apply only in the very small experience of Bronze and Iron Age inhabitants of a small area of the world.

It's almost as though the whole thing was made up by people who assumed that their tiny patch of existence was representative of the entirety of the universe because they knew no better, and without any input from an all-knowing deity at all.

When does undifferentiated chaos become something differentiated and non-chaotic? It's all subjective and arbitrary. How does one recognize undifferentiated chaos?

By it's high entropy.

Sure, the exact place that you draw the line might be arbitrary and subjective; but that doesn't mean there's no way to recognize it, any more than the existence of a spectrum of visible light wavelengths prevents us from telling the difference between 'red' and 'blue'.

 

[angelo]

The first time intelligence evolved on this or any other world, it would look around and come to the conclusion that all he sees around him was created by a deity just for him.

The amazing thing is that billions of people today who should know better, still believe it.

 

[DrZoidberg]

The first time intelligence evolved on this or any other world, it would look around and come to the conclusion that all he sees around him was created by a deity just for him.

The amazing thing is that billions of people today who should know better, still believe it.

Wouldn't that make it not intelligent?

 

[angelo]

The first time intelligence evolved on this or any other world, it would look around and come to the conclusion that all he sees around him was created by a deity just for him.

The amazing thing is that billions of people today who should know better, still believe it.

Wouldn't that make it not intelligent?

How would a five year old child react if left alone on a desert island? What would be his/hers thoughts?

 

[DrZoidberg]

Wouldn't that make it not intelligent?

How would a five year old child react if left alone on a desert island? What would be his/hers thoughts?

"I want the red ball now now now. Don't care if it's 20 000 miles away"

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Wouldn't that make it not intelligent?

How would a five year old child react if left alone on a desert island? What would be his/hers thoughts?

It would probably be along the lines of "I'm a five year old child and therefore I lack the tools to survive on my own in a hostile environment. I think I'll lie down and die now".

 

[Lion IRC]

http://www.newstatesman.com/politic...ens-did-not-convert-christianity-his-deathbed

I do Hope this clears up the bullshit!

Not really.
It's hearsay evidence reported by people with a religious bias - atheism.
And nothing in that article refutes Hitchens' interview with 60 Minutes in which he said he liked surprises - ie. The afterlife would be a pleasant surprise, not an unpleasant one.
Similarly, Newstatesman doesn't elucidate us re. Hitchens' last days/weeks spent reading about the life of GK Chesterton, a famous Christian apologist (and former atheist.)

Here's in Hitchens' own words right before his death. When he's giving this talk he is actually dying:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4cPe_YS8i8

He doesn't look like he's "actually dying" in that video.
And you aren't really adding anything new by posting (yet another) video of Hitchens repeating his preemptive self-prophesy about no deathbed conversion. We already know he was a defiant and proud man who proseltyzed atheism and would think it embarassing to publicly admit doubt in front of his fans.

Most smart people in Pascall's lifetime saw the hole in the logic of Pascall's wager. I'm pretty sure Hitchen and Dawkins does/did as well.

"Smart people" know it's not actually a wager.
It's just giving the benefit of the doubt IF you are a skeptic and you have nothing to lose.
Pascals so-called wager ISNT for people who think they know God isn't real.

 

[Elixir]

Not really.
It's hearsay evidence reported by people with a religious bias - atheism.

Uh, atheism isn't a religious bias. That's like saying creationism is a scientific bias.

And nothing in that article refutes Hitchens' interview with 60 Minutes in which he said he liked surprises - ie. The afterlife would be a pleasant surprise, not an unpleasant one.

What does THAT bear on? Are you saying that Hitchens believes he's going to heaven? Or he believes in your mythical heaven but not your mythical hell?

He doesn't look like he's "actually dying" in that video.

Everyone who is living is also dying. I don't think you can predict a time of demise for anyone just by looking at them. Of course I'm not blessed (read: cursed) with your divine (read: satanic) insight born of years of religious indoctrination (read: brainwashing).

 

[Cheerful Charlie]

Remember, good health is merely the slowest rate at which one can die.

Your cheerful thought for the day.

 

[DrZoidberg]

Not really.
It's hearsay evidence reported by people with a religious bias - atheism.
And nothing in that article refutes Hitchens' interview with 60 Minutes in which he said he liked surprises - ie. The afterlife would be a pleasant surprise, not an unpleasant one.
Similarly, Newstatesman doesn't elucidate us re. Hitchens' last days/weeks spent reading about the life of GK Chesterton, a famous Christian apologist (and former atheist.)

The definition of a surprise is something you're not expecting, ie don't believe will happen. Personally, if I'd find myself before Peter at the Pearly gates I'd request if I could go to hell. It's where all the fun people will hang out. Just imagine all the ghastly bores in Heaven. It's a place only consisting of all those people you tried your best to avoid at parties.

Here's in Hitchens' own words right before his death. When he's giving this talk he is actually dying:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q4cPe_YS8i8

He doesn't look like he's "actually dying" in that video.

He died soon afterwards. He'd already been given a death sentence by doctors and was only kept upright by powerful painkillers. His dying wish was to have is body donated to science.

And you aren't really adding anything new by posting (yet another) video of Hitchens repeating his preemptive self-prophesy about no deathbed conversion. We already know he was a defiant and proud man who proseltyzed atheism and would think it embarassing to publicly admit doubt in front of his fans.

Why would somebody about to die be swayed by shame? They're about to die! That's the nice thing about dying people, they're the only people we can be sure are 100% honest.

Anyhoo... I think it's disgusting of you to try to smear his name by dragging it into the dirt of a death bed conversion. Apart from making no sense it's an insult to his family and memory.

Most smart people in Pascall's lifetime saw the hole in the logic of Pascall's wager. I'm pretty sure Hitchen and Dawkins does/did as well.

"Smart people" know it's not actually a wager.
It's just giving the benefit of the doubt IF you are a skeptic and you have nothing to lose.
Pascals so-called wager ISNT for people who think they know God isn't real.

So you planing on having a deathbed conversion to Hinduism when you die? If you don't believe when you die you risk being resurrected as a lower being. Or how about to Norse Paganism. You wouldn't want to risk not going to Valhalla would you? Or what about a new religion I just made up. Wouldn't want to not see the celestial stripper bar on Boobia, would you? See the problem yet? Why Pascall's wager is complete nonsense?

Even assuming there's a pay-off for picking the right religion at death, the possible number of religions is infinite. Any of them could the correct one, and all the rest could damn you to an eternity in Hades. The odds on this one is so low there's no point in playing. Why waste the last moments you have in this world on a meaningless activity? Wouldn't it be better to connect with your loved ones one last time?

 

[Jobar]

Perhaps Hitchens had heard of the Unicornian Heaven, and was hoping to be surprised by a hero's welcome at the Great Beach Bash in the Sky!

 

[abaddon]

... it's disgusting of you to try to smear his name by dragging it into the dirt of a death bed conversion. Apart from making no sense it's an insult to his family and memory.

Very disgusting.

Also a lot of stupid self-serving imagining goes into this sort of thing. Theists seem to not comprehend just how laughably idiotic the concept of God seems to many atheists. There's often no temptation to wish there were a god. Maybe wish for a nonChristian afterlife... But the Christian vision of things is truly horrific and morally depraved.

Another apparently common imagination is that any person who is about to die in a few hours knows it. I think people envision a person laying in bed saying his goodbyes and feeling terror at what is about to happen to him. Usually people don't know that their last day is their last day.

His wife said the topic of God didn't come up in his last convos before dying. And that he wasn't aware that his time had come either. She said he remained optimistic of possibly beating his disease to the end.

See the problem yet? Why Pascall's wager is complete nonsense?

He can't. Again the feeling of certainty, the will-to-believe will cripple his imagination. Brainwashed in Christianity makes it seem plausible at all, and like the one and only plausible religion.

 

[PyramidHead]

Indeed, Hitch was one of the only outspoken "anti-theists" of our generation. He described the afterlife as a sort of celestial North Korea from which there can be no escape. If he would have liked a pleasant surprise after death, the Christian version wasn't what he had in mind.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Indeed, Hitch was one of the only outspoken "anti-theists" of our generation. He described the afterlife as a sort of celestial North Korea from which there can be no escape.

Sweet. I like the idea of making the lot of you stand around and put on mass choreographed dances for me for eternity while I starve your asses and yell at the guy next door to stay the hell off my lawn. Sounds like a fun afterlife.

 

[PyramidHead]

Indeed, Hitch was one of the only outspoken "anti-theists" of our generation. He described the afterlife as a sort of celestial North Korea from which there can be no escape.

Sweet. I like the idea of making the lot of you stand around and put on mass choreographed dances for me for eternity while I starve your asses and yell at the guy next door to stay the hell off my lawn. Sounds like a fun afterlife.

I definitely get that vibe whenever I really stop and think about the word "Lord".

 

[Lion IRC]

In a couple of generations from now Christopher Hitchens might be more famous than he was when alive.
People will argue about which of his sayings were authentic and which were literal or figurative.
Did he convert (back) to Judaism on his deathbed?
Did he doubt his own atheism?
Was he pro-life?
How much did he really love the KJV bible.
Did he think women/wives ought to be homemakers and husbands the bread winners?

And as time passes it will gradually become easier and easier to transform him and his deeds into suprahistorical events.

FWIW - Christians don't think it is a 'slur' against Hitchens that he may have considered God and/or converted in his final weeks/days. To call that an attack on his integrity would be like saying every atheist (free thinker) who converts to religion ought to feel shame.
CS Lewis, Francis Collins, Alister McGrath, Antony Flew, Malcolm Muggeridge, Lee Strobel

...Paul Jones

 

[bilby]

But it IS an attack on his integrity, nonetheless.

Your being too arrogant and self-absorbed to realise it, doesn't change that fact; nor does it make his family and friends feel any less awful about your ignorant and unwarranted intrusion on their grief.

A little humility would go a long way - but Christians seem to only talk about how incredibly humble they are, without ever actually demonstrating any humility in their actions or their words.

It doesn't matter whether Christians think it's a slur. Your opinions on that issue don't trump those of the deceased's family or friends. The opinions of Christians on this matter are of importance ONLY to those Christians; and if they had a shred of decency, they would keep them to themselves.

 

[blastula]

Yes. Unborn ghosts.

And to his credit he doesn't attempt to completely disavow himself of what you might call the religious/spiritual psyche which persists to some degree even in strong atheists. I think he would chalk it up to cultural/anthropological vestiges. He isn't embarrassed to admit that he might be prone to some irrational superstitions - like fear of wearing the clothes of mass murderer after they were executed. (Would you avoid stepping on someone's grave?)

Dawkins is gonna convert on his deathbed I suspect like Hitchens probably did.

But by your standards for evidence, some first century guy is still alive somewhere waiting around for the signal to fly to earth on top of clouds.

 

[Thomas II]

 

[Jobar]

In a couple of generations from now Christopher Hitchens might be more famous than he was when alive.
People will argue about which of his sayings were authentic and which were literal or figurative.
Did he convert (back) to Judaism on his deathbed?
Did he doubt his own atheism?
Was he pro-life?
How much did he really love the KJV bible.
Did he think women/wives ought to be homemakers and husbands the bread winners?

In case you didn't know, there are these things called 'books' and 'tapes' and 'DVDs'. Collectively they are called 'records'.

There exist quite a lot of records of all sorts, many directly authored by Hitchens, and many showing him discussing his beliefs, and lack thereof. Lots of commentary on what he said and wrote, by others. From these, future generations will be able to learn about Hitchens' life, opinions, and philosophies, in great detail.

Rather a pity the same cannot be said for Jesus of Nazareth, called Christ, isn't it?