/lit/ - Literature

>>21965033
He was unironically dumb

>>21965033
He makes Christcucks seethe.

>>21965096
no...

>>21965033
Of course he is. Anyone who shilled for the Iraq War on behalf of Israel has the blood of 500,000 civilians on his hands.

>>21965149
Really bizarre thing he did

I reread something of his last night looking for a quote and it's was a delight to see just what a good writer he was.

>>21965168
how so? he also supported the Falkland's and NATO bombing's in Yugoslavia.

Different conflicts but he had similar reasons.

>>21965183
>just what a good writer he was
What are the quotes. I think he was a moron.
>how so
I think its bizarre to attempt to justify wars like that

>>21965195
>I think he was a moron.
Why?

>>21965205
Because he held moronic opinions and was in support of the (((Iraq war))) which anon points out left 500,000 civilians dead. Why do you think he wasn't a moron is a better question.

>>21965214
>Because he held moronic opinions
Such as?

Considering he was reasonably consistent with his opinions im sure he would have supported sending more aid to Ukraine if not outright joining the war. He'd be out campaigning for it right now.

Good man.

>>21965221
Atheism and materialism when there's unlimited evidence to the contrary

>>21965221
>>21965239
But please, tell me some things he thought and said that were intelligent.

>>21965242
NTA, but...
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/xnt9gq/well_youre_not_that_great_yourself_mr_hitchens_a/
https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/gcxpr5/saint_mother_teresa_was_documented_mass_murderer/
>inb4 go back
Okay, but this doesn't refute the facts.

>>21965249
I'm the Hitchens was a moron anon and ya I've seen that. The inaccuracies don't matter as much to me as his ability to be significantly wrong about everything and to also shill for Israeli wars.

>>21965239
>unlimited evidence to the contrary

>>21965259
So what did he ever say on any subject that was particularly intelligent?

>>21965149
>>21965168

isn't it funny that atheist icons only embody the condescending atheistic character towards Christianity whereas their instance and persona disappear at the le 'God's chosen people' light?

>>21965268
Find me a single major public intellectual, university educator, or politician who has ever said literally
>I oppose massively slaughterous wars of regime change that take place at the behest of Israel
With the last part. It's a relatively common opinion among regular people but does even 1 exist?

>>21965253
>inaccuracies
>significantly wrong about everything

Children. The board is full of literal sub-16 year olds.

>>21965268
And atheism vs Christianity is sort of a red herring
>>21965259
Anon here, and Hitchens, are denying everything practiced or believed by every culture on earth for all of human history and persisting to this day that touches on anything currently described as "paranormal," no matter what it is, despite the fact that all the evidence disagrees with them.

>>21965282
Honestly I saw the bad history reddit link and thought this was a different post I'd already read covering massive numbers of inaccuracies in God is Not Great. I read some of this and Hitchens lying and being completely wrong about everything to the degree he did is very extreme.

>>21965292
>massive numbers of inaccuracies in God is Not Great. I read some of this and Hitchens lying and being completely wrong about everything to the degree he did is very extreme.
Name ten

>>21965033
Unironically great.

Miss him every day.

>>21965313
Sure, although you'll just respond by dismissing the source because it was compiled on reddit
>https://www.reddit.com/r/badhistory/comments/xnt9gq/well_youre_not_that_great_yourself_mr_hitchens_a/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button

>>21965195
As long as you can avoid drowning yourself in parenthesis and screaming Juden! loud enough to wake neighbors, in his biography the chapter on his mother's death and discovering his own Judaism is excellent.

then again considering you managed to dismiss all atheism and materialism as moronic so im sure you will have no trouble disregarding any form of good writing.

>>21965328
All atheism and materialism is moronic. I asked you to quote a single thing he ever said that was intelligent or tell me about his intelligence and you said
>the chapter on discovering his Judaism is excellent
Maybe he was a decent writer. What did he ever say that was particularly intelligent?

>>21965033
all atheists are evil

High in INT low in WIS.

>>21965033

A high functioning sociopath who can persuade himself, and often others, of any proposition.

>>21965322
>Name ten
>gives a link
You can't name one

>>21965347
Centuries of evil church and "holy men" activities. Religion is institutionally evil.
Atheism is just not buying into it.

>>21965033
pretty cool that God gave him cancer

>>21965273
they don't because they're too chickenshit to do otherwise

>>21965375
>Atheism is just not buying into it.
There's literally no such thing as a "neutral" position and to think that there is is peak brainlet.

>>21965403
Neutral is agnostic. Talk about brainlet

>>21965403
Tell that to the millions of pagans who didin't give a shit, or to most of the world today who is not religious in any christian sense.

Shut up and behave like the minority you are.

>>21965344
Being able to write well shows intelligence. Shilling for a war that triggers you is not moronic. It might be some other thing, but if he advocated for it, he had his reasons. Whether you agree with them or not is more of an ideological difference as far as I can tell

>>21965286
>Anon here, and Hitchens, are denying everything practiced or believed by every culture on earth for all of human history and persisting to this day that touches on anything currently described as "paranormal," no matter what it is, despite the fact that all the evidence disagrees with them
most cultures have traditions talking about the silence and hiddenness of god/gods, the unreliability of metaphysical opinion, etc.

>>21965033
>Was he unironically evil?
I don't know why but God seems to have shown me the casual misery of our current era and so just because of that I refuse to criticize the dead. I think he was a very important voice that people largely don't realize has always been a historical force throughout time and at the very least I think it's important that saints are tested. That all being said, he was accidentally evil because he made his living by being incorrect. I would gladly have had a beer with him and bought him an appetizer to boot but his movement caused me to hurt others and my relationship to God and as for that I don't think I would endorse him. I've never read him too to be fair.

>>21965214
>>21965149
>Not the hecking sand niggerinos!

>>21965273
Chomsky

>>21965974
What about heckin global stability?

>>21965268
>[lots of citations needed]

>>21965273
>It's a relatively common opinion among regular people but does even 1 exi
It's really not a common opinion among regular people, outside maybe some Western European countries and the Muslim world. 4chan is not real life.

>>21965739

Weird as Christianity rejected what so many traditional cultures had practiced for so long, such as sacrificing animals. But obviously that was just people being wrong for thousands of years.

>>21965033
>atheists greatest hero is a chain smoking pop journalist for vanity fair who actually paid a photographer to take a pic of him in a Trenchcoat with a popped collar smoking a cigarette

It makes me wonder if a lot of these guys are paid and employed and promoted by mossad in some way. He had no talent other than mild rhetorical wit. But intellectually had no talent.

Atheists love him of course

Pity he now lies in eternal torment, but he sold his soul and became a mouth piece for the Iraq war and herald of globohomo religion that is nu-atheism

Why do Americans lap up plummy voiced posh brits? If this guy had a Boston accent you'd call him a cuck and move on

>>21965033
No. He was a thoughtful person with an incredible memory and decent taste in literature.
>>21965195
have you read Love, Poverty, and War? It's a great collection of his articles and essays.

>>21965168
I actually respect him for being honest here. That's not to say that I believe his stance was the right one, but he never pretended to be anti-war when all he really was was anti-Bush like so many of his ilk did.

>>21966361
It was borne out of his long-standing disgust with Islam, going back to 1989. When the foreign policy, at least on paper, included an explicit attack on behaviours common among Islamists, he felt the ends justified the means.

Guy was just edgy to a fault. Brilliant man, the bottle and the smokes ruined him, the church does deserve rebuking, to be sure, but his attitudes towards Christ were misguided and wicked. His toxicity betrayed him when his throat could no longer resist his own venom.

>>21965168
Not really. He wrote all about his motivations for supporting the Iraq war. Hussein murdered a lot of people. And hindsight is 2020, right? Unless you worked in intel you probably didn’t know the true story about what was going on with WMDs in Iraq. It’s easy now to point back and say what a bad decision it was, but that’s because we’re 20 years out.

>>21965322
>Called a church a cathedral
>Says Jesus was born in 4 AD, but other people say it was actually 6 BC

>>21966425
FWIW, there's actually a book (the name of which escapes me, my apologies) where essays from pro-Iraq War (post-WMD disclosures) writers were collected, and he used the Kurdish people as his main justification. I was a kid when I read it in ~2009, but I remember him essentially saying that HW should've finished the job he started in the Gulf War and that the US owed it to the Kurds.

>>21966062
>atheists greatest hero
He wrote a simple book. It’s one of many that effectively takes apart religion. We’ve many such champions, but he most recently made a display of himself taking your pundits apart. You and yours try to make him into a big deal.

He was a fine writer, but as right as he was on this simple and old issue, he was a muddled thinker for being a Trotskyist and later in bed with neoconservatives. Let him go, little christard, let him rest in peace.

>>21965273
Ron Paul MAY have said something similar to this

>>21965268
He absolutely annihilates Rabbis both in direct conversation, and also in his books details and condemns the disgusting tradition of using the teeth on a baby's penis. Hitchens was absolutely ruthless to all religions when it comes to barbaric and obscene practices.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xx_ov2NiNo4

>>21966062
He was a skilled writer and orator who advanced the interest of freedom of speech and thought. How many people appeared on national media and unequivocally condemned the Charlie Hebdo terrorist attacks? How many people went on these networks to point out the willingness of the supposed "free press" of the West to kneel down to the wishes of terrorists and refuse to publish the eminently newsworthy political cartoons which the terrorists hated? It was Christian countries who implicitly sided with the terrorists and acknowledged that the blasphemy of a cartoonist to utilize his free expressions was a greater crime than that of the terrorists who killed him for it. Time and time again Hitchens helped to demonstrate the wickedness and perversion of morality that religion engenders in all it's real adherents, and even if you hate him you should reflect on how easily he was able to do this.

>>21966045
Christianity is literally a cult of human sacrifice, and the best thing it can say for itself is "it was only one human!"

>>21966743
He didn’t take on anyone. He just said look at science woah! Some Christians are bad guess god isn’t real.

>>21965033
Was he impersonating Camus here?

why is this post getting traction? the only time i have seen this monkey do anything was a debate and he literally was so retarded i laughed at my friend explaining why everything he is trying to argue has no value
can anyone point to a single argument he ever made that has substance?

>>21967561
He was low iq hiding behind decent vocabulary and a posh accent

>>21967447
>>21967486

Only these two have actually read Hitch I believe. I finished letters to a young contrarian today.

It's great self-help book about being noncomformist and, I think, a real man in today's world. Real gem

>>21967607
Sounds retarded and very dated

>>21967561
His demolition of the Catholic Church was pretty solid.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yuGjcCByVyc

>>21967607
Have you read any of his other works? I've been on the lookout for The Missionary Position or No One Left to Lie To, but I might have to end up just ordering them online.

>>21967615
before watching this video i already know and agree that the Church has been corrupted, infiltrated and used against Christians.
As I'm watching I'm not actually seeing any arguments about why these things were wrong. In talking about the Catholic Church you have to separate a lot of time periods. Vatican 2 for example was hilarious in its entire essence. Forgive the Jews? No ty. Many things he is glossing over he is just allowing us to accept them as fact that they were wrong. Haha, they persecuted Galileo. There was a lot of confusion, and collecting a list of wrongs done by an organization that had so much power for over a thousand years is called cherry picking. Evil men seek power whether they really believe or not. Though because some use the power from faith for wrongdoings does not disregard the strength that comes from faith. The fact that God is real. So- to answer OP's question from watching this video, yes, he is evil. He deceives to make you believe something. We know who the father of lies is.

>>21967649
Least schizophrenic christcuck.

>>21967661
nice response bitch boy

>>21967649
Wait for the part where he talks about how the Church, at that very moment, was harboring a child rapist from justice. If this organization supposedly has as it's leader the Vicar of Christ on Earth, and this person deliberately harbors a fugitive from justice who is accused of the worst crimes against a child, and that very person then votes on the next Pope, this is not simply corruption, this is an evil organization. Is this an organization operating with the blessing of God or not? If so, then God is evil, if not, I think we approach the truth, evil people use religion as a means to perpetrate evil, and those gullible enough to buy it become victims, both of those evil men but also of their own naiveté.

>>21967649
Imagine missing the point this profoundly. He is mostly stating things /the church itself has apologized for/ and as such the church itself has recognized how abhorrent it's existence has been. The idea that some people still hold the Catholic Church to be in any sense remotely an authority on morality is on it's face absurd when each new phase of the church begins with such a long list of apologies that it approaches self parody. Plus, in case you're a child or weren't paying attention, the Catholic Church, at the very time he was speaking, was embroiled in a massive child abuse scandal where the Church leadership itself was shuffling priests accused of abusing children to different places to protect and facilitate further abuse. Again, if you accept even for a moment that this is an organization which has any moral authority, or has any ground to claim it's connected with "God", you are hopelessly gullible.

>>21967666
Thanks Lucifer.

>>21967680
The church’s 2000 year old doctrine includes the idea that every man has sinned and falls short of glory.

And the church has less child diddling than teachers and Jews and politicians.

It’s really not a good argument and it’s really a strawman

>>21965249
Do you have any other threads like this for authors regardless of their views, I want to see self important niggas get cooked publicly

>>21965974
That's literally what was used to justify the war.
>NOOO NOT THE HECKING SANDNIGGERINOS WE NEED THEM TO BUY MCDONALD'S AND LET WOMEN DRIVE!
>tries turn a completely different culture into western liberal democracy
>over 75% of nation's income from US taxpayers
>glowie imposed government just embezzles it all
>war over, no infrastructure improved, no lasting cultural impact, nothing changed
The Taliban is preferable to the current establishment over here too.

>>21967667
poor argument. that's evidence the Church has been corrupted. ignoring past history and picking select events isn't an argument
>>21967680
not even sure i found a point to his matter besides 'things have gone wrong in the church'. does it prove atheism? no. does it disregard religion? no because as his own premise states, the church has also recognized these events as wrong. which means as to their authority is saying these things are immoral which hitchens is trying to also state. so they both agree on the events being poor.

>>21965033
An enemy that numbers time in millennia with a cultural basis that goes back to preliterate man and symbolism rooted in primordial homonids appears!
>[(You)--Choose your fighter]!
a) Richard Dawkins: rat-faced evolutionary biologist who popularized the word meme (secret weapon: Scientism; weakness: Kafka)
b) Sam Harris: midwit who solved the problem of induction (secret weapon: meditiation; weakness: complex thought)
c) Christopher Hitchens: reformed commie/former fag with a talent for rhetoric (secret weapon: alcoholic snark (aka Hitchslap); weakness: Neoconservatism)
d) Daniel Dennett: Saturday morning philosopher (secret weapon: midwit empowerment (aka Reddit); weakness: phenomenology)
>(You): WEAPONIZED CONDESCENTION! ALL FOUR HORSEMEN, I CHOOSE (You)s!
*****[Fight!]*****
>(You) choose: YOU DON'T BELIEVE IN SANTA CLAUS, DO YOU?!
[Counter attack: nuance. Enemy isn't 4 and is unimpressed you don't believe in Santa. Attack is ineffective.]
>(You) choose: WHY DON'T YOU WORSHIP ZEUS?!
[Counter attack: nuance. Even myth is meaningful in a way not reducible to materialism. Attack is ineffective.]
>(You) choose: SCIENCE THOUGH!
[Counter attack: nuance. Enemy brings up the history of science and its complex relationship and continuing interplay with religion. Attack is ineffective.]
>(You) choose: FEDORA TIP!
[Counter attack: enemy is laughing.]
>(You) choose: NO YOU!
[Counter attack: enemy is laughing.]
>REEEEEEEEEEEEEE
>[(You) have fainted.]

>jew trying to take u from faith
who cares?

His take on religion misses the mark. Religion is so much more complicated than just evangelicals, who take every story in the bible literary.

>>21968054
Your post misses the mark. The book God is Not Great touches on more than just evangelicals

>>21968158
It's still fundamentally just a "these are all silly stories, let's logically destroy them" arguments. It doesn't deal honestly with the fact that a society needs a religion to be a cohesive unit. Yes, Humanitarian values are just christian secular values. You cannot escape from Religion. Ever. If you think we live in non-religious times, you haven't been paying attention. We live in hyper-religious times right now. Woke is a religion and I am not saying this to insult them as a cult. It's a real religion, which is going to be used by the white managerial Elite to keep control of multicultural western countries.

And if you do not deal with that in your critic about religion and only deal with surface bullshit, then you missed the mark.

>>21968170
>Oh no logic!
>b-b-but god invented logic! h-h-he's above it! You don't understand!!!
>Society crumbles without religion!!!
>Christians invented humanitarianism! It literally never existed till Jesus!

SHUT UP. GET OFF OF /lit/ FOREVER, PLEASE.

>>21968188
1. I'm not Christian.
2. I'm an Atheist.
3. Yes, Humanist values are just Christian values without the Church and the supernatural.
4. Wow, what a little spergy sperg out you are having.

>>21968204
YOU'RE AN IDIOT

>>21968210
calm your vagina

>>21965033
out of the whole new atheism crew he seemed to be the only one who really hated god

>>21968054
He got BTFO by William Lane Craig.
>>21968170
It doesn't have anything about the role of myth or how it relates to human understanding.
>>21968204
You poked his intellectual pride, anon. Nothing triggers them faster. Atheism is an "I'm smart" LARP retards buy into without understanding no one is impressed they don't believe in Santa. It's one thing if you're an edgy teenager but it's truely embaressing if you carry it on into your 20s.

>>21967633
Those are his salacious hit pieces. Read his essays from the 80s and 90s and early 2000s.
https://www.youtube.com\

>>21968398
CORRECTION: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nU-u_88wag0&ab_channel=ManufacturingIntellect

>>21968402
wax mannequin AIDS jew vs. the 'speare of speaking

>>21967547
I thought this thread was about Camus kek

>>21967797
>>21967916
>Continuing to ignore that the Church, at that very moment, was harboring child rapists from justice
The Pope deliberately protected child rapists from secular justice. The cope, seething, and deflection in these posts is hilarious.

>>21968777
Don't bother anon, the whole life of a Catholic revolves around never admitting the Church is wrong, even when it's demonstrably wrong

>>21968380
>William Lane Craig
He is an admitted con man. He bilks idiots for cash. He also fails in debates, relying on rhetoric rather than substance.

The best he has is calling out the normies and Americanized Christians for not being morally principled (also the MSM is not indicative of genuine thought, it's the propaganda machine). He has no argument against morally principled Christians except "I don't like your aesthetic". You can refute any of his atheist claims with simple skepticism proving that
1) Atheism is a religion
2) Agnosticism is the actual rational default and non-religion

>>21965033
>God's not real now go die in a forever-war
why do edgelords worship this guy so hard?

He was Mark Twain's snake oil salesman figure: the man with a "smart" British accent that convinced droves of gullible rubes that he had something to say - because it was deemed clever or contrarian, when in fact , it conformed perfectly to mainstream opinion. What exactly is controversial about secularism? Or supporting the latest "democracy, liberation, human rights bla bla bla... war? It's quite clear that everything he said or did was designed to elevate his social standing among the groups in which he was a member. Glad he died when he did; although he should have been crucified. His brother is much more nuanced, thoughtful and articulate. The hated Peter Hitchens.

>>21966425
Please, understanding the vicious evil that is the American Government only requires a brief look at the last 70 years. You'd have to be a moron to support it.

>>21968777
Catholics are very often not Christians. I had a dream I stabbed a catholic priest in my bed to death and muddied the evidence after he put a hit out on my cousins unborn daughter.

>>21968777
>>21968789
>catholics constantly writing books about corrupt church and pope
>atheists just repeat about how God isn't real because a pope was evil
well see there is no arguing here with an atheist. they have no argument about God only corrupt men.

>>21968790
You’ say this without a trace of irony in a hitchens thread?

>>21968777
I’m not Catholic but you’re argument is just bad

>>21969636
If you admit that the church did those things (and it's a quite well-documented fact now), it calls into question the integrity of the church's authority. That's the point. The church has always been a self-professed authority on God and morality so when they are guilty of indisputably immoral actions, it undermines the whole thing.

>>21969667
>If you admit that the church did those things (and it's a quite well-documented fact now), it calls into question the integrity of the church's authority. That's the point. The church has always been a self-professed authority on God and morality so when they are guilty of indisputably immoral actions, it undermines the whole thing.
wait so get this
>infiltrate church
>commit crimes as church leader
>undermine the church
atheists still think this means God isn't real

>>21969711
The argument isn't that God isn't real based on that, it's that the church cannot claim to be an authority on anything related to morality if they routinely behave in an immoral fashion.
>infiltrate church
>commit crimes as church leader
>undermine the church
Yes, so if the church is constantly infiltrated, corrupted, and criminal, why should we recognize its authority?

>>21969725
>if they
it's not they. any authority the church has comes from the traditions and information it contains from the conception of the church. the church's authority isn't about listening to the pope and getting the vaccine because some jesuit deceived his was there to lie to you.
maybe you can point me to where the church self proclaims all these things in another light

>>21965382
Throat cancer no less

>>21969667
If you are genuinely interested in the church’s modern problems, find Ratzingers / Benedict’s article that was published a few years ago on the infiltration of the church in the 60s/70s.

It’s very interesting.

But you’re just attacking a strawman. The church is the authority on god but it doesn’t claim it’s members are perfect and in fact I claims they are sinners all the same.

The data also shows they are better behaved than the general population by a significant margin.

It’s also interesting that Jews and homosexuals get a free pass from hitchens and the media despite being radically guilty in the arena of child abuse and financial crimes.

No spotlight movie on them.

Hitchens was a retard, just find another hero dude

>>21968380
>an "I'm smart" LARP
No. It’s actually very elementary. YOU are the mental cases.

>>21968790
Then that makes it all the more sad that Hitchens lost the debate.
>>21970066
>No.
>YOU
Kek. Atheism is an intelligence LARP coming from people who expect others to be impressed they don't believe in Santa. Simple as.

>>21965974
I prefer mesopotamians to germoids

>>21969478
God is the invention of men

>>21969809
>Jews and homosexuals get a free pass from hitchens
You must not have read anything in this thread because it's been shown multiple times that Hitchens obliterates Jews on the disgusting practice of circumcision both directly to their faces and in print.

Theists are uniform in their stubborn adherence to the most ludicrous propositions possible. The invocation of God is a hollow attempt to increase a person's authority. The real interesting part is how universal this phenomenon is, literally every nation in the world has their own divine myths that are used to try and control the gullible masses of their populations, yet supposed intelligent people can look at this facet of human nature and still cling to their own cultures myths as if they are true, even when they clash with other divine myths and all these myths stem from the same human tendency. I'm sorry, but if you fail to see the true nature of religious myths, and they they are all on the same level, and all incompatible (thus, all almost definitely false), if you can't see this, you are the definition of a mid wit. It's the ultimate intellectual failure, and the only appeal one has is to childishness.

>>21970600
Wow, what a stunning hot take! Did you come up with it all by yourself?

>>21965232
>reasonably consistent
>Hitchens
LMAO

>>21965033
He makes christians, muslims, and jews seethe.
He was the only atheist with balls to criticize jews

>>21970624
It is the default assumption we all have when first lied to about this shit. Not profound at all. Very simple fact. Get rekt, cuck.

>>21970600
If God was the invention of Man we would be able to explain his nature.

>>21970861
We just did. It’s an explanation for existence and a comfy bedtime story on where the dead go.
It was later adapted as a control mechanism for the state and an excuse for the central ruler to have everything. Stop being stupid

>>21970236
>yeah, I believe in Santa!

>>21970857
>I wasn't trying to be profound
>I..uh...it's simple
>can you not see how smart I am?
Why are atheists so intellectually needy? inb4 "YOU NEED GOD, NO YOU!"

>>21970899
>HE IS SANTA THOUGH! I FIGURED IT OUT!
Take away their predictable responses and point out atheism is an intelligence LARP and watch them seethe.

>>21970861
Different cultures all have different definitions of his nature, exactly what you would expect of a construct of the imagination of different people in different places.

>>21971245
Atheism is just as much a construct of the imagination and it answers nothing worth knowing about God and the universe.

>>21970911
Even if you're a theist, it is true by definition that God is the invention of man on the whole. Different religions are mutually exclusive, meaning they cannot all be true. So, if taken as a phenomenon in human culture, God is 100% assuredly a construct of the imagination. The theist is in the position of saying that yes, on the whole religion fulfills a role in society and that the specifics are on the whole false for all other cultures, but actually MINE is 100% correct and right. Anthropologically, you have to concede that the role of religion and God exists in most, if not all, cultures as a useful mechanism which is useful in spite of being false, and being false by definiton because we are speaking of tons of different religions where, if any one is true, all the others must be false. There is no way to escape this.

>>21971251
Atheism is the rejection of assertions by other people. It cannot be the construct of the imagination, since it is just refusing to accept another person's assertion.

>>21971261
By being the rejection of an assertion, it is an assertion, and an assertion constituted by an imaginative leap.

If you people simply admitted that you know nothing, it would be more understandable. But you assert that you *know* God does not exist, as if the noumenal and the supersensible can ever be apprehended by these electrified appendages of meat.

>>21971265
>By being the rejection of an assertion, it is an assertion
This is your brain on religion. Here's a helpful hint, intelligent people can refuse to accept a belief, while at the same time holding that belief and many different possible beliefs in the same category of being possible. You need to learn that there are mysteries in our universe, and they can remain mysteries without asserting anything else about them. In short, you are a midwit. Even hardcore atheists like Dawkins holds that on a scale of 1 to 10, 10 being absolutely knowing God doesn't exist, he puts himself at a 9. I don't think any prominent atheists assert they KNOW God doesn't exist, just that it is unjustified to claim to know that he does.

>>21971278
Thank you for your insight, although I don't appreciate the snarky attitude. Please lower your tone when talking to me in the future. Your point has been made and I don't find anything unreasonable with it.

>>21969755
so the church is just some amorphous entity that evades responsibility for bad things but takes credit for the good things?
>>21969809
I will do so. I recently started reading his trio on the life of Jesus and enjoy it so far, even though much of it is over my head because I haven't ever read theology.
>The church is the authority on god but it doesn’t claim it’s members are perfect and in fact I claims they are sinners all the same.
That may be true, but the initial accusation was that they hid the crimes, the actual secular crimes, of dozens or hundreds of its priests. It did this institutionally from a very high level. That was the original point. That's why it's so hard for people who are skeptical of the church to not question its teachings on morality... because the church as an institution appears to be behaving immorally.

>>21971282
This is a fair, reasonable, and civil response. Are you doing any reading in regard to these subjects? I personally am about the begin The Golden Bough, which is a book on comparing world religions and myths and how the similarities can indicate universal truths about human beings and the human mind.

>>21971300
No worries. I'm actually embarking upon a reading of Hegel which I've set aside some months for. Currently going through the Cambridge Companion first to get some insight and context. Primarily I want to understand what the nature of these questions is, what consciousness and self-consciousness are, and what we mean when we talk about God. I hope at some point to come back to you all to discuss my findings.

Thank you for being reasonable. You'll have to let me know how Golden Bough goes. I've not read it but have always heard about it.

>>21971292

Again. Ratzinger addresses this in the article. It was published in Bavarian theological journal though and google hates it so it’s somewhat hard to find.

But once you understand how the church works you’ll start to see why some Marxists and homosexuals (at least a politically active kind, a repentant celibate homosexual isn’t an issue) getting in 40 years ago has created a big big problem and likely caused Benedict to step away. He lost control and was too old he felt to combat it.

The problem was Francis was chosen who is more or less one of the problems

>>21971323
Francis is basically a globohomo neoliberal progressive.
Can you confirm that this is the essay you're referring to?
https://www.catholicnewsagency.com/news/41013/full-text-of-benedict-xvi-essay-the-church-and-the-scandal-of-sexual-abuse

>>21971309
I'm curious what your opinion is on evolution. For me, there is obviously a legitimate philosophical curiosity regarding things like the nature of time and the beginning or origin of it and our universe, but this seems like it gets co-opted by social structures more interested in controlling populations of people rather than supplying rigorous explorations of what is actually "true". In regard to evolution, this is what you might expect to arise from competing groups where in-group cohesion through the belief in rather fantastical stories provides survival benefit. It also acts as a kind of heuristic to know a friend more quickly. Also, I think Freud had some interesting insights in regard to Christianity in particular as it puts forward the idea of a "Heavenly Father" who you must both love and fear, who will punish wickedness and reward piety. In short, it's the external personification of the Super Ego. Hopefully I'll see you again in another thread in future Mr. Cambridge Companion!

>>21971331
Thanks much for that explanation of evolution, Mr. Golden Bough. I think there's validity in what you've expounded. Belief clearly is an evolutionary adaptation with survival benefits and I would have no problem with religion being completely eviscerated and its followers jailed; however, from the theological perspective, more needs to be said. Religion, insidious as it is, has co-opted the discussion of what is unknown, a result of its evolutionary pressures playing upon it. That still does not resolve the question of what is out there, if anything, why we think there is something out there, and how we should discuss it. Mr. Golden Bough, I will get back to you on that.

>>21971259
>Different religions are mutually exclusive, meaning they cannot all be true
"No god is ever new, only new a emphasis can be given to a conception potentially present since the beginning." (Frye) Although adherence to a specific religion may exclude others relgions themselves aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. If anything they present a means of understanding and even a common language demonstrated across various cultures irregardless of their distance from one another.
>So, if taken as a phenomenon in human culture, God is 100% assuredly a construct of the imagination.
That doesn't follow from your previous claim.
>The theist is in the position of saying that yes, on the whole religion fulfills a role in society and that the specifics are on the whole false for all other cultures, but actually MINE is 100% correct and right.
You're selectively choosing to focus on dogmatism which is the low-hanging fruit by which people like Hitchens and Dawkins have betrayed their overall ignorance of religious understanding. The real problem is the idea that it's culturally contingent, and thereby undecidable, which religion should be invested with ultimate authority. However, this doesn't necessarily entail religious understanding is invalidated as a whole nor does it mean such need be restricted within overly specific contexts (i.e. it's more impressive that knowledge and precepts predating written language remains impactful in modern culture).
>Anthropologically, you have to concede that the role of religion and God exists in most, if not all, cultures as a useful mechanism which is useful in spite of being false, and being false by definiton because we are speaking of tons of different religions where, if any one is true, all the others must be false.
It isn't necessarily false though (especially by the criteria you've set out).
>There is no way to escape this.
If you haven't thought about the subject very deeply that may be true but it seems to me you just need to come to the realization your understanding of the subject is myopic and you read more.

>>21971356
>irregardless
Stopped reading there. Atheism wins again.

>>21968188
You desperately need to read Nietzsche's Genealogy of Morals.

>>21971359
>atheist ideologue retreats pretentious snark when confronted with his own ignorance
Quite common.

>>21965286
>despite the fact that all the evidence disagrees with them.

Lmao

>>21971329
Yes nice work

>>21971329
>>21971512
Great article.

>>21971356
>"It's, just like, all the same God, maaaan"
Are you serious? Theological groups make assertions, serious claims, the denial of which will be regarded as blasphemy, and these claims conflict with other theological groups. You can't hand wave this away without admitting any specific claims about God or the divine are basically false, which is my point to begin with.

>>21967547
People can say what they want about Camus, but he was fucking hot.
>CAPTCHA: XYGAY

>>21965739
If by "most cultures", you mean Christianity, then yes.

>>21967680
>/the church itself has apologized for/
Vatican II has apologized for*

>>21965033
>le tradlarping on anime degenerate website
never gonna stick pal

>>21969667
Saying the catholic church undermins god is like saying transgender acceptance undermines current science except that is actually true. The catholic church does not need to be Christian just as scientific "consensus" does not need to be scientific

>>21970622
>talking bad about circumcision is talking bad about jews
Thats just about the most basic pussy shit you could criticize them about. Akin to calling transgenders delusional for chopping of body barts, its an unlosable argument

>Hitler was... le good
>Hitchens is... le evil

Yes, yes, you will reply with
>yes, unironically
The problem is that when you look at /lit/ as a whole you see nothing except trademark internet contrarianism.
How are these opinions different from, say, going on /tv/ and saying
>[acclaimed movie] sucks?

It's not that the mainstream can never be wrong, it's that the trend of going against it purely to be le unique becomes too obvious.
In summary, ur gay.

>>21973419
OP never said hitler was good, hitchens is a hack
>>21965249
cope and seethe. Some acclaimed movies suck dick. Think for yourself.

>>21965239
>Atheism and materialism
Every single post with these words combined into this buzz phrase is always retarded.
>when there's unlimited evidence to the contrary
And there's the tardation in question.

>>21967797
>And the church has less child diddling than teachers and Jews and politicians.
Catholic priests molest at over twice the rate of the gen pop, and yet your argument is...
>dude it could be worse

Catholics are comically retarded.

>>21965033
>doesn't believe in God
Can't get more evil than that. He led millions to Hell despite knowing in his heart of hearts that God is real. He made his career by attacking the faithful, such as when he spread malicious lies of Mother Theresa.
Hell is too good for him, but it will do.

>>21973466
>despite knowing in his heart of hearts that God is real
elaborate

>>21973475
Romans 1:20
>For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse.
You know God exists. Christopher Hitchens knows God exists (I don't use the past tense despite his death because he is very much aware of the fires burning his flesh now) and every single person, animal and object in the world knows God exists.
Atheism is not real. "Atheists" just want to sin without feeling guilt. It's like saying "oh it's okay to commit a crime if you don't get caught". But you will get caught. God WILL punish you. Denying Him won't save you.

>>21973482
I accept your concession.

>>21971732
Reminds me if this

>>21973438
That’s false and also I’m not Catholic

The psychological association found that at its peak 4% of Catholic priests (70s) abused children. 7% of teachers have and are abusing students. The catholic priest situation also dropped off dramatically in the 80s and there have been only a few cases since.

It’s also noted the priests are much more likely to be homosexual than the Gen pop, but accoridng to the apa this doesn’t correlates with child abuse. That’s a differnt discussion.

>>21972382
>>"It's, just like, all the same God, maaaan"
Do you know what a strawman is, anon? Also, your point was steelmaned for you in that post and now you're shifting the goal posts in order to ignore the argument given toward your insistance on focusing on dogmatism. Instead of just stating the same arguments again, even though you failed to address them, I'll add that no where does it say that the way relgious teachings are understood need remain static and unchanging IRregardless of how the culture around them has evolved and made encounter with greater complexity. There's even a conversation thread ITT relating to the diversity in thought within catholicism and the formal mechanisms used to reflect on religious teachings in light of the such.

So no, I'm not the one "sidestepping" here. You're asserting a really shallow concept of religion and clearly don't understand how it actually operates. Again, you need to read more.

>>21974194
He is probably referring to the fact that it's assumed between 1-2% of the population are pedophiles (that's people who have an attraction to children, not those who have necessarily acted on their desires). 4% therefore appears quite high by comparison. You're saying the church has twice as many abusers as the general population has pedophiles, and not all pedophiles even act on their perversion.

What's your source for the 7% figure?

>>21970911
>no really! I don’t understand what you just said! I’m serious!!

Okay

>>21970924
>why yes, I do follow The Amazing Atheist on Twitter

We’re not all in a cult together, honey. I don’t vouch for this guy, much less follow (anybody) on Twitter

>>21974643
>NO, YOU REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW SMART I AM TO FIGURE OUT GOD IS LIKE SANTA! I DON'T BELIEVE IN SANTA!
>ARE YOU NOT IMPRESSED?
Yawn, get some new material that doesn't rely on asserting people obviously smarter than you can't comprehend your laughably basic takes.
>>21974649
If you want to focus a subset of religious people (e.g. evangelicals) we'll focus the guy who rose to fame spouting your ideological simplicities.

Seriously? This is the legacy of the New Atheism internet fad...bisexual furry rape/cuck fetish porn? Really?

>>21974878
Why are people like this never content to be a little bit degenerate? If I were a satanic pedophile vampire elite, and I wanted to further degeneracy, I would make all the Amazing Atheists of the world just a little bit degenerate, each in different ways. This one would say "c'mon, just leave furries alone" and this one would say "c'mon, it's not that big a deal to have a gay pride parade with ass sex on Main Street," but you'd never have both coinciding in the same person, let alone in a major representative of the more ostensibly benign forms of degeneracy, like atheism.

But instead what happens is where there is some degeneracy, soon all forms of degeneracy will be there. If someone is pushing "sex positivity," within one week you will find tweets with them enabling pedophiles and screaming at someone for not chopping his kid's cock off, and saying that all states should throw open their borders and adopt UBI and make ten COVID vaccines per second mandatory for zygotes. It's never just one thing. They are always total walking nuclear reactor meltdowns of horrible ideas and perverted habits.

>>21973410
He says it directly to the face of Rabbis though. Have you ever done that? "Unlosable argument" yet there are still massive amounts of people who claim it's fine and normal and good to mutilate the genitals of children. In all cases, this should be condemned, Hitchens did so directly to the faces of those perpetrating these acts, have you?

>>21974515
You are sidestepping the issue. You would like to pretend all religious is just a friendly chat about what interpretation of God is correct where all viewpoints are equally welcome. This is the muted and tamed version of religion, and only becomes this way when conquered by secularism. In theocratic states, or whenever religious people really gain power, there is invariably intolerant dogmatism. Why is there tension between Israel and Palestine? Because both groups hold steadfast to a dogma that God gave them special rights to the same bit of land. They aren't interested in agreeing they both have different interpretations, they flat out deny the validity of the other side, categorically. Religious shares traits across populations of vast distanced, this is true, but it is true because religions are created by man, and man has similarities across the world. I WILL repeat again, the different created religions assert things that are clash with other religions, and this is always a point of contention and often of open hostility between religious groups, and as the example I noted earlier, can fuel war and animosity down through the generations. If your point is that religion is better the less dogmatic it is, I whole heartedly agree, but that's merely to say religion is better the less of it there is.

>>21965033
No he was just wrong about the spiritual reality of life since NDEs are real and prove that there is an afterlife and that we are eternal and will go to heaven unconditionally when we die.

>b-b-but NDEs are dreams or hallucinations somehow
Already explicitly refuted in the literature you likely have not read on NDEs.

Here is a very persuasive argument for why NDEs are real:

https://youtu.be/U00ibBGZp7o

It emphasizes that NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and when people go deep into the NDE, they all become convinced. As this article points out:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/mysteries-consciousness/202204/does-afterlife-obviously-exist

>"Among those with the deepest experiences 100 percent came away agreeing with the statement, "An afterlife definitely exists"."

Since NDErs are representative of the population as a whole, and they are all convinced, then 100% of the population become convinced that there is an afterlife when they have a sufficiently deep NDE themselves. When you dream and wake up, you instantly realize that life is more real than your dreams. When you have an NDE, the same thing is happening, but on a higher level, as you immediately realize that life is the deep dream and the NDE world is the undeniably real world by comparison.

Or as one person quoted in pic related summarized their NDE:

>"As my soul left my body, I found myself floating in a swirling ocean of multi-colored light. At the end, I could see and feel an even brighter light pulling me toward it, and as it shined on me, I felt indescribable happiness. I remembered everything about eternity - knowing, that we had always existed, and that all of us are family. Then old friends and loved ones surrounded me, and I knew without a doubt I was home, and that I was so loved."

Needless to say, even ultraskeptical neuroscientists are convinced by really deep NDEs. So he was convinced immediately when he woke up into the light as well.

>>21974972
>You are sidestepping the issue.
Then why did I directly address your points and steelman your argument while you neglect to acknowledge the details with which I've presented you? What's really happening here is that you've indoctrinated yourself with simpistic atheistic talking points and will likely soon resort to scientism when you can't even perform basic calculus.

Again, you insist we only focus on dogmatism and refuse to converse about the phenomena of religious understanding occuring throughout humanity in general beyond the simplistic idea it means you yourself can't become informed and build a personal relationship with religion. You also refuse to offer comment on how longstanding religious institutions have formal organs that specifically deal with their theology based upon the idea society is complex and everchanging.

What's actually happening here is that you're being confronted with your own ignorance regarding the subject and, atheism being an intelligence LARP, can't submit to the idea your understanding is falliable. Pretty ironic given that's what atheists always seem to project on to those possessing religious beliefs.

>>21975059
You keep saying you've addressed my points and "steelmaned" them, yet the actual content of my posts seem to have completely passed you by. I addressed the fact that, once secular society has imposed it's morals on religious institutions, they become much more tolerant and well behaved.

Also, "scientism" isn't a word.

>>21975145
Yeah, I said that religious belief is culturally contingent and it's thereby undecidable on a macro-social level which religion should be invested with ultimate authority. I then said that this doesn't entail the idea that a given religious structure is untrue or not superior to others even when it comes to how you restrict it according to cultural context. I added that you shouldn't neglect the fact religious understanding is a cross-cultural phenomena, it uses the same language and even often the exact same methaphor and imagry across cultural borders, and emphasized that such things remain relevant in modern contexts even though they harken back to preliterate man.
>once secular society has imposed it's morals on religious institutions, they become much more tolerant and well behaved
That's a new point and even though you've failed to address any of my prior arguments I'll point out why it's fallacious. First, you have no standing to assert we focus on negative outcome related to religious belief. I can equally point to positive outcomes and influences religion has had while also asserting the fact that no one argues religous structures allow man to act without any mistakes (once again you're asserting an idea of dogmatism that begs the question that religious structures and understanding remain static regardless of how society evolves or changes). Second, an article written by Pope Benedict XVI that's available ITT gets into how societal influences outside of the church can corrupt it's organs--that is the dialogue between any church and secular society is a two-way street and positive/negative influence cannot be characterized as always coming from only one of them.
>Also, "scientism" isn't a word
It is. Scientism is a dogmatic ideology that insists only beliefs based on scientific understanding carry weight when it comes to how we should understand and interpret the world around us. It's a side effect of the demotic phase of language in which we find ourselves (see pic-related and do further research if interested).

>>21975300
In this post, you claim that "this doesn't entail the idea that a given religious structure is untrue". This is literally what I said earlier, it's possible one of the religions is true, but that would mean every other religion which conflicts with it's claims MUST be false in those claims. Therefore, best case scenario, the vast majority of religious ARE false. And, once again, I explained why religions may share traits, after all their creators are always human, and humans share many psychological traits across the world. None of this lends the slightest credibility that any specific religious claim is true, and as we've established already, 99% of them conflict with each other and as such if they aren't all false (which seems the most likely), than all but one are false, yet they all have equal claim to being true (a very weak claim).

>>21974972
>>21975300
Atheism is a religious belief and it's a very militant system for its adherents.

>>21975368
Atheism is the rejection of religious beliefs. You hold the atheist's position regarding every religion which you do not believe in. What is commonly referred to generically as "an atheist" is simply a person who holds that position to all proposed religions.

>>21975350
>still insisting I accept his dogmatism
>still not directly addressing the points I made
I want you to now realize that even the most base and dogmatic religious believers have a direct counterpart when it comes to atheism. You've demonstrated this yourself.
>>21975368
Exactly.

I wasn't aware the Prophet Hitchens still had his acolytes. What a wonderful thing to behold, one catty little pseud trashing another.

>>21975758
>>21975444
>>21975368
Hit the nail right on the head. Atheism is just as fundamentalist as religion. People who subscribe to the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse have been brainwashed and are too stupid to understand it.

Not as good as Graham Oppy.

>>21975368
You can only believe that, if you are terminally online or live in some ultra Christian state, where only edge lords dare to call themselves atheists. Travel a little and you will see millions of atheists who don't really care one way or another.

>>21975779
>focus on low-hanging fruit
>refuse to actually study religion
>pretend scientism is a mark of intelligence
>encourage supporters to react with ridicule and snark
Gee, I wonder why New Atheism went so wrong and its legacy is intellectually lazy fedora tippers.

>>21975444
>>21975779
Religious people actually think the adherence to logically formulated argumentation and a careful vigilance against self deception is actually the same as supernatural assertions resting purely on faith, a mode of belief which necessarily conflicts with others who use the exact same mode to reach conflicting conclusions. This is why it is the most secular countries which are advancing in tangible metrics of truth such as technologies and more religious countries are floundering in mediocrity. It's literally the first thing you learn in philosophy that at a base level, one must accept some presupposition, it's only the religious who use this as justification for the most insane belief systems, where as the judicious person acknowledges that anything presupposed opens the door for error, so we should be most cautious in our presuppositions and keep them as minimal as possible (for example, to presuppose that our sense data reflects actual objective things outside of our perception, whereas the religious presuppose their own culture's mythic fairy tales about a divine Father in the clouds is actually real, see the difference?)

>>21975845
>meanwhile, with the candidate that the religious bloc of America voted for...

>>21967906
what he said

>>21976006
>adherence to logically formulated argumentation and a careful vigilance against self deception
Atheists have been failing at that ITT. So much for your monopoly on logic.
>>21976025
>pretending the Clinton option was any better

>>21976133
>>pretending the Clinton option was any better
My point is that you posting people you don't like with Epstein pics isn't an argument, since the candidate of choice for the other "team" is in the same boat. But you knew that, and are posting in bad faith (the religitard playbook).

>>21976156
>my point is I have TDS and was triggered by a picture of Lawrence Krauss with Alex Epstein
Noted and it's cool you want to focus on that instead of the factors which lead to the pathetic legacy of New Atheism.

>>21976156
Aside and since you keep bringing it up--did you know that Clinton flew on the Lolita Express something like 20 times and that whenever he did so he dismissed his secret service detail (something he is known to refrain from doing most of the time)? I'm not a fan of Trump but if you don't have a problem with that there's something wrong with you.

>some atheist jew might have been a pedo, therefore God is real!

>>21966425
In was easy then too, when people like based Parenti were btfoing Hitchens 20 years ago.

>>21976245
>as a scientist I discerned the girls weren't underage via empirical observations
Yeah, that monopoly on logic claimed by atheists is infalliable. Kek, you can't make this shit up.

>>21965273
Finkelstein.

>>21976262
>make this shit up
inb4 snark because atheists are predictable retards.

>>21976133
Ah, you don't address my points, you address "atheists" as a group of people. Interesting.

>>21966915
He certainly did and I believe that's the only one

>>21975758
It's amazing to me how many people apparently like Hitchens on this board.

>>21976426
Hitchens is based

>>21976395
>you don't address sperg
>tips fedora
Atheists don't have a monopoly on logic. Simple as. See >>21976262.

>>21976467
He was a complete idiot.

>>21976262
Lmao Krauss is a Rat

>>21976467
Hitchens was a drunk and midwit

>>21976512
>There are some atheists who aren't consistent!
>Checkmate atheist!
Are you serious? Again, try addressing the content of my posts, not bringing up irrelevant quirky academics.

>>21976549
>>21976567
He relentlessly dunked on dogmatists of every religion, to their faces, with wit and style, he was extremely based. He also wrote mercilessly against political and religious figures who, for some reason enjoyed mainstream admiration but who were complete fraudsters, see the Clintons and Mother Teresa.

>>21976467
>Hitchens is based

>>21976576
>Again, try addressing the content of my posts
Atheists don't have a monopoly on logic. Simple as.
>quirky academics
Is that how atheists refer to sexual predators? I guess you need save the term so you can make your child molestation jokes about priests.

>>21965033
[cum bitch fag] lol test

nugger

>>21965149
God, you fucking faggots are worse than
>muh 18 million gorrillion
Memes.
https://www.iraqbodycount.org/database/
Shit didn't break 300k.

Hussein murdered upwards of 80,000 kurds, with some of the more pessimistic estimates being double. His regime had to topple eventually, and if you want to blame anyone, blame the fucking Satanist child fuckers in America's government that put him there.

>>21965033
we all are on our own ways

>>21976585
He dunked on a bunch of people even stupider than himself

>>21976633
Those are "violent deaths" and not total civilian deaths, retard.

>>21976841
What other deaths are you going to attribute to American soldiers?
Lack of disaster relief, economic sanctions, or perhaps the executions carried out in the name of the goat-fucker's death cult? The database also includes the death toll from insurgent groups, which began to far outstrip anything the American soldiers were doing after Hussein was executed, and the remnants of his regime wiped out.

>>21976883
>What other deaths are you going to attribute to American soldiers?
Deaths attributable to the war, retard. But don't worry, shifting the goal posts doesn't distract from how much of an edgyboy you are.

I find the logical arguments for God perfectly sound, but I know I could never deeply believe in it no matter how hard I try. How do I cope with being a hylic?

I'll always give Hitchens credit for criticizing religions other than Christianity as practiced in the West. It's not even that I'm particularly bothered by it (and some of it's deserving), but I can't take anyone seriously if that's their whole shtick.

>>21974941
>have you?
are you 12? Hes an author and public speaker and I'm not, why are you championing a guy for having common fucking sense?

>>21977098
be good

>>21976262
Universe from Nothing bros...

>>21976567
only some of which is true.