RIP Christopher Hitchens:

Originally posted by jaywill
We know Hitchens was adamant as an Atheist to the end.

So RBHILL hopes that Hitchens rejected his own life's work and all the principle and intellectual rigour that it demonstrated [and the comfort and support it gave to the millions of people who shared his belief system] in the final throes of agony as he succumbed to terminal cancer?

Originally posted by FMF
So RBHILL hopes that Hitchens rejected his own life's work and all the principle and intellectual rigour that it demonstrated [and the comfort and support it gave to the millions of people who shared his belief system] in the final throes of agony as he succumbed to terminal cancer?

So RBHILL hopes that Hitchens rejected his own life's work and all the principle and intellectual rigour that it demonstrated [and the comfort and support it gave to the millions of people who shared his belief system] in the final throes of agony as he succumbed to terminal cancer?

RBHILL probably hopes that that man received eternal life. The possibilities of eternal life are perhaps infinite.

Is RBHILL wrong to hope that such an enjoyment would have been Christopher Hitchen's as well as any other who receives Christ ?

His intellectual rigor was of God who formed His soul and then observed his ways:

"Jehovah looks from heaven; He sees all the sons of men. From the site of His habitation He gazes at all the inhabitants of the earth,

He who fashions the hearts of them all, He who discerns all their works." (Psalm 33:12-15)

God fashioned the heart of Mr. Hitchenes. God observed what Mr. Hitchens chose to do with that heart. God gave him the ability to argue at all. Then He observed what he argued.

I see nothing wrong with a Christian wanting that a man used his heart either early or late or at the very end, to draw close to God through Christ's salvation.

Originally posted by jaywill
I see nothing wrong with a Christian wanting that a man used his heart either early or late or at the very end, to draw close to God through Christ's salvation.

Your attitude to Hitchens strikes me as pretty disrespectful and your certainty verging on vanity. You'd actually wish he had turned round and told people like you that he'd "repented", i.e. wasted his entire intellectual and philosophical life, so that you might feel... what? Better? More certain? Self-righteous? Vindicated? ...about the conjecture, speculation and hoping that you've done about your own salvation and immortality?

Now I do respect your right to choose your own spiritual path, jaywill, and I'm pleased for you if it brings you happiness or helps you to make sense of your life, but can you at least understand how decent people with a different belief system from you might find the spectacle of Christians - like you, Doward, RBHill etc. - condescending a dead man, just a little bit ugly and lacking in humanity?

Originally posted by FMF
Your attitude to Hitchens strikes me as pretty disrespectful and your certainty verging on vanity. You'd actually wish he had turned round and told people like you that he'd "repented", i.e. wasted his entire intellectual and philosophical life, so that you might feel... what? Better? More certain? Self-righteous? Vindicated? ...about the conjecture, speculati d, RBHill etc. - condescending a dead man, just a little bit ugly and lacking in humanity?

Your attitude to Hitchens strikes me as pretty disrespectful and your certainty verging on vanity.

There is no disrespect there at all. Where's the disrespect ?

You'd actually wish he had turned round and told people like you that he'd "repented",

No. That is too shallow FMF. First of all I HAVE NO IDEA of the final thoughts of Christopher Hitchens. Only God knows that.

I totally respect anything PRIVATE that was between him and God. He did NOT have to come to jaywill and tell me ANYTHING. I am persuaded of the truth. His repenting to me or not means very little.

I am not diminished by his clenching his fist in God's face to the end (if that was the case). Nor does it add that much to me if he reached out to God.

And when you really get right down to it - I don't really know what was deep in his heart all his life. I know what he spoke. Only God knows what was really in his heart.

I respected Mr. Hitchens. It is a Christian virtue to want all men to be saved for that is God's heart:

" ... our Savior God, Who desires all men to be saved and to come to the full knowledge of the truth." ( ref. 1 Tim. 3,4)

Maybe you think that I would enjoy gloating or something, if Hitchens were to tell me something. What we wish for Hitchens and every man is more between that man and God rather than that man and us.

i.e. wasted his entire intellectual and philosophical life, so that you might feel... what? Better?

Since I have tried to correct your misconception about anything I required, I don't think I need to comment further.

What we wish for is mostly between a man and his God. Of course "Brother Christopher Hitchens" would have been a nice greeting. But we do not expect that that will always be the case.

But if a life long atheist receives Jesus, for sure we will enjoy fellowship together in eternity in the New Jerusalem, if not in this age.

It is really HARD to be a loser when you belong to Christ the Victor. It all comes out so positively eventually.

More certain? Self-righteous? Vindicated? ...about the conjecture, speculation and hoping that you've done about your own salvation and immortality?

More of the same misconception. No comment further.

Now I do respect your right to choose your own spiritual path, jaywill, and I'm pleased for you if it brings you happiness or helps you to make sense of your life, but can you at least understand how decent people with a different belief system from you might find the spectacle of Christians - like you, Doward, RBHill etc. - condescending a dead man, just a little bit ugly and lacking in humanity?

If we said we were glad, you would find that ugly.
If we said we were hopeful, you find that ugly.
Probably you would find ANY reaction of Christians to the news, "ugly and lacking in humanity".

You have the last word on that. I move on to something else, probably of little interest to you.

I can't change your view on that. But it is fascinating to me that a man like Saul of Tarsus was probably as vehement and brilliant an opposer of the Christian faith. When I think of what Paul must have been like when he was dragging men and women from houses for calling on the name of Jesus, and throwing them in jails, making them recant, etc. it must have tasted like Chris Hitchens .

Paul said that he was the very worst of opposers of Christ so that in him, God would have an example of His longsuffering to reach even the hardest of the hard.

" ... Who formerly was a blasphemer and a perscutor and an insulting person; but I was shown mercy because, being ignorant, I acted in unbelief ... But because of this I was shown mercy, that in me, the foremost, Jesus Christ might display all His long-suffering for a pattern to those who are to believe on Him unto eternal life." (1 Tim. 1:13,16)

I am pretty sure that Saul (Paul) was more of a fierce enemy of the Christian church then we've known.

But we know some will remain persecutors and blasphemers, "ignorant" and acting in unbelief until they die.

In the last year many many Christians were praying for Mr. Hitchens. I found myself praying less for him but more for those enfluenced by him.

Originally posted by jaywill
Probably you would find ANY reaction of Christians to the news, "ugly and lacking in humanity".

The reaction from Christians like you, RJHinds, RBHill etc. that I would not have found "ugly and lacking in humanity" is one that showed a bit more common decency and respect. With your creed unable to persuade Hitchens in his lifetime, despite his considerable track record of engaging and debating it, you stand over his grave now and express hopes and make assertions about him and the meaning of his life that he cannot answer. Not as-bad-as-it-gets ugly stuff. But ugly stuff nevertheless, jaywill.

Originally posted by FMF
The reaction from Christians like you, RJHinds, RBHill etc. that I would not have found "ugly and lacking in humanity" is one that showed a bit more common decency and respect. With your creed unable to persuade Hitchens in his lifetime, despite his considerable track record of engaging and debating it, you stand over his grave now and express hopes and make ass ...[text shortened]... that he cannot answer. Not as-bad-as-it-gets ugly stuff. But ugly stuff nevertheless, jaywill.

The reaction from Christians like you, RJHinds, RBHill etc. that I would not have found "ugly and lacking in humanity" is one that showed a bit more common decency and respect.

What did I write that failed to show decency and respect ?

Are you saying that such a long life of labor, hard work, strong arguments, intense debates should have been shown more respect ?

I think Christopher Hitchens did a good job of beating up some things which needed to be beat up. But I also think he made some mistakes.

There's respect there.

With your creed unable to persuade Hitchens in his lifetime, despite his considerable track record of engaging and debating it, you stand over his grave now and express hopes and make assertions about him and the meaning of his life that he cannot answer. Not as-bas-as-it-gets ugly stuff. But ugly stuff nevertheless, jaywill.

You're really upset. You seem really bitter. I don't know what all everyone wrote here. I just said there was nothing ugly about RBHILL saying he hoped that the man repented.

I stand by that.

If you lost a personal loved one in Christopher Hitchens, you have my sympathies.

Originally posted by jaywill
You're really upset. You seem really bitter.

Upset? Bitter? Not at all. Just responding to what you and other Christians have posted on this forum. Wait a minute. Am I "Upset"? "Bitter"? Has it been a personal loss of a "loved one"? Are you by any chance trying to somehow dismiss - ad hominem - my criticism of your reaction to Hitchens' death as some kind of emotional thing on my part?

Originally posted by FMF
The reaction from Christians like you, RJHinds, RBHill etc. that I would not have found "ugly and lacking in humanity" is one that showed a bit more common decency and respect. With your creed unable to persuade Hitchens in his lifetime, despite his considerable track record of engaging and debating it, you stand over his grave now and express hopes and make ass ...[text shortened]... that he cannot answer. Not as-bad-as-it-gets ugly stuff. But ugly stuff nevertheless, jaywill.

With your creed unable to persuade Hitchens in his lifetime, despite his considerable track record of engaging and debating it...

I know you're not serious.

Hitchens railed against religion--- and, specifically, Christianity--- via personal attacks on the likes of Mother Teresa, or his insipid denouncements of particular outcomes of religious power gone amok. The fact of the matter is, he never even closely approximated anything remotely near an interesting/poignant/meaningful critique of Christian thought.

If ever a person had an ax to grind, it was Hitchens. The brilliance of his mind and the sparkle of his prose were muted by his childish anger.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
[b]With your creed unable to persuade Hitchens in his lifetime, despite his considerable track record of engaging and debating it...

I know you're not serious.

Hitchens railed against religion--- and, specifically, Christianity--- via personal attacks on the likes of Mother Teresa, or his insipid denouncements of particular outcomes of religious ...[text shortened]... ens. The brilliance of his mind and the sparkle of his prose were muted by his childish anger.[/b]

Well I can accept of course that you didn't agree with him. So what kind of RHP Christian are you when it comes to Hitchens' passing - the "good riddance" kind? Or the kind standing over the grave of a dead man saying how you "hope" that he "repented" and that he is now "with Jesus"?

Originally posted by FMF
Well I can accept of course that you didn't agree with him. So what kind of RHP Christian are you when it comes to Hitchens' passing - the "good riddance" kind? Or the kind standing over the grave of a dead man saying how you "hope" that he "repented" and that he is now "with Jesus"?

As I said, I think he was brilliant but misguided. I have a copy of a documentary of "Collision," a roving side-show style debate between Hitchens and Douglas Wilson which I found made the former endearing for his earnestness. I also found his final admission of a Mother Teresa-type doubt both illuminating and hopeful.

We are told by God to 'ask, seek and knock.' I consider those who do this a benefit to all mankind, and I will miss his voice.

Originally posted by FreakyKBH
As I said, I think he was brilliant but misguided. I have a copy of a documentary of "Collision," a roving side-show style debate between Hitchens and Douglas Wilson which I found made the former endearing for his earnestness. I also found his final admission of a Mother Teresa-type doubt both illuminating and hopeful.

We are told by God to 'ask, seek ...[text shortened]... d knock.' I consider those who do this a benefit to all mankind, and I will miss his voice.

Well that's reassuring to hear. It seems that Divegeester has been the only other regular-posting Christian to exhibit a bit of common decency - to my way of thinking, at least - so far in reaction to Hitchens' death.

Originally posted by FMF
Upset? Bitter? Not at all. Just responding to what you and other Christians have posted on this forum. Wait a minute. Am I "Upset"? "Bitter"? Has it been a personal loss of a "loved one"? Are you by any chance trying to somehow dismiss - ad hominem - my criticism of your reaction to Hitchens' death as some kind of emotional thing on my part?

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

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

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

Ah yes , I see what you're doing here. I am not "bent out of shape", jaywill. I am just disagreeing with you. As I have clearly and [I reckon] quite cogently stated, I have found yours and RBHill's - and some other Christians' - response to Hitchens' death to be 'small' and vain. I'm not saying this in an effort to persuade you to agree with me. Nothing of the sort. And I am not "bitter" or "upset" or grieving a "loved one". Nice try.

Originally posted by jaywill
But it is fascinating to me that a man like Saul of Tarsus was probably as vehement and brilliant an opposer of the Christian faith. When I think of what Paul must have been like when he was dragging men and women from houses for calling on the name of Jesus, and throwing them in jails, making them recant, etc. it must have tasted like Chris Hitchens .

You mention Hitchens and someone "throwing [Christians] in jails" in the same breath. Why would that be? Someone"was dragging men and women from houses for calling on the name of Jesus..." it must have tasted like Chris Hitchens? What are you on about? I know you don't agree with him and his belief system, but what are you doing comparing him to someone who was "dragging [Christian] men and women [...] and throwing them in jails..."? What is your purpose in talking about Hitchens in this way? Is this an indication of your "respect" for him?

Originally posted by FMF
You mention Hitchens and someone "throwing [Christians] in jails" in the same breath. Why would that be? Someone"was dragging men and women from houses for calling on the name of Jesus..." it must have tasted like Chris Hitchens? What are you on about? I know you don't agree with him and his belief system, but what are you doing comparing him to someone w in talking about Hitchens in this way? Is this an indication of your "respect" for him?

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

I took a few breaths inbetween.

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

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

Did you ever see the debate between Tony Blair and Christopher Hitchens ? They deabted each other about that very thing, whether or not there has been a positive enfluence on culture from Christianity.

Why would that be? Someone"was dragging men and women from houses for calling on the name of Jesus..." it must have tasted like Chris Hitchens?

I was speaking of similarities between Paul and Hitchens.
I did not say they were identical if that is the corner you wish to push me into.

I could as well speak of the differences between the two men as well.
Ie. one a theist and one definitely not.
However, in that post I was speaking of similarities.
Explained, moving to your next point.

What are you on about? I know you don't agree with him and his belief system, but what are you doing comparing him to someone who was "dragging [Christian] men and women [...] and throwing them in jails..."? What is your purpose in talking about Hitchens in this way? Is this an indication of your "respect" for him?

There are things in which I would agree with Hitchens about.

I think my post was clear. I implied being under the persecuting hand of Saul of Tarsus must have been something like the opposition of Hitchens. Certainly, the NT says Paul was "breathing out" his disdain for the Christians.

"But Saul, still breathing threatening and murder against the disciples of the Lord ..." ( Acts 9:1).

When Paul became a disciple, some of the Christians didn't believe it and didn't trust him.

I was commenting on Hitchen's opposition to the Christians and Saul's opposition to the Christianns. I think there are interesting parallels.

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

I think both men were obsessed with an intention to destroy the Christian faith - obliterate it.

William Lane Craig comments on Hitchens in his final days.
You won't like it FMF. Better not watch it.
Someone else may get something from it.


YouTube