Why I Don't Need God | The Hitchens Challenge

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why I Don't Need God | The Hitchens Challenge

The vulgar assumption that without god mankind would have no morality: Without god, humans are capable of doing anything. Without god there is no moral restraint on human beings.

Christopher Hitchens, you know who he is/was. Christopher Hitchens challenged people to name two things:

1) Name a moral action undertaken by a believer, that you believe cannot be undertaken by a non-believer, or name a moral statement made by a believer, that you believe cannot be undertaken or made by a non-believer.

2) Name something wicked that only a believer would be likely to do, or something wicked that only a believer would be likely to say.

--- --- ---

[youtube]XqFwree7Kak[/youtube]

name something wicked said or done, that can only be attributable to someones faith.

--- --- ---

here is a fraud pretending to answer the challenge:

Taking the Hitchens challenge Tom Flannery

 

[Tony_Anastasis]

On hio statement: "Without god there is no moral restraint on human beings"........being just "a vulgar assumption"

It seems that just he had eccentric opinions on the existence of God, he also had non-standard opinions on the meanings of the words 'moral' and 'restraint'.


How much of his unbelief may have sprung from his bohemian way of life?

 

[Skull Pilot]

I've asked this question before but it's worth repeating.

Who is the the moral man; is it the man who believes in god and does good works out of fear of a punishment or to attain some reward in the afterlife or is it the man who does not believe in god yet does good works for their own sake not motivated by fear of punishment or reward in heaven?

 

[mudwhistle]

Another Dante thread........like slowing down to peek at a car-wreck.

 

[Caroljo]

Why I Don't Need God | The Hitchens Challenge

The vulgar assumption that without god mankind would have no morality: Without god, humans are capable of doing anything. Without god there is no moral restraint on human beings.

Christopher Hitchens, you know who he is/was. Christopher Hitchens challenged people to name two things:

1) Name a moral action undertaken by a believer, that you believe cannot be undertaken by a non-believer, or name a moral statement made by a believer, that you believe cannot be undertaken or made by a non-believer.

2) Name something wicked that only a believer would be likely to do, or something wicked that only a believer would be likely to say.

--- --- ---

[youtube]XqFwree7Kak[/youtube]

name something wicked said or done, that can only be attributable to someones faith.

--- --- ---

here is a fraud pretending to answer the challenge:

Taking the Hitchens challenge Tom Flannery

Believers are human, just as unbelievers are human. We all make the same mistakes.
Nothing, good or bad, can be attributed to one or the other. The difference is, we Christians know that when we've sinned, we will be forgiven if we ask for forgiveness and truly repent of it. We are no different in our actions than non-believers. I also don't know of any Christian that does good for others JUST because they're afraid not to. That's a ridiculous statement.

Tell me....do you believe in forgiveness? Have you ever told someone you forgive them for something they've done to you? Has anyone ever said they've forgiven you for something you've done?

 

[Si modo]

I've asked this question before but it's worth repeating.

Who is the the moral man; is it the man who believes in god does good works out of fear of a punishment or to attain some reward in the afterlife or is it the man who does not believe in god yet does good works for their own sake not motivated by fear of punishment or reward in heaven?

Personally, I'm not all that interested in motivations for doing good work as long as the good work is done. But, I think to add to the perceived motivations you mentioned - reward in an afterlife or fear of punishment - guilt also adds in. Some religions motivate also by guilt.

Also, I have to think that many current self-proclaimed atheists (really most are agnostics) were exposed to religions as children. As with me (not an atheist, but I am an agnostic theist), I cannot say that my current morals were not influenced by early exposure to religion because I have no control to compare.

Can we ever really have a control experiment?

 

[Avatar4321]

The very fact that moral action exists is evidence that there is a God. The challenge undermines his entire argument.

 

[Si modo]

The very fact that moral action exists is evidence that there is a God. The challenge undermines his entire argument.

Or is it the very fact that a God exists is evidence that humans are moral?

 

[laughinReaper]

And yet every society feels it necessary to set such rules usually with religion. One thing I've learned over the years. If a law exsists it's because people are willing to break it.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

On hio statement: "Without god there is no moral restraint on human beings"........being just "a vulgar assumption"

It seems that just he had eccentric opinions on the existence of God, he also had non-standard opinions on the meanings of the words 'moral' and 'restraint'.


How much of his unbelief may have sprung from his bohemian way of life?

address teh challenge

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

I've asked this question before but it's worth repeating.

Who is the the moral man; is it the man who believes in god and does good works out of fear of a punishment or to attain some reward in the afterlife or is it the man who does not believe in god yet does good works for their own sake not motivated by fear of punishment or reward in heaven?

address teh challenge

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Another Dante thread........like slowing down to peek at a car-wreck.

address teh challenge ::: not only fails, but has to express luv 4 all things Dante. We look down upon public displays of affection.

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

Why I Don't Need God | The Hitchens Challenge

The vulgar assumption that without god mankind would have no morality: Without god, humans are capable of doing anything. Without god there is no moral restraint on human beings.

Christopher Hitchens, you know who he is/was. Christopher Hitchens challenged people to name two things:

1) Name a moral action undertaken by a believer, that you believe cannot be undertaken by a non-believer, or name a moral statement made by a believer, that you believe cannot be undertaken or made by a non-believer.

2) Name something wicked that only a believer would be likely to do, or something wicked that only a believer would be likely to say.

--- --- ---

[youtube]XqFwree7Kak[/youtube]

name something wicked said or done, that can only be attributable to someones faith.

--- --- ---

here is a fraud pretending to answer the challenge:

Taking the Hitchens challenge Tom Flannery

Believers are human, just as unbelievers are human. We all make the same mistakes.
Nothing, good or bad, can be attributed to one or the other. The difference is, we Christians know that when we've sinned, we will be forgiven if we ask for forgiveness and truly repent of it. We are no different in our actions than non-believers. I also don't know of any Christian that does good for others JUST because they're afraid not to. That's a ridiculous statement.

Tell me....do you believe in forgiveness? Have you ever told someone you forgive them for something they've done to you? Has anyone ever said they've forgiven you for something you've done?

address teh challenge

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::


but...

Just because you claim to not know of Christians doing something good because they afraid not to, doesn't mean diddly squat. Forgiveness has not been patented by any Christian sect.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

The very fact that moral action exists is evidence that there is a God. The challenge undermines his entire argument.

incapable of understanding most basic discussions?

address teh challenge

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

And yet every society feels it necessary to set such rules usually with religion. One thing I've learned over the years. If a law exsists it's because people are willing to break it.

address teh challenge

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::

 

[Truthmatters]

god is for those who can not fully understand the world

 

[Dragon]

god is for those who can not fully understand the world

Also for those who have fully EXPERIENCED the world in all its sublime power. Besides, nobody fully understands the world.

Hitchens provided a good counter to the absurd argument that only religious people can be moral. His challenge really doesn't have any significance beyond that, but I suppose it's useful as far as that goes.

 

[Truthmatters]

if you can not make sense of the world without a god in it then you need to believe in a god to help you make sense of the world.

I can understand how the world works without needing the idea of god to have it make sense.


God is for people who can not make sense of the world as it is.

 

[Truthmatters]

without a god the world makes perfect sense to those who understand the reality of our exsistance.

That is why some can only understand the patterns of exsistance by placing it in gods hands.

It makes perfect sense with no god involved.

 

[Procrustes Stretched]

god is for those who can not fully understand the world

address teh challenge

::: fail ::: http://www.usmessageboard.com/relig...d-god-the-hitchens-challenge.html#post4981772 ::: fail :::