Zone1 Can you find the Flaw in Atheist Speaker Christopher Hitchens' Logic Here.

[alang1216]

You were the one who said you expected pearly gates and that you would be there. I thought it interesting that pearly gates were your idea of an afterlife, a kind of sight-seeing tour. On the other hand, I see the afterlife of existing in the presence of God. That's two views, but for me, I want to know what the author was thinking.

I used pearly gates as a symbol for heaven but you confused me when you referred to them as an "inanimate object". I don't think we disagree.

The worship you describe might be compared to dessert, while the worship I present is the meat-bread-vegetables part of the meal.

OK. We all worship different things in different way.

 

[Meriweather]

OK. We all worship different things in different way.

We do? The etymology of worship is make one thing a priority. How long does singing hymns in church once a week survive as a life priority? When I face a problem at work (or at home), singing a song isn't even on the list--let alone the first priority.

 

[alang1216]

We do? The etymology of worship is make one thing a priority. How long does singing hymns in church once a week survive as a life priority? When I face a problem at work (or at home), singing a song isn't even on the list--let alone the first priority.

The etymology of "worship" is rooted in the Old English word weorthscipe (or worthscip), which literally means "worthiness" or "worth-ship"—the condition of ascribing value, honor, or worth to something or someone. It evolved from acknowledging the worth of an object or deity to mean paying reverence.

• Components: It is a combination of weorth (worth/value) and -scipe (a suffix indicating state or condition, similar to "-ship" in friendship).
• Original Meaning: It meant to give, or to show that something is worthy of honor.
• Evolution: Over time, this evolved from a general term for showing honor (e.g., to magistrates, as in "Your Worship") to a specific term for the reverence paid to a divine being.
• Conceptual Application: Worship is considered the act of placing the highest value on God, making Him the ultimate priority.

Therefore, while not explicitly "making one thing a priority" in its Old English root, it means "ascribing worth," which inherently elevates the object of worship to the highest priority.

 

[ding]

The etymology of "worship" is rooted in the Old English word weorthscipe (or worthscip), which literally means "worthiness" or "worth-ship"—the condition of ascribing value, honor, or worth to something or someone. It evolved from acknowledging the worth of an object or deity to mean paying reverence.

• Components: It is a combination of weorth (worth/value) and -scipe (a suffix indicating state or condition, similar to "-ship" in friendship).
• Original Meaning: It meant to give, or to show that something is worthy of honor.
• Evolution: Over time, this evolved from a general term for showing honor (e.g., to magistrates, as in "Your Worship") to a specific term for the reverence paid to a divine being.
• Conceptual Application: Worship is considered the act of placing the highest value on God, making Him the ultimate priority.

Therefore, while not explicitly "making one thing a priority" in its Old English root, it means "ascribing worth," which inherently elevates the object of worship to the highest priority.

God's worthiness is unquestioned. Just look at existence. It's our worthiness that is in question.

Are you worthy of the gift you have received? Are you thankful? If you were, how would you show it? Because it looks to me like you either aren't aware or you don't think much of it. So it's no wonder you are here questioning the existence of God instead of seeking God. You don't seem to appreciate anything.

 

[Meriweather]

The etymology of "worship" is rooted in the Old English word weorthscipe (or worthscip), which literally means "worthiness" or "worth-ship"—the condition of ascribing value, honor, or worth to something or someone. It evolved from acknowledging the worth of an object or deity to mean paying reverence.

• Components: It is a combination of weorth (worth/value) and -scipe (a suffix indicating state or condition, similar to "-ship" in friendship).
• Original Meaning: It meant to give, or to show that something is worthy of honor.
• Evolution: Over time, this evolved from a general term for showing honor (e.g., to magistrates, as in "Your Worship") to a specific term for the reverence paid to a divine being.
• Conceptual Application: Worship is considered the act of placing the highest value on God, making Him the ultimate priority.

Therefore, while not explicitly "making one thing a priority" in its Old English root, it means "ascribing worth," which inherently elevates the object of worship to the highest priority.

I go back to the Hebrew etymology which defines priority. The King James' English doesn't quite nail the original meaning--which is a continual issue throughout the English translations from the Hebrew. Practicing one's faith happens in the real world, in real life--not in church. Don't get me wrong. I believe gathering as a community is of great importance as well, but as a vital side note, not the main.

 

[EdwinAMartin]

I always wondered why God didn't send Jesus to China and the Americas too. Didn't they deserve enlightenment? Why to only one people in one place at one time?

From an evangelical point of view, the ME was exactly the right geographical location at the time, with active trade routes from England to China. Christianity spread around Europe and Africa rapidly, thanks to the stability of the Roman Empire and its roads and conquests. India and China were just months away, the largest concentrations of humanity and its most important cultures within reach.

 

[alang1216]

From an evangelical point of view, the ME was exactly the right geographical location at the time, with active trade routes from England to China. Christianity spread around Europe and Africa rapidly, thanks to the stability of the Roman Empire and its roads and conquests. India and China were just months away, the largest concentrations of humanity and its most important cultures within reach.

Doesn't explain the Americas but OK. Jesus came 2,000 years ago but civilizations were already several thousand years old by then. What about the peoples who lived and died before Jesus? Did they get their shot at heaven?

 

[Hafar1014]

Doesn't explain the Americas but OK. Jesus came 2,000 years ago but civilizations were already several thousand years old by then. What about the peoples who lived and died before Jesus? Did they get their shot at heaven?

Hell was a threat invented by Christians to compel obedience. Convert or burn in hell forever because you have original sin. This is distortion of Genesis. Genesius states the sin of one cant be extended to humanity as whole. There is no orignal sin or fall of man. Its Gods moral teaching and the trial for mans freedom. Christianity was built on a lie

 

[EdwinAMartin]

Doesn't explain the Americas but OK. Jesus came 2,000 years ago but civilizations were already several thousand years old by then. What about the peoples who lived and died before Jesus? Did they get their shot at heaven?

Doesn't have to explain it, not nearly as many people here in 1 A.D., and certainly not literate cultures conducive to the spread of Christianity around the world; the Euros would get here eventually, and Christians had a better chance of surviving and spreading compared to feral cannibal savages who tossed kids into volcanoes and practiced mass human sacrifice. The timing for the euros arriving in the Americas is also pretty good and conducive to shutting down the likes of the Aztecs and Incas savagery. Cortez for instance found zero problems finding over 200,000 allies to destroy the Aztecs when they attempted to murder him and his soldiers.

Considering the development of technology and sailing ships, Europe wins again re the spread of Christianity.

 

[alang1216]

Hell was a threat invented by Christians to compel obedience. Convert or burn in hell forever because you have original sin. This is distortion of Genesis. Genesius states the sin of one cant be extended to humanity as whole. There is no orignal sin or fall of man. Its Gods moral teaching and the trial for mans freedom. Christianity was built on a lie

Lots of moral ambiguity in the Bible. Children can suffer for the sins of the parents (Exodus 34:7 and 2 Samuel 21).

 

[alang1216]

Doesn't have to explain it, not nearly as many people here in 1 A.D., and certainly not literate cultures conducive to the spread of Christianity around the world; the Euros would get here eventually, and Christians had a better chance of surviving and spreading compared to feral cannibal savages who tossed kids into volcanoes and practiced mass human sacrifice. The timing for the euros arriving in the Americas is also pretty good and conducive to shutting down the likes of the Aztecs and Incas savagery. Cortez for instance found zero problems finding over 200,000 allies to destroy the Aztecs when they attempted to murder him and his soldiers.

I guess God didn't do a very good job when he created the Native Americans? Maybe if they built a coliseum for their savagery you'd have more respect for them.

 

[Hafar1014]

Lots of moral ambiguity in the Bible. Children can suffer for the sins of the parents (Exodus 34:7 and 2 Samuel 21).

There is a lot of wisdom in Genesis far beyond the tome it was written. These are allegories not literal so the meaning is more than whats simply stated. Children do suffer the sins of the parents when parents are bad parents

 

[EdwinAMartin]

I guess God didn't do a very good job when he created the Native Americans? Maybe if they built a coliseum for their savagery you'd have more respect for them.

They had the same free will everybody else has. Nobody defended the coliseums, so I guess you're just throwing stuff around hoping something sticks here. Christians didn't build the coliseums.

 

[Hafar1014]

They had the same free will everybody else has. Nobody defended the coliseums, so I guess you're just throwing stuff around hoping something sticks here. Christians didn't build the coliseums.

Christians bult the Crusades and Spanish Inquisition

 

[EdwinAMartin]

Christians bult the Crusades and Spanish Inquisition

Yes, both great things. Actually it was the kings who did that, as the Roman Inquisition never killed anybody, and the Portugese and Spanish Inquisitions didn't really kill many either; the Spanish one put maybe 600 to death, out of some 10,000 tried, the Portuguese maybe 2,000 out of more.

Of course the Xian haters will snivel and claim 'millions', with zero evidence, then turn around and praise the Arab invaders who did actually kill millions as 'enlightened and tolerant', so we know not to pay any attention to their defenders. All of those tried had the option of leaving peacefully, they chose to lie instead, and got caught.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Seems like an asshole to me.
He makes his living on giving speeches about his faith that other people's faith are invalid.
I guess that is what happens when your education greatly exceeds your intellect.

 

[EdwinAMartin]

Seems like an asshole to me.
He makes his living on giving speeches about his faith that other people's faith are invalid.
I guess that is what happens when your education greatly exceeds your intellect.

He sells hot air. He likes being 'controversial' because he makes money being a 'celebrity atheist'.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

He sells hot air. He likes being 'controversial' because he makes money being a 'celebrity atheist'.

Exactly.
He is a pretender. An actual intellect is not going to waste their time debating what can't be proved or disproved.
A lifetime of wasted time.

 

[ding]

Lots of moral ambiguity in the Bible. Children can suffer for the sins of the parents (Exodus 34:7 and 2 Samuel 21).

There's moral ambiguity everywhere for people who don't believe morals exist.

Exodus 34:7 and 2 Samuel 21 illustrate that children can experience negative consequences, or "suffer," due to the sins of their parents, often manifesting as natural, familial, or social repercussions across generations. While interpreted by some as a direct divine punishment, it is often understood as the lasting impact of wrongdoing rather than the individual being held guilty for another's actions.

Key interpretations regarding this concept include:

• Generational Consequences (Natural Results): Many interpretations emphasize that sin creates a lasting legacy. For example, parents’ actions like addiction, abuse, or idolatry can create, or "pass down," environments that negatively affect children.
• The "Third and Fourth Generation" Context: In Exodus 34:7, the punishment of children is often associated with cases where the descendants continue in the same sins as their ancestors (repetition of mistakes).
• Individual Responsibility: Other biblical passages, such as Ezekiel 18:20, emphasize that each person is accountable for their own sins, stating that the child will not share the punishment for the parent’s iniquity.
• Breaking the Cycle: The focus is frequently on the potential for individuals to break these generational cycles through repentance and conscious, righteous choices.

Ultimately, while the Bible acknowledges that actions have long-reaching effects on families, it distinguishes between bearing the consequences of a parent's sin and being held guilty for it.

 

[ding]

I guess God didn't do a very good job when he created the Native Americans? Maybe if they built a coliseum for their savagery you'd have more respect for them.

Or you are a hammer looking for a nail.