Christopher Hitchens, R.I.P.

Nah, what's really fair is haveing some moron repeatedly slander someone else's faith into grotesque and inaccurate strawman in order to justify calling people rapists and murderers ... who have never raped or murdered anyone.

Concepts like humbleness, repentence, atonement, and forgiveness, as well as purpose, can all be ignored, repeatedly, by people who think ignoring these things to call other people murderers and rapists is a good thing? A better thing even?

But definitely not flame bait or trolling. Never that.

 

His tactics were kinda counter-productive in my opinion.

Rest in peace.

 

most serial killers are christians ....

and what you've "heard" is based on the ignorant ramblings of people who believe in fairy tales.

 

Yes..."twixt the stirrup and the ground/mercy sought and mercy found". But a bit vulgarized don't you think?

There is a Catholic rule of nullus salus extra ecclessiam which means "no salvation outside the Church". It is a fine example of Catholic intolerance. But of course there are liberal Catholics who manage to turn this on its head by arguing what "extra ecclesiam" means. For such liberal Catholics all persons of goodwill who act in accordance with their conscience are "intra ecclesiam" whether baptized or not. Their implicit acceptance of Christ is evidenced by their goodwill. Even Protestants can be saved.

We liberal Catholics are pretty convinced that the Hitch is a person of goodwill who is up there now having a merry row with God about why all His followers on Earth are so inarticulate and incompetent right now (which he himself already had stated was his excuse if he turned out to be wrong and found himself post mortem standing in front of the Supreme Being).

We are those sad effete Chrsitians, like Graham Greene, who believe in Hell, but just don't think a merciful and loving God can send anyone there. Not even Jerry Falwell.

 

Only if his conversion is genuine. In other words, the criminal needs to genuinely feel sorry for his sins, and truly accepted Jesus as his Lord and savior.

 

It should be said that this is an evil doctrine if applied to exclude good people who did not say the right words or choose the right faith (ie if it excludes Buddhists, muslims, Sikhs and other believers). It is an evil doctrine if it excludes all people born before Christ. It is an evil doctrine if it excludes people who never heard of Christianity or only came across it as an adjunct to an invading army.

The basic Christian message is that of divine love. Messages that subvert that message are evil heresies.

 

Well good gracious. Have you not studied the scripture? During that three days that Jesus was supposed to have been in the tomb, under the guard of centurions, Jesus had already left the tomb and was preaching ... guess where... in the land of the dead... presenting himself to all those that had died before He began His preaching while living. They have been given an opportunity to believe. As for those living today... they are also "without excuse". Thus that great commission handed down to all Christians, to preach the gospel to the whole world... so that none are left without opportunity to believe.

Have a nice evening.

 

And so with a whoosh of the keyboard, good persons who come from outside Christendom (and many within) are swept into Hell fires. This is the fundamentalism that commands its followers to see followers of other religions as evil, that demonizes them and polarizes the world into two great Apocalyptic camps. This is the evil intolerance of Christianity, the hatred that flies directly in the face of a loving God. This is the heresy that Hitchens fought against, the picture of a loving God burning his children to death eternally, torturing them for ever. Such hatred is worthy of the most withering contempt.

And of course there is no level playing field. A peasant labouring in the fields of rural China may have "heard of" Christianity. But his low literacy rate, the communist indoctrination he receives, the sheer brutality of his life, precludes any meaningful chance of conversion. But the Christian evangelist's child, born into a wealthy home and instructed from birth, falls right into Christ's lap.

This is really the very evil creed that Hitchens would have us see it to be.

It is strange to think of all those Founding Fathers of the USA burning in Hell fires. Because this is what the writer suggests must happen to Deists who rejected Christ's divinity. Jefferson, Paine, Washington, Franklin... all in Hell's fire. What hateful filth is this?

 

That description above is also your perception of what is happening outside Christendom. Merely a subjective opinion.

Again, your perception. Not in anyway mandating that your perception and subsequent conclusion be accepted as truth. Just another opinion from someone who only knows to ridicule that which he does not comprehend.

Now we jump all across that level playing field and attempt to provide a greater advantage to the wealthy above the poor. In essence, saying that God only makes His salvation available to those that can best afford such salvation. Interesting ideology, but that is not the way it works. If you had studied your scripture, you would have been able to present a more tangible argument. That one literally stinks. Try again.

This is really the very evil creed that Hitchens would have us see it to be.

If in fact they DENIED Jesus and did not accept Jesus as their savior, then the scripture speaks more boldly on that matter than I can suggest. Nice try again. You need to work on those straw arguments. They are losers.

 

So where's this deathbed conversion we were promised?

 

All that and you still didn't answer the question as to why some Christians believe in an evil creed that sends the vast and overwhelming majority of God's children to an eternity of torture.

If I've got it wrong, tell me how it works, Or don't you know?

 

I found no need to address an untruth and a wrongful interpretation of scripture. It is not my fault that you are so spiritually blind that you cannot see beyond your hatred of God.

 

This is no more than avoidance. If this interpretation is wrongful, is it not your Christian duty to set us on the correct path, rather than condemn us?
Indeed, If there is a question, why is that? On such a vital point, why is there room for interpretation? Why has a supposedly loving God set a minefield of traps and false directions into the route to glory?

 

Which part of scripture? What interpretation? Why are you so afraid of explaining your interpretation of God's truth?

Don't lie. I don't hate God. I hate the false God that you worship. The 1st Commandment - go read it.

I agree with the Colonel. Is it not a Christian's duty to tell the Good News and to be fishers of men? I am sure emulating Saducees is not part of the role.

I suppose this is yor way of showing how you have lost the argument. All you have is abuse.

 

You're so benevolent! I'm in awe.