Wonderful stuff. Focusing on what's important, the teachings. If the teachings stand up on their own, then it doesn't really matter who said it. But if the teachings are only listened to because of who supposedly said them, then they aren't worth much. Especially so if that person didn't really exist, at least as told.

Ha. Socrates would probably have liked "take no care for the morrow."
Diogenes, they guy who metaphorically told Alexander the Great to fuck off, would surely have like it.

Tags for this video have been changed from 'Christopher Hitchens, Jesus, FredomFest, Socrates' to 'Christopher Hitchens, Jesus, FreedomFest, Socrates' - edited by xxovercastxx

Hitchens makes an excellent argument against this straw man Jesus he's set up. "Take no care for the morrow" would be almost completely against what the biblical Jesus taught. Why would Jesus have healed countless sick people if he knew they were going to die anyways? The idea that metaphysical or spiritual is more important than physical or that the material world is evil is Greek philosophy, not a Biblical one.

Christianity is a faith that believes Jesus came to redeem all creation (the physical AND the spiritual). Christians don't think they're going to be just spirits floating around, but rather that they'll receive new bodies. Hitchens is just shaking his fist at a faith he made up.

I'm interested if a fellow Sifter could find and cite the study regarding the Israeli archaeologists and the Exodus mythe that Hitchens is talking about.

>> ^Morganth:
Hitchens makes an excellent argument against this straw man Jesus he's set up. "Take no care for the morrow" would be almost completely against what the biblical Jesus taught. Why would Jesus have healed countless sick people if he knew they were going to die anyways? The idea that metaphysical or spiritual is more important than physical or that the material world is evil is Greek philosophy, not a Biblical one.
Christianity is a faith that believes Jesus came to redeem all creation (the physical AND the spiritual). Christians don't think they're going to be just spirits floating around, but rather that they'll receive new bodies. Hitchens is just shaking his fist at a faith he made up.


1) the idea of the physical being inferior to the point of being "evil" is an Eastern religious/philosophical one, not Hellenic. Greek philosophy, if one takes Plato as representative of the entirety of that school, only held that perfection was not possible in the physical, but that is not a moral judgment. Ancient Hellenic religious traditions held that the gods were full of the same imperfections as humanity.

2) you would be hard-pressed to find a Christian dogma that holds that the dead are given new PHYSICAL bodies in the afterlife. if one takes their doctrine directly from the bible, hell is described as being a place away from the sight of god and without his grace, which is supposed to be eternal torment. being given a physical body in heaven would actually run contrary to christian teaching since it would allow for physical pleasures - which are generally deemed as base and even sinful on earth - in the afterlife.

which leads me to
3) presenting the miracles jesus is said to have performed in the healing of the sick as evidence for his divinity or the historicity of his person does not help your case a whit as that is one of the major points AGAINST his alleged divinity. it is a well-known problem in christian theology that while jesus taught that the earthly was base and that the afterlife he would create for all mankind was idyllic beyond description, he went to endless trouble to heal the sick and even went so far as resurrecting the dead. attempts to resolve this have only caused further arguments over the fate of lazarus after his resurrection and whether life of the soul after death would be granted, retroactively, to those who had lived before the time of jesus.

all of which is merely to say: sit down. your interpretation of christian doctrine of the afterlife is, at least, equally as made up. Hitchens merely has the edge on you of having his being scripturally correct.

*british

Adding video to channels (British) - requested by Zifnab.

He's referring to The Bible Unearthed: Archaeology's New Vision of Ancient Israel and the Origin of Its Sacred Texts by Finkelstein and Silberman as well as Masada by Yigael Yadin.

References can be found in Hitchens' God Is Not Great, chapter 7: Revelation: The Nightmare of the "Old" Testament.

>> ^therealblankman:
I'm interested if a fellow Sifter could find and cite the study regarding the Israeli archaeologists and the Exodus mythe that Hitchens is talking about.

Hitchens makes an excellent argument against this straw man Jesus he's set up.

As youmakekittymad pointed out, Hitchens cannot be blamed for the bible's inconsistencies, the basis for the so-called strawman is an alleged quote from Jesus himself..

That being said, Hitchens has his bit to share about many aspects of Jesus and Christianity, the one he uses more often is the idea of vicarious redemption. The Scapegoatish idea that Jesus "died for our sins" is not just foolish and naive, but wholly immoral and certainly irresponsible.
http://www.videosift.com/video/The-Tyranny-of-a-Callous-God-Christopher-Hitchens

EDIT: I linked to the wrong video, although the above one is even better.
http://www.videosift.com/video/Christopher-Hitchens-Christianity-Is-Totalitarian

[spam redacted]

>> ^youmakekittymad
1) the idea of the physical being inferior to the point of being "evil" is an Eastern religious/philosophical one, not Hellenic. Greek philosophy, if one takes Plato as representative of the entirety of that school, only held that perfection was not possible in the physical, but that is not a moral judgment. Ancient Hellenic religious traditions held that the gods were full of the same imperfections as humanity.
2) you would be hard-pressed to find a Christian dogma that holds that the dead are given new PHYSICAL bodies in the afterlife. if one takes their doctrine directly from the bible, hell is described as being a place away from the sight of god and without his grace, which is supposed to be eternal torment. being given a physical body in heaven would actually run contrary to christian teaching since it would allow for physical pleasures - which are generally deemed as base and even sinful on earth - in the afterlife.
which leads me to
3) presenting the miracles jesus is said to have performed in the healing of the sick as evidence for his divinity or the historicity of his person does not help your case a whit as that is one of the major points AGAINST his alleged divinity. it is a well-known problem in christian theology that while jesus taught that the earthly was base and that the afterlife he would create for all mankind was idyllic beyond description, he went to endless trouble to heal the sick and even went so far as resurrecting the dead. attempts to resolve this have only caused further arguments over the fate of lazarus after his resurrection and whether life of the soul after death would be granted, retroactively, to those who had lived before the time of jesus.
all of which is merely to say: sit down. your interpretation of christian doctrine of the afterlife is, at least, equally as made up. Hitchens merely has the edge on you of having his being scripturally correct.


1)I stand corrected. However, even Platonism is dualistic in nature - saying that there is a separation of the ideal/spiritual and the physical/material. My point is simply that this is not a Biblical idea.

2)Ummm, no. Catholics and most Protestants would agree that they ARE given physical bodies. Otherwise, Christians wouldn't call it Resurrection. Christian teaching never says that physical pleasures are evil. Rather, Christian teaching says that sin is a perversion or twisting of what God designed to be good. Contrary to popular mythology, even the Puritans respected a healthy sexuality. If any of them were having marital problems their first question was always "Are you having enough sex?" Christianity would say it becomes sinful when taken outside of marriage because that takes it out of God's intended design, but otherwise go have fun with it. Jesus' first miracle was turning water into wine at a wedding. He was often criticized by the Pharisees and religious community because he would go to parties, feasts, and the kinds of people he associated with.

3)Jesus never taught that the earthly was base. Again, earth was very important. Why else would God have created the earth and humanity and then declared it good in Genesis? Why else would Jesus come as a man? One of the fundamental doctrines in Christianity is that Jesus was fully God and fully man. This means that there is NO problem with the sicked being healed, but instead reinforces the idea that the physical IS important.

I really don't know where you're getting these ideas of what Christians believe, but they're very far off. As for Hitchens being scripturally correct, I just watched the video again and he doesn't quote it even once. Instead, he makes generalizations about things the Bible never says. He also misquotes C.S. Lewis.

Jesus lives in New Mexico, and sells hubcaps from cars.

Christians are supposed to make themselves available to the whims of God... you need to have no real plans except to obey.. so yea, dont plan for the morrow. Live in the present. It fits.


Kinda fits with smoking weed too.. living in the moment...satisfied.. friendly... plus God created it since it is naturally occurring! doh

"Take no care for the morrow" would be almost completely against what the biblical Jesus taught.

What are you talking about? Here's Jesus in Luke 12:

22 And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I say unto you, Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.
23 The life is more than meat, and the body is more than raiment.
24 Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap; which neither have storehouse nor barn; and God feedeth them: how much more are ye better than the fowls?
25 And which of you with taking thought can add to his stature one cubit?
26 If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least, why take ye thought for the rest?
27 Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his glory was not arrayed like one of these.

^ Try it with a little context and read the two sections before this.

Context? Pfft! Videosift people don't use no stinkin' context! You just pick out whatever you want, make it mean whatever you want, and then agree with every video that has an anti-Christian sentiment.

^ So? How exactly is that a bad thing? Christians are fundamentally wrong at life.

*length=7:26

The duration of this video has been updated from unknown to 7:26 - length declared by radx.