I'm watching with some dismay as Christopher Hitchens publicly challenges pastors to debate and, when they agree, makes short work of them. What do you expect? Hitchens is a seasoned debator in the public area. Pastors are used to speaking in churches where everyone already shares their assumptions. What pastors talk about on Sunday, which is how the Bible applies to everyday life, is completely irrelevant when they encounter an opponent like Hitchens who rejects the authority of Scripture to adjudicate these questions. Besides, Hitchens is tough and mean. Pastors are inhbited because of their position. They can't respond in kind. So Hitchens can call them names but they can't call him names because they have to show Christian forbearance.
It's time for the devil's advocate to pick on someone his own size. I'd be happy to do a series of debates with him in the fall. We have debated twice before, once on socialism in Washington D.C. a long time ago and then again a few years ago on political correctness at Wabash College. Both of us have similar intellectual backgrounds and I am ready to meet Hitchens on his own ground of skepticism, where nothing is taken for granted. Besides, I don't have ecclesiastical inhibitions. I can suspend Christian charity for the duration of the debates. This would be one situation where Hitchens may need alcohol. So how about it Chrisopher?
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 2)
1. Short work is made of them because their position is utterly ridiculous.
Also--did you ever complain when someone like Kent Hovind has a debate and coordinates efforts to get all the fundies to attend, so that it will always seem like he "wins" the debate?
Knight_of_BAAWA at 9:12AM on May 30th 2007
2. Good luck Dinesh. I hope Hitchens has the spine to accept your challenge.
I thought Hovind won all those debates because his opponents' positions were all utterly ridiculous.
William Z. at 9:54AM on May 30th 2007
3. That debate would be great to watch! I like your work, and I enjoy Hitchens' good work as well.
I am Roman Catholic and so would naturally take your side D'Souza, but it is always a pleasure to see Hitchens in action.
The downside for Hitchens is that, given that I imagine the debate would be about his new book on God, because his position is so untenable, he will likely not be at his best.
The thing I do admire about Hitchens is that - unlike so many of the more trendy, but snotty liberal premodonnas - he seems more like the type who, after a rough and tumble discussion, could still be civil enough to enjoy gin and tonic or two! Of course I do not know the man and so I may be wrong, but that is my impression of him.
In any case, good luck, have fun, and 'cheers'!
Ken Berg at 10:35AM on May 30th 2007
4. I would like to see Hitchens (& Dawkins & Harris for that matter) expose Benny Hinn & all the others of that snake oil salesman ilk. He should challenge them directly & force them to defend their tax-exempt status, promises of eternal life, etc.
These people need to be exposed for the frauds & charlatans that they are & maybe even forced to return the millions they have collected from the credulous. They should be called to account for the "miracles" & "healings" they claim to have experienced or facilitated with God's assistance.
They are a national disgrace & should be indicted for fraud and uttering false promises.
While they are at it, maybe they could rip into Ken Ham's Creationist museum in Kentucky.
Ted
TedS at 11:17AM on May 30th 2007
5. What do you call this ad hominem attack then, a pre-debate?
You paint Hitchens as a challenging, seasoned, authority-rejecting, tough, mean, name-calling, skeptical, drunken devil's advocate of a man...
... was that an undercoat? Is it logical fallacies all the way down the line with you?
Those poor naive, ill-prepared, inhibited, forbearant pastors that the evil Hitchens picks on apparently don't know how to read Hitchens books or they imagine God has prepared them well enough.
But you know different, right Mr. D'Souza?
You say, "I don't have ecclesiastical inhibitions."
That's a laugh! In your posts here you never seem to have any 'fact', 'truth' or 'logic' inhibitions whatsoever.
You say, "I can suspend Christian charity for the duration of the debates."
But you are a sociopath, Mr. D'Souza, you have as much Christian charity to suspend as you have 'grace' with which to admit defeat.
You can't defeat the 'straw-man' you constructed two posts up without making it so obvious as to be laughable.
What's the plan against Hitchens... some obscure general knowledge question where you get to make up the answers as you go along.
What a fool you'd be to try to argue against anyone, anyone at all without your toolbox of logical fallacies... but I'm guessing Hitchens would see right through them, drunk or sober.
Good luck 'pal'... you're gonna need Hitchens to fall on his head or something stupid like that to give you a fighting chance.
D'Souza 1..... Straw-man 0 (again) LOL
pboyfloyd at 6:33PM on May 30th 2007
6. While you are suspending christian charity, you might try suspending christian irrationality. Also, if you have a break during your intense training to become yet more obnoxious, you might try to craft a coherent argument. As for the alcohol, it is the only hope that you will find yourself and Hitchens on the same intellectual playing field.
nerd_instinct at 9:20PM on May 30th 2007
7. I would love to see you debate Hitchens on religion. He'll make short work of you just as easily as he does of the pastors. Taking the side of religion is a severe handicap. It's hard for myth and fantasy to stand up against reality.
mparker at 11:17PM on May 30th 2007
8. Re: William Z,
"I thought Hovind won all those debates because his opponents' positions were all utterly ridiculous."
I hope youre being sarcastic! Hovind loses his debates constantly. Try looking up his radio appearance on InfidelGuy, when scientists called in and embarrased him with brute facts. Or better yet, look at Hovind's most recent challenge: in court on tax evasion charges. He was convicted and is currently in jail, serving his decade long sentence.
Re: Dinesh,
"pick on someone your own size"
A trained theologian knows, or SHOULD know, the standard pro and anti God arguments. A preacher is supposed to be a messenger of God, and a keeper of the flock. One of their main purposes is to defend and spread their faith. Back when I was a Christian, I attend church every Sunday and I remember many times when the pastor gave both justifications for faith and criticisms of unbelief. Who, if not a trained and seasoned servant of God, would be Hitchens' "own size"? You seem to think that you are more equipped to defend faith than a preacher who dedicates his/her life to the study and application of Gods word. Are you that presumptuous?
I mean this will all due respect D'souza, but a trained theologian who preaches from the pulpit every Sunday is likely a far more formidable opponent for Hitchens than you are. And if you had listened to Hitchens' recent debate with Al Sharpton (the audio is available from the New York Public Library website), you would know that not only did they both handle their sides of the debate with skill and knowledge, but they were both very respectful and amicable to each-other and clearly enjoyed the exchange.
I've watched or listened to most of Hitchens' recent TV and radio appearances, and the only time I saw him get testy face to face with his opponent was when he appeared on Hannity and Colmes, and even then only after Hannity attacked him.
Aaron Kinney at 1:37AM on May 31st 2007
9. DD,
You could start by explaining to Hitchens why there are two different creation myths in the bible. http://www.skepticfiles.org/atheist/bible3do.htm
lil_turk at 4:28AM on May 31st 2007
10. Mr D'Souza
I subscribe to what Hitchens said recently re Jerry Falwell, applied to your good self. If someone gave you an enema, your remains could be buried in a matchbox.
Peter Kemp at 5:42AM on May 31st 2007
11. WHY ISLAM MUST BE REFORMED
Quote of the Day: International Herald Tribune
May 31, 2007
Our goals are beyond Lebanon. We want the Levant to be governed by Islam again and then in the whole world. We want to bring people back to Islam, and we want to liberate our land occupied by Zionists." Abu Salim, a spokesman for Fatah al Islam, the group holed up in the Palestinian camp near the Lebanese city of Tripoli.
The reality is that 1.2 billion Moslems are not going to abandon Islam en mass. Islam cannot move forward with force and threats. Islam needs to be reformed and new ideas need to be incorporated for fresh thinking and survival. Reformation will be resisted by Islamic fundamentalists with violence and terrorism. For the future of our freedom, peace and life it must be undertaken. A reformed Islam will have more influence and acceptance around the world.
The Reform of Islam is a life and death issue for civilization.
The greatest danger mankind faces is the smuggling of a nuclear weapon by an Islamic Fundamentalist into a major western city killing millions in the name of and to the greater glory of ALLAH. If the hateful teachings are not removed from Islam this is the disaster that will destroy civilization as we know it. It will dramatically change human history forever. The stakes are that high.
What we want to achieve is a very limited goal of removing from Islam all teachings of violence and the subrogation of women. We are not challenging Islamic teachings such as praying 5 times a day, washing feet before praying, the non belief of Muslims in the doctrine of Trinity etc.
This is an issue of conscience. Islam as it is presently constituted is an issue of conscience and its Reform is definitely the concern of all peace loving, democratic believing peoples everywhere. Violence in Islam is a direct threat to all mankind. It is an issue of National Security not only for the West but also for Muslim countries.
Least we all forget - it is mostly Muslims who are suffering and being killed and blown up in horrific numbers. Since 911 - over 150,000 Muslims have been murdered by their fellow Muslims in the worst ways imaginable.
Murder, suicide bombings, violence, etc are evil. When these evil acts are committed in the name of and to the greater glory of ALLAH – this is the greatest evil that anyone can commit. To kill and murder so you can ascend to a Paradise of Big Breasted Nymphs to rape and molest for all eternity – this is truly evil incarnate.
WHY WE WANT THESE TEACHINGS OF VIOLENCE AND SUBROGATION OF WOMEN REMOVED FROM THE KORAN?
By leaving these violent and abhorrent teachings in the Koran, we are in effect saying that these teachings are NORMAL. We are basically acquiescing to evil. By demanding that Peace Loving Moslems prove that they are truly peace loving – by removing these teachings – will be a TRUE MOMENT OF CATHARSIS FOR ISLAM.
The Koran is accepted by all Muslims as the word of God – not subject to change- not even by one word. By forcing Muslims to confront these evil passages they will be forced to answer the following question:
Is Muhammad A False Prophet Or Is ALLAH A False Prophet?
Answer:
ALLAH AS THE CREATOR OF THE UNIVERSE - THE CREATOR OF ALL LIVING THINGS IS PERFECT.
AS A PERFECT GOD - ALL TEACHINGS OF ALLAH - MUST BE PERFECT
This means that all teachings recorded in the Koran and all other Islamic texts, revelations, writings, sayings, fatwas of murder, killing, death and destruction, violence, hate, suicide bombers, violent jihad, terrorism, torture, maiming, wife beating, inferiority of woman, subrogation of women, women as instruments of sexual pleasure in paradise, honor killings, stoning, cutting off limbs, child sex, bigotry, intolerance, slavery, inequality of infidels, inequality of any human being, that infidels can be murdered as a holy duty, that Muslims who renounce Islam can be killed, that Muslims (or anyone) who challenge the teachings of Islam can be murdered, etc are irrational AND NOT THE PERFECT TEACHINGS OF ALLAH. They are THE TEACHINGS OF MAN.
If Muhammad taught his followers that the above teachings were the WORDS of ALLAH then he is a false prophet since as a PERFECT GOD - ALLAH never would have given such revelations to Muhammad. If however, ALLAH issued any of these teachings to Muhammad then he is no longer PERFECT and therefore no longer GOD. Indeed the false PROPHET would be ALLAH. An evil false PROPHET.
Once these teachings are removed - Islam will be a TRUE Religion of Peace. Issues such as environmentalism, modern family life, poverty in the third world – modern issues that did not exist 1400 years ago – should be added to this New Modern Koran. By reforming Islam - a truly great New Koran can be created that all Muslims can take pride in. The printing of a new Koran will be a truly historic day for mankind. And it will be a worldwide best seller.
By,
Larry Houle
www.godofreason.com
Larry Houle at 8:06AM on May 31st 2007
12. Let the great debate begin!! Both Hitchens and D'Souza are quite humorous and it would be really fun to watch.
To the folks on this blog who are so riled up over Christianity, soak up a few rays on these nice summer days and relax. We Christians aren't plotting to turn this country into a nunnery and we aren't hiding behind the bushes ready to leap on you and lop off your head. And, last time I looked, we didn't have horns growing out of our heads either. I really don't understand what all the fuss is about.
Dianne at 1:01PM on May 31st 2007
13. A new book serves as a rebuttal to Richard Dawkin’s, The God Delusion, and also refutes the premise of moral relativism. The title is Adults Only (Bernard Hanan and Co. Publishers, New York). This book offers scientific proof to the fact that the human being has a distinct soul and thus has a special moral imperative and questions whether morality is possible without religion. It also proves that there is an absolute ethical standard. The book, brilliantly and creatively written, is comprehensive and is exceedingly logical. It covers everything from scientifically disproving atheism to delving into themes of moral philosophy and relationships. The author, IC Fingerer, is president of the Thnink and Care Tank, www.thinkandcaretank.org, a rabbi and bioethicist. The book can be ordered from Barnes and Noble or directly from www.thebookforadults.com.
mat at 2:34PM on May 31st 2007
14. @ Diane (comment 12)
You say, " We Christians aren't plotting to turn this country into a nunnery..."
This is called doublethink, Diane. You know it is not the majority of Christians(or any religion) that we are suffering from. But you must know that Christians hi-jacked the last two elections and it because of well meaning Christians who can't see anything wrong with voting in a fundamentalist Christian as president that the soldiers are standing in Iraq today.
These same Christians that you read on this blog supporting 'Victory in Iraq' have no realistic definition of that victory because the war is a war on 'terror'.
D'Souza himself admits that the war is against every radical Muslim... this is the 'greater conflict' that he says Bush sees. There will never be a time when reasonable people can say that there are no more radical Muslims, ever.
So, you can pat yourself on the back and say, "... last time I looked, we didn't have horns growing out of our heads either. I really don't understand what all the fuss is about."
Well the fuss is about soldiers dying needlessly in Iraq with no end in sight, ever.
Geez, Diane, why is it that you think you used to pray to the 'Prince of Peace' for (what else) peace... but now most Christian bloggers and commenters seem to be praying to continue this endless war on terror?
pboyfloyd at 2:44PM on May 31st 2007
15. @ mat (comment 13)
Where is God, mat? I guess all us atheists can just head for the nearest Church because you found a book in which the writer claims to have scientific proof of 'the soul'.
But this is no vague thing that the writer found, it is specifically a 'moral imperative'. Could it be that we have found a way to determine who is a sociopath?
I want Dinesh D'Souza and GWBush tested right away then. No, I think it would only be fair to test everyone. When do we start?
pboyfloyd at 3:35PM on May 31st 2007