Comments on: Hitchens Updates the Ten Commandments

By: Sam Urfer

Sam Urfer — Thu, 15 Apr 2010 05:13:30 +0000

“Dilige et quod vis fac.”

By: Carl Peter Klapper

Carl Peter Klapper — Wed, 31 Mar 2010 16:16:12 +0000

I have a number of disagreements with Mr. Hitchens presentation:

1. It is a false dichotomy to say that either:
a. God created Man with a precise description of God and a godly life handed down to Man; or
b. Man created a god or gods out of whole cloth.
Instead, it is more reasonable to assert that all of us, including the many writers of the many books of the Bible, try to understand Reality and that many writings have stood the test of time of giving insight into that Reality.

2. Contrary to Mr. Hitchens assumptions, that insight is not uniformly gained irrespective of the passage and the reader. Mr. Hitchens, in his praise for the commandment to not bear false witness, attests to the continued worth of “The Ten Commandments” even as he offers up his own.

3. Mr. Hitchens dismisses the first commandment too readily. The statement with which it begins sets the stage for the injunction to not contradict it. In the most general terms, it is saying to be true to your understanding. It also establishes the authority for the commandments which follow.

4. Mr. Hitchens imposes his own metaphysics, based on ethics, onto a body of work which is fundamentally anti-ethical. God creates and then declares it good, not the other way around. The sin in the Garden is learning ethics. People are godly because they walk with God, not because they strictly adhere to a code of ethics. The point of “The Ten Commandments” is thus not to create “ethicatons” (if I may coin a word) but to show people a way to holiness.

5. Mr. Hitchens ignores the insights of Jesus of Nazareth, whom I call the Christ, as to “The Ten Commandments”, in particular the equating of the first commandment with loving your neighbor. If the Truth is that our Reality is Love, we should not let anything else be more important than Love, so we should always love our neighbor, our fellow human beings. If we do that, then all the rest would follow, even all of Mr. Hitchens’ modern additions excepting the hateful parts.

6. “The Ten Commandments” do not direct or suggest punishments or even disrespect for those who disobey. Mr. Hitchens seems unable to resist doing so, thus making his commandments far inferior to the original even with its admittedly ancient assumptions of ass ownership.

By: Valerie Elverton Dixon

Valerie Elverton Dixon — Fri, 26 Mar 2010 15:56:37 +0000

I like Christopher Hitchens’ ten commandments. However, his ten added to the ten I already try to honor is a bit much to remember. God is Love. So the one commandment that contains them all is: Love Love with all one’s heart and soul and strength and love your neighbor, every other Other, as we love ourselves because our neighbor is us.

Peace,
Valerie Elverton Dixon

By: woollenmillie

woollenmillie — Wed, 24 Mar 2010 21:10:55 +0000

Thank GOD* for Christopher Hitchens!

*just not the Abrahamic one!

By: Marco

Marco — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 23:21:01 +0000

I read Hitchen’s piece in Vanity fair, and I thought it was just common sense. And it was funny: to wit, a drawing of Hitchen’s engraving a NEW commandment for our day; “Thou shalt turn off thy fucking cell phone” ! And Hitchen’s remark about one of the commandments dealing with coveting thy neighbor’s wife, thy neighbors’s ass, etc…: what happens if you want to covet thy neighbor’s wife’s ass!? I suppose the latter is a given if you want to covet her. And what is wrong about coveting your neighbor’s wife? Perhaps she is unhappy in the marriage, maybe you would be a better boy-friend… These 10 Commandments are just another expression of the filthy patriarchy and authoratarianism that has infected human civilisation since the beginning.

Marco

By: robyn burrows

robyn burrows — Mon, 22 Mar 2010 08:24:50 +0000

Thank Christopher Hitchens for your cogent rethinking of “the ten commandments” for the 21st century.
i am of your persuasion, that there is no god, and if we humans would put even half of the energy that we expend on “God”, not to mention the billions of dollars donated, and instead, put our energies and love into each other, it would be a much healthier and happier world.

By: January

January — Sat, 20 Mar 2010 21:35:47 +0000

Hitchens is not just “any” atheist. He is a commercial atheist who makes a living finding ways to keep his persona before the public. We all know what he already thinks. How many different ways can one say, “Religion is bad for your health”?

I confess I did not listen to his piece. In addition to having no regard for his authenticity, I will not listen to a video that if it were text I could scan quickly. (Yes, I hardly ever select a video. The internet is for literate folks) Doesn’t this site have an editor? The editor’s job is not to let precious space get cluttered with handouts from those exploiting our ignorance.

By: JustJack

JustJack — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 23:37:39 +0000

I suppose if Hitchens had taken a Talmud class or too, he might have a different take on the details of course but I thought the whole thing was a riot. His version doesn’t come until near about minute 6 or so but at least 7 or 8 of the “updates” seem perfectly reasonable to me.

And I’m NOT a Hitchens fan by any stretch.

By: Be Scofield

Be Scofield — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 20:53:40 +0000

If what you say is true then of course atheists shouldn’t listen to any comments from the spirituality inclined or religious. I hope both sides listen.

By: Rev. Harry Green

Rev. Harry Green — Fri, 19 Mar 2010 17:35:45 +0000

y thinking rfeligious person care what Christopher Hitchens thinks about anything from the religious sphere?