Collision: Quotes (Second)

Hitchens:
“Truth is not relative, but we cannot find it.
Truth is not relative, but honesty and kindness are best.”
(Isn’t that a truth statement? How do you know what “honesty” and “kindness” are? How do you conclude they are “best”? What is “best”?)

On statements he receives about his writing, “If I travel several blocks and do not hear complements, I start to get very sulky.” Haha!

On Protestants: “They came to do good, and ended up doing well.” Hahaha

On who will read the book: “These are the sort of people who buy the ‘Left Behind’ series, aren’t they? So that means they can’t be reading for pleasure. OR instruction.” (hahahahahahahaha)

On seeing someone who says they have just risen from the dead, “I would look at him quite narrowly…”
Wilson’s reply, “…if you had been with the guy for three years and he told you this would happen…I hope that you would look at him more than just squinty-eyed.” (haha!)

I loved the ending conversation they have in the car. Wilson appears to be dead-dog tired, while Hitchens seems to be gaining his second wind. Wilson tries to stay engaged (and awake) while Hitchens explains to him that if only one religious person were left on the earth, he wouldn’t try to convince them to leave behind their erroneous ways. He would let them stay religious. Very curious. I would have liked to see the incredulous look on Dawkins’s face! What joy would he find in keeping one religious person operational? Would this be done out of kindness? pity? to show-off his power?

Hitchens never knew that the "Good Samaritan" parable was culturally shocking.
Woe to those who teach fluffy Sunday school lessons thinking that little boys and girls (and/or adults) cannot comprehend!

I LOVED the footage of when they would discuss things after a debate. Wilson did such a better job of explaining and speaking during these one-on-one chats. I was thrilled to see that BOTH gentlemen listened intently to one another. So interesting to observe that when debating/discussing neither one would look at each other in the eyes. They don’t have time to take in the other one’s facial expressions! They are sifting through the other one's words while they are sifting through their own. Each man was processing and thinking. Neither of them took this lightly.

I think it can be noted that Hitchens finds this more of an amusement and Wilson finds this to be a deep responsibility to souls; perhaps he found his greatest burden of responsibility to the soul of Christopher Hitchens.
(What other well-studied Christian can say that the Lord allowed him to spend three whole days with Christopher Hitchens?! What other well-studied Christian could DO what Wilson did in the manner of a “regular guy” as Wilson did it? Out of all the teachers my church’s culture listens to – could one of them could stand as Wilson did? I think that’s slightly disenchanting.)

Wilson:
I love how he made fun of (within reason) Puritans, Protestants, the United States, himself and Christopher.

I appreciated how he went into pubs and taverns to formally debate and even went to the pubs and taverns to discuss topics after their formal debate. (I’m just glad he wasn’t “prissy”. He was relating to the man on his own terms WITHOUT stepping away from the truth. This is the BEST example the Church has seen and all must watch Collision for that very reason.)

WHAT does Wilson believe about end times??

I was surprised to hear some foul language come from his lips, but I think it was appropriate in making a point. (It actually helped to gain their attention and to show them that, according to the Atheist premise; it does NOT matter if the Amalekites died. They ARE taking on Christian standards when they protest the killing of the Amalekites.) I do find it humorous that the editors chose to highlight it with such great efforts.

Wilson did lose the Amalekite battle every time, however. The problem is that he will lose it every time. I am not sure there is a way for a Christian to win it in a setting such as this because you must take too much time to explain the background theology of God’s holiness, His patience, His justice, our obedience, etc. I will give it to Wilson that he may have gained a point in this argument (particularly at Martin’s Tavern) when he used the “No God; _______ happens” line. He proved right there that there is NO standard for right or wrong in the atheist premise and so it does NOT matter that the Amalekites died.

A ridiculous statement that came from Wilson (I cringed when he said it)came in the “bonus features.” Wilson was stating why atheists should watch the movie.
(I paraphrase)
“There is Christian argument yet to be engaged by the ‘sophomoric’ arguments of the atheists.”
I would agree to a point. Some arguments are sophomoric, but the REASON they haven’t engaged it is because Christian laymen are at the junior high level of argumentation! (I speak for myself.)
They have not read good literature, and they do not know good logic.
But to say that atheist arguments are at the sophomoric level when I just watched a movie in which Wilson himself didn't win every argument?
To say that atheist arguments are at the sophomoric level when (many) of his constituents are far behind?
I didn’t think that was an appropriate statement. Maybe he said it to be purposely offensive, thereby trying to influence many to watch out of rage.

Watching this video has given me a bit of motivation to study how to structure arguments and how to debate properly. I must read more, study more, speak more, and PRAY more.

(What can wash away our sins? Nothing but the blood of Jesus through the regeneration of the Holy Spirit by the predestination of God.)
Not by the power of our words, but by the will of God; therefore, we must PRAY.