The Interview may be found here: http://www.cbc.ca/thehour/videos.html?id=1121355844
1. Hitchen's comments on quitting smoking are interesting but not surprising ("My children kept saying they couldn't stand it"... "I was getting less and less pleasure out of it and more and more fear" ...It's the perfect self-administered micro-drug ... it's the little glowing friend that never lets you down... All the while it's being your best friend, it's being your worst enemy."'
...does not his description of the addiction match that description of sin in the Bible?
2. Hitchens makes the point on water boarding that U.S. soldiers vow to uphold the constitution which forbids cruel and unusual "punishment", but fails to address distinctions as to whether the practice was being used for reasons of "punishment" or otherwise.
3. Hitchens admits he was wrong before as he has begun to see evil exists (and random acts are done with no justifiable cause). Three response:
a. It's good to see Hitchens not only come to see this but also to admit his error.
b. If Hitchens erred on this issue before, might he also be in error on other related matters? (Bigger question, will he follow where this truth leads? ... or will his presuppositions keep him from the truth?)
c. On what grounds can Hitchens suggest evil exists from his worldview?
4. Hitchen's fear is obvious when he speaks of Iran as a potential "theological party with apocalyptic weaponry". It's good that the world (whether by no choice or otherwise) is good. Suppose that while the world makes fun of believers for apoclyptic beliefs are considering at all that perhaps Christians have been right all along (whether this be a part of it or not)?
5. Hitchens throws the word "believer" around without defining it when he states one must be a "believer" to throw acid in the face of a woman. (Note: he's certainly not referring to the Bible's definition.) Hitchens does the same thing when he states "for a good person to do bad, make them religious."
6. Hitchen falsely states without context or sound biblical exegesis that "genocide, slavery and racism" are all mandated in the Bible. It's sad when one condemns the Bible when the fault lies in their own unscholarly exegesis.
7. In referring to circumcision, Hitchens:
a. Fails to distinguish between such things as "old covenant vs. new covenant" contexts, revelation, principles, commands, etc.; symbology (sign/seal) versus works righteousness, etc.
b. Fails to provide justification from his worldview which provides grounds or justifies this (or any other practice) as being wrong.
Type rest of the post here