You’re free to label my observations of an atheist’s reality as uneducated, but I’m not sure how you arrived at that since by your own admission you’re uneducated yourself.

People have been convincingly refuting Hitchens for decades. Someone like Alex O’connor would have been a better suggestion imo, but I guess Hitchens is quasi famous, so people think of him first I suppose.

Since we are giving suggestions check out “I don’t have enough faith to be an atheist” or “stealing from god” by Frank Turek

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

Where did I say I'm uneducated? I've been thinking and reading about this matter for decades.

Of course, if you're unconvinced by Hitchens's arguments (or unwilling to hear them), then this discussion is pointless.

You pointed to someone else instead of addressing my points, and also labeled my argument as uneducated. What else is someone to conclude?

I’ve listened to enough of Hitchen’s to know his arguments are not particularly persuasive, which is why I pointed out Alex O’connor as a better suggestion.

If you have been reading about this matter for decades and your first thought is go point to Hitchens then yes this discussion is pointless, and so is life ultimately and objectively if there is no God.

I simply deferred to a much better debater, someone who has addressed all of your points directly. How you think that makes me uneducated is a mystery.

And the point of life is for it to go on. That's evolution, my guy! We are here because we survived. It's not that complicated. What's "silly" is thinking you need a god to explain what science has already gotten right.