tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post2607807241536847904..comments2023-10-18T00:59:40.216-07:00Comments on Christian Skepticism - a reasonable faith...: Hitchens DustedoddXianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15427095709766850092noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-38434833.post-59200943452839453682007-07-20T12:05:00.000-07:002007-07-20T12:05:00.000-07:00This is rich. The reviewer seems obviously so keen...This is rich. The reviewer seems obviously so keenly aware of Hitchens' manner and attitude of communication, yet still refuses to actually properly acknowledge and attempt to counter the sound arguments that are presented.<BR/><BR/>Nice job of paraphrasing what amounts to creating <I>one</I> sentence type straw men to then <I>easily</I> disenbowel. <BR/><BR/>Case in point:<BR/><BR/><I>Hitchens then says that miracles don’t validate religious claims, citing Exodus 7–8 (p. 142). But there are two problems with that objection:<BR/><BR/>i) It is not a sufficient validation of religious claims, but it may still be probative by affording corroborative evidence.<BR/>ii) It would still invalidate secularism.</I><BR/><BR/>Does the author seriously consider this a credible response? <BR/><BR/>Another gem:<BR/><BR/><I>If He Doesn’t Like It, He Doesn’t Believe It</I><BR/><BR/>Shouldn't about any believer honestly have to answer this?<BR/><BR/>A lot of points made against this book could be summed up with this last part which is really quite a more fitting argument against this review instead. <BR/><BR/><I>And that’s the problem with his book as a whole. Ignorance of Christian theology. Ignorance of Christian apologetics. Even ignorance of secular philosophy. His entire case against the Christian faith illustrates the textbook fallacy of the argument ad ignorantiam.</I><BR/><BR/>Basing one's argument on ignorance with ignorance looks very sad indeed.<BR/><BR/>A critic of a literary critic should be better at reading the text. <BR/><BR/>None of This is surprising though. <BR/><BR/>Most of christian belief strongly adheres to a bible which was already written thoroughly 'dusted' in part since the NT reveals it is unwilling and/or unable to understand and support the major issues offered from the OT. <BR/><BR/>There really needs to be an actually justification here past the mere say-so.sharon45https://www.blogger.com/profile/02368321904975789611noreply@blogger.com