I have to say that I completely agree with Christopher Hitchens, the idea of a God that monitors us and demands a standard by moral performance and is in essence complete theocracy underlining the high government. His conclusion was that because of the rational evidence presented to him, and the lack of evidence to bring forth the case for the existence of a God, it is more of a relief than anything else to take a stance on Antitheism. I dont want to add onto his argument, its complete as it is. On my own derivative of his opinion— I will say its kind of hilarious that Christianity claims to be the only religion that doesnt have God assessing us on a moral basis... but when the moment that you walk into a church its all about agenda. If youre an unbeliever, the church will accept you for about three weeks supporting you until you realize that theres no way they can make you repent and start to ignore and give up on you. Thats how it is in almost every church and denominations, I dont mean to pick on the Pentecostals but theyre super guilty of it. You cant jump on the acceptance bandwagon unless you get rid of the agenda. Im just backing up Christophers point. Christianity seems to think that its exempt from this code of moral performance— no. Christianity is EXACTLY what Hitchens was referring to.
Posted on: Mon, 28 Oct 2013 09:33:06 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015