Has anybody on 4chan read this book? What do you think of it?
Just finished. Is it good?
I remember that interview he did with Hitchens where he got raped
>>7398647
I've never listened to it, but the summary on RationalWiki (a mostly atheist website) makes it sound like Hitchens loses.
>“What if God did come to this earth in the flesh of Jesus Christ, and he took the punishment from you which you deserve, what if this is true would that be the greatest kindness gift to your life and the world?” Hitchens says no, he does not want anyone dying for him and would seek to have him prevented for sacrificing himself. Todd says “if that did happen, wouldn't it be an act of kindness?” Hitchens answers no, it takes away his free will and gives him no choice but to bad, the son already died and now he [Hitchens] is committed. Todd begins to plea with Hitchens to admit that it would be an act of kindness, but Hitchens does not give in and his answer remains the same. Hitchens notes that he already addresses this in his book, and Todd is not asking something new. Hitchens does not think it is an act of kindness, it is a tyrannical act. Todd asks “you think it is tyrannical that someone sacrificed themselves for you?' Hitchens replies “according to you, he didn't. He was alive again shortly after.” Todd says he did die and we celebrate it called Easter, which has been going on for thousands of years – Hitchens adds in “to no effect.” He was supposed to come back during the time of his listeners, that was a direct promise, and he did not keep it.
He sounds like a child trying to disagree with everything his mom says. Here's how it ends.
>Todd asks Hitchens if the reason he wars against god is so he can live his life autonomously and live his life anyway he wished without being accountable to his creator? Hitchens answers it may be highly probable. And with that, Todd ends the interview.
I'm a catholic, I hate tod friel, he can suck my dick.
>>7398647
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3L15e2sNZsU
This is better.
>>7398672
Listen to it and you'll hear him flail about like a retard and be made to look a fool. You can hear him get angrier. If anyone got the impression hitchens 'lost' they just weren't listening
BWAH GAWD! THAT'S-THAT'S GOTTA BE KANE! THAT'S GOTTA BE KANE!!
>>7398672
>he lost because he disagreed and gave valid points
>le mom meme, just for good measure
Sup Tod
>>7398672
>you can't disagree with a Christian because children sometimes throw tantrums
Christian wisdom at work, everybody.
ITT: Fedora getting BTFO and then samefagging
>>7399137
Too many pronouns. I have no idea what you're trying to say.
>>7399137
Tell me why they aren't valid
>>7399139
>I can't read and I'm proud
>>7399148
>I don't want anyone dying for me
Completely irrelevant to the question
>It takes away my free will
It doesn't, Hitchens can still act however he wants.
>He was live again shortly after
Schoolyard snark.
>Easter has been going on "to no effect"
Again, that's irrelevant.
The whole thing reads like an argument rather than a debate. I don't agree with Friel, but all Hitch does is contradict him and crack jokes.
>>7398712
This is borderline heresy in many aspects.
For example he denies that the fullness of truth is already in the teaching of the church, argues for some kind of a super religion and other very new age like elements.
Also a purely naturalistic evolution is contradictory to Catholic teaching as it implies an either deist or nonexistent God.
>>7399161
Using too many pronouns without antecedents makes your meaning unclear because nobody knows what you're referring to.
>I can't write and I'm proud
>The whole thing reads like an argument rather than a debate. I don't agree with Friel, but all Hitch does is contradict him and crack jokes.
When someone makes highly specific claim that they can only back up by insisting that you must deep-down want it to be true, there's not much else one can say.
>>7399166
Wow, so Catholicism really is as anti-human as I thought it was.
God damn it, religious debates are so fucking dumb.
>>7399161
It seems you don't understand the meanings of 'irrelevant' or 'valid'
>>7399178
I'm not even that guy but I hate seeing posts where someone just says 'nuh-uh'
Try to expand
>>7399178
Seems you... Eh fuck it. I can't believe you guys side with either one of these tools.
>>7399180
If you hate 'nuh-uh' posts you might want to check his post first
>>7399182
>but his post is just as shit as mine!
>>7399177
That's because they're usually somebody objecting to the specifics of s religion. If you just sat down a normal atheist and had someone try to convince him that there's a divine being, that debate would be much more clear, but also boring and one-sided because the sentimentality of belief in a God would be on display so clearly for any reasonable viewer.
>>7399181
Irrelevant xD
Am I critiquing right?
>>7399184
uh...wut?
>>7399183
You can hate whatever you want to. I don't think either post is shit due to 'nuh-uh'
his post is shut because it's a shit critique. You're the one whose blood apparently boils at 'nuh-uh' if that's so there's a post which should be doing it for you more than mine.
If you were just lying for effect and to one-up as I suspect then you wouldn't
>>7399191
God's not real, so arguing about how the sacrifice of Jesus makes Christopher Hitchens feel is not important at all.
