He spends most of his time arguing how we all got to these state of affairs and then demonstrating the logical conclusions of the new atheists and their argument that raising children to be religious is 'child abuse. In any case, this is a rambling review, but I think Hitchens' book looses some serious steam, especially when he starts talking about the Soviet Union. Godard, Ted 21 August 2010. It is more memoir than instruction and really applies only to Christopher Hitchens. He currently writes for the Mail on Sunday, where he.
If he cannot be driven out of hearts, total control by the state is impossible. The Rage Against God received a mostly favourable reception in the media. The question provides a frame of reference for our own consideration of life, both personal and political. Ultimately, the Rage Against God ends up as a polemic against modern secularism rather than a meditation on atheism and faith. Rather than describing an encounter with Jesus Christ, Hitchens instead defends the King James Bible and the Common Book of Prayer from what he views as inferior innovations of the Anglican Church.
I am as mad at his god as i am mad at at Thor for the thunder, sigh. I caught strong hints of he and I being basically in the same camp. Can that faith save him? The last portion of the book is a bit less personal in nature and more an answer to some of the top anti-theist claims, including the claim that molestation by a religious figure is less damaging to a child than being exposed to the religion itself. Christopher is the author of best seller God is not Great. In the process, he provides hope for all believers who, in the words of T.
The final third of the book is a rant against the Godlessness of Soviet Communism. In the book Hitchens details various attempts by the Bolshevik regime to expunge religion from Soviet society. His acceptance of Christianity appears to have been something about art, architecture and the fear of damnation. I peered at the naked figures fleeing the pit of hell. Peter Hitchens often has the same melancholy style of looking at the world's troubles, but he sees what those are with intense clarity and insight. This book isn't bad, but I think most of what he says has been treated elsewhere more coherently.
If God is not dethroned and his laws revoked, he represents and important rival to the despot's authority, living in millions of hearts. With first-hand insight into the blurring of the line between politics and the Church, Hitchens reveals the reasons why an honest assessment of Atheism cannot sustain disbelief in God. Read it if you're interested in learning more about how the ideology of atheism leads to hypocrisy and ultimately a violent and controlling government. It's 50% a lackluster spiritual biography of how Peter Hitchens became Christian, and 50% a combination of very brief arguments against atheism and a lot of talk about the Soviet Union. ამის მაგალითად მოყავს სტალინი, მაო ძედუნი და ჩრდ კორეის ლიდერი სახელი არ მახსოვს :D როგორც ბევრი მორწმუნე ისიც კომუნიზმის და საბჭოთა კავშირის მთავარ პრობლემას უღმერთობაში ხედავს, უღმერთობის შედეგი წარმოუდგენია ტოტალიტარიზმი და ყველა დანარჩენი პრობლემა. What I didn't read were well laid out calls for the believers to question their motives for any level of violence.
I wasn't really aware who he or indeed who his famous brother was. But the latter part talks much more about Communist Russia really than argues against atheism. The cultural shift in American society brings with it a growing hostility toward religion, particularly Christianity. Christopher Hitchens is a well known atheist, kind of a right hand man to the venomous Richard Dawkins. Again, I expected more from Christopher Hitchens' brother. But I'm not as convinced about the axes Hitchens has to grind.
In a sentence, it is Christopher Hitchens style with the content of a C. კარგი იქნებოდა პიტერმა დოვკინსის კრიტიკისთვის ამოკითხული პასაჟების გვერდით, ევოლუციური ბიოლოგიიდანაც წაიკითხოს რამე. Fear of eternal judgement for these acts, combined with new parenthood, seems to be what brought him back to the church. The new atheists have to answer: 1. But the church he came back to was not the one he left. The fact that Hitchens is brother to the late, great atheist writer, Christopher Hitchens makes this book worth the read. I was hoping for more of an apologetic as to why he found Dawkins and company views on the non existence of God unsustainable, but that is obviously for another book.
With unflinching openness and intellectual honesty, Hitchens describes the personal loss and philosophical curiosity that led him to burn his Bible at prep school and embrace atheism in its place. Hitchens writes beautifully, and while his theistic arguments are excellent, I found the content of his reflections on England and Russia to be the real beauty of this work. I ended up reading it myself as my life appears to be undergoing some crises. This is an unusual apologetic, at once personal, autobiographical, aesthetic and political. It's really all about him, and it's dull.