Pat Archbold joins the long list of people who couldn’t so much as touch Christopher Hitchens in life and are now claiming victory in the debate of god’s existence now that Hitch is dead.
Christopher Hitchens now knows the truth of it.
Read the link. At no point does Pat defend that position, but he’ll sure claim his inert opponent has conceded. Plenty of atheists out there who Pat can save from the fires of hell in this lifetime to whom Pat could have made his case (I volunteer myself), but no, Pat wants to go one round against an empty corner and call himself champ. It doesn’t take a lot of balls to swing at someone who can’t hit back.
I have no reason to think that Hitchens had a sudden religious awakening at the end, but I can hope. I can hope that at the end there was a small crack in the veneer large enough to let in the light. But I can never know, not in this life.
First, Hitchens was willing to change his mind. He did so politically frequently. Don’t act like there were so many good reasons for him to change his mind about god and he was just being close-minded. Some believers tried to convince him while he was alive and they got their asses handed to them on a plate.
Second, you can damn sure know in this life that Hitchens died with nothing but contempt for your religion the same way you can know that evolution is true, that there was no global flood, and that god doesn’t exist: it’s where all the evidence lies. In the real world, that’s what it means to know something.
But there are things I do know. God loved Christopher Hitchens. Always has. He created him out of love. He died for him out of love.
Pat most certainly does not know those things. If he ever ascended to the new heights of explaining how he supposedly knows those things (and defending them) and presented those ideas to any mildly informed atheist (who is alive) they would tear them apart. I am so unbelievably sick of people coming out of churches with the idea that you don’t have to actually have sound methods for carving out your beliefs, you must only claim to know things with conviction. That alone is enough reason to keep me gnawing on religion.
And I will pray for him out of love.
And here Pat tries to take a position of nobility, even as he’s masturbating a corpse for his own ends. Classy.
Hitchens, not unlike me, was a sinner in need of redemption and penance.
Don’t flatter yourself by comparing yourself to Hitch, Pat. And we all make mistakes in life (though it takes a mind drunk on faith to consider extra-marital sex and other harmless acts deemed “sin” by the faihful to be mistakes). If Hitchens needed redemption for his mistakes (not anybody else’s, as the good book foolishly says), he found it by working to change the world for the better every day.
For Hitch, penance for his mistakes was the weight of his own conscience which drove him to forgo extra time spent with more enjoyable pastimes in order to make himself better. This moved him to dismantle people like Pat who think that redemption is as easy as believing the proper farce.
Jesus took care of the redeeming part, perhaps I can assist with the penance.
Oh, you condescending little sneak, Pat.
Yet when Hitchens himself responded to [Pat praying for him], he didn’t seem as angry about it. He may not have agreed, but I think he saw the logic of my belief even if he didn’t share it.
I read Pat’s earlier piece. There was no logic to agree with. There was talk about how much Hitch needed prayers and how Pat was praying with all the gusto he could muster that Hitch would change his mind about someone rising from the dead 2,000 years ago. I didn’t see a single reason provided for Hitch to do it, but lots of praying.
That’s an odd behavior for somebody you think is dangling over the precipice of hell, isn’t it? I mean, if you saw someone hanging over a cliff about to fall to their death and you prayed rather than actually helping them up, you’d be accused of standing idly while they died. Yet in the case of Pat, he clearly thinks prayer is better than reasoning, better than doing something tangible, and was willing to prop himself up as a would-be savior for Hitch by doing something that’s impotent everywhere else (and which didn’t invite Hitch to spank him with logic).
There were some people who believed in hell and who cared enough about Hitchens to face an impending smackdown to try and keep Hitchens out of it before Hitch died. They were wrong and got exposed as such, but at least they had something resembling guts. Pat, at best, is valiant enough to dance on a corpse while talking about how he can help a man like Christopher Hitchens with “penance.”