my review of christopher hitchens is now online

My theistic review of Hitchens' book God is not Great is now online and 
available at
http://webpages.charter.net/jeffstueber/hitchens.htm

here are some highlights:

I mention, in the essay, his comment that religion originated from a
period 
of history where nobody understood anything about nature.  I note that
even 
if this was true at one point, it is not true now and I go on to state:

  "If this is true, then the religious would only believe because of lack
of 
knowledge. This clearly is not the case and Hitchens knows this otherwise
he 
would not criticize theistic arguments such as the argument to design. 
And 
what are we to make of converts to Christianity from either atheism or 
agnosticism including Alister McGrath, C. S. Lewis, J. Budziszewski, Josh 
Mcdowell, Antony Flew, Patrick Glynn, and Ignace Lepp (none of whom based 
their conversion on lack of knowledge of the natural world)?  Clearly 
Hitchens displays a blind spot toward theistic belief here, perhaps 
mimicking the very single-minded fixation on one idea that causes the 
religious he criticizes to behave as they do"

Hitchens says the argument to design is not really a theory at all. How 
then, I note, can he contemplate that some organs like the eye are 
imperfectly designed.  I criticize his writing with an analogy.

"Suppose you came upon a man who said the theory that women salespeople
sell 
more cars than men is not even a theory.  He then, without batting an eye 
lash, also told you that it was discovered that there was no difference 
between the number of cars sold by men and women and this disproved the
idea 
he just claimed was not even a theory.  What would you make of such a man?

You might affirm that he has contradicted himself, did not have his facts 
straight and was horribly mistaken, or was willfully ignorant of the
facts. 
Such is the case, I believe, with Hitchens.  In fact, evolutionists have 
been overtly quick in refuting any kind of creationism by pointing out
that 
the natural world does not agree with what it would look like if a god had

created it.  That, in itself, makes intelligent design a theory unless 
evolutionists would like to disclaim their negative theological claims. 
(But I seriously doubt they ever would.)"

In the end I point out that his critique of religion and bolstering of 
secularism is flawed by pointing out that belief in evolution has been a 
strong force in Naziism and Communism.