CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS AND HIS PROBLEM WITH GOD

Atheists often challenge Christianity with examples of dysteleology – lack of design, evil, and suffering – arguing that a good and all-powerful God would never have designed such a world. This is perhaps the primary argument that the late atheist Christopher Hitchens offered in his debate against the Christian John C. Lennox.

Hitchens pointed out suffering, the disappearance of 99% of the prior life forms, and the unlikelihood that the Savior would only come thousands of years after horrible human suffering.

However, there are many problems with Hitchens argumentation:

·       Human history actually conforms to the Biblical reality of what would happen to the world as a result of the rebellion against God and the Fall.

·       The examples that “fail” to conform to Hitchens expectation of what a Divine design should look like do not disprove Intelligent Design (ID) and the existence of a Designer. They merely point out that Hitchens is not God.

·       These examples do not alleviate Hitchens’ burden to disprove the many compelling evidences of design.

·       Although Hitchens is right to be concerned about human suffering, he cannot say that it is “bad” or “evil.” He lacks any objective basis for his outrage. Why? He has rejected the only basis for objective moral law – the moral law-Giver. Consequently, his outrage is no more than a subjective outcry that “I don’t like this.”

Hitchens also charged, “No human being is in any position to say that they know God’s will. This information is not accessible.”

I just wonder how Hitchens would have enough information about the subject to know that such information is “not accessible.” Instead, if God exists, could He not convey such information? If God is not all-powerful, then Hitchens could not blame Him for what He regards as evil. If He is all-powerful, He should have no problem communicating to us.