View Single Post
  #4  
Unread January 24th, 2009, 11:53 AM
Fred H. Fred H. is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Posts: 483
Default Re: More than a kiss...

In Edge Coyne asks:
Quote:
DOES THE EMPIRICAL NATURE OF SCIENCE CONTRADICT THE REVELATORY NATURE OF FAITH?
Poor question, although it does provide an opportunity for atheists to pontificate on the splendor of their atheism. But then since atheism unavoidably and inevitably reduces to nihilism, and since most atheists seem to lack the intellectual honesty and rigor to acknowledge that rather unpleasant inevitability, poor, irrelevant questions from atheists are to be expected.

The more relevant question is this: Does the available science and evidence (not to mention parsimony) that we’ve discovered so far point to the existence of a first cause creator, or to the only available alternative, some sort of infinite, eternal multiverse (wherein truth is, at best, nothing more than a subjective mental construct)?

The science and evidence indicates that we are beings capable of discerning and discovering objective truth (certainly objective mathematical truth), that we find ourselves in a universe that had a beginning having inexplicably low entropy; and our gut tells us that we have some amount of free will and moral responsibility, that human life has a unique intrinsic value; and that all points to some sort of first cause creator.

Nevertheless, atheists prefer the alternative, the infinite, eternal multiverse, where truth is, at best, nothing more than a subjective mental construct, where there is nothing that is inherently right or wrong, good or bad; where life has no inherent meaning or purpose . . . where most atheists are unable or unwilling to acknowledge that their atheism inevitably reduces to a nihilism that their universe/multiverse inevitably and unavoidably implies.
Reply With Quote