Sailing?

Embodied and mortal consciousnesses together–7 billion of us!–subject to pain, held to the rocky surface of a sphere by gravity in a vast cosmic ocean, beacon lights (such as they are) random and far away.

The Earth is our Titanic, and God (if God exists) is silent, in no way responding to our distress. Hey, God! SOS […_ _ _ …]!

Nothing.

Nothing works.

We are very far out to sea. Who will captain this ship?

About Santi Tafarella

I teach writing and literature at Antelope Valley College in California.
This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to Sailing?

  1. Peter Smith says:

    Santi, I think you need to once more to read my post about the Scientist and the Formicarium!

  2. Peter Smith says:

    I feel sorry for atheists, they persist in flogging one or more dead horses. The dead horses don’t care and we smile at the waste of energy.
    Here are the dead horses that they delight in flogging.

    1) Science and religion are competing explanations of the world.
    False, they explain the different domains of ‘how’ and ‘why’. Even a moment’s examination reveals how obvious this is.

    2) Science has shown that the universe spontaneously generated from nothing, making God unnecessary.
    False. It has not shown this, it is pure conjecture and it is not science. Furthermore, this scientific conjecture can never be verified, it is hidden behind an absolute information barrier.

    3) Science has shown that free will does not exist.
    False, science is unable to explain free will. That does not mean that it does not exist.

    4) Evolution is a contradiction of religion.
    False, evolution is the tool through which God achieved his purpose, as are all the laws of nature.

    5) Religion is evil and therefore God does not exist.
    False on two grounds. Look at Catholicism as an example. It does enormous good around the world and persistently advocates a noble moral code. Secondly the evil that some people do merely shows that some people are evil. Judges have been guilty of criminal conduct but that does not make the institution of justice evil.

    6) God is hidden and therefore does not exist.
    False. The hiddenness of something does not prove that it does not exist. This is an elementary error of logic. However, atheism delights in fatal contradictions. The best example of this is their dogmatic commitment to the multiverse. Now here is the thing. The multiverse is hidden, it is hidden forever from scientific investigation. There is no evidence for its existence and there will never be any evidence for the simple reason that it (if it exists) is hidden behind an absolute information barrier.

    There is a delicious irony in the way that atheists can, with their left hand, claim that there is no God because he is hidden, and yet, with their right hand, claim there is no God, because there exists a hidden and unobservable multiverse. Is atheism completely immune to its self contradictions?

    There is a further irony in the way that atheism loudly proclaims the pre-eminence of science and yet quickly jettison one of the most basic tenets of science(hypotheses need to be verified by observation) to advance their favourite competing explanation for God.

    We theists, agree that science is the best tool for explaining ‘how’ the universe operates but please don’t pass off mere conjecture as good science. Good luck with trying to use science to explain the ‘why’ of the operation of the universe. You’ve made a very poor start with no discernible progress.

    • colinhutton says:

      The quantity and content of your comments here, over the past several weeks, are worthy of a proseletysing Christian fundamentalist; who I wouldn’t normally bother to read or react to. I admit, however, that in your case my curiosity has been piqued and I have read most of what you have to say. For two reasons.

      Firstly, I routinely read well written stuff I disagree with. Partly on principle and partly to serve as (my term) dis-confirmation bias.

      Secondly, “I converted from atheism to Catholicism about five years ago”. (“converted” suggests you approached your atheism as a faith, which of course it isn’t. Disappointment was inevitable. But I digress.) I find that curious, since I did the opposite. After schooling, at a Jesuit boarding school (which I enjoyed), I transitioned painlessly and rationally from catholicism to atheism at university.

      Bearing in mind your statement “Religion takes many forms as it is inevitably shaped by local culture. Some of these forms are degenerate and show a faulty understanding of the nature of God”; I am now curious to know whether the “Catholicism” of which you speak accords with my understanding of the word.

      If ‘yes’, you accept catholic dogmas such as the ascension, the assumption, papal infallibility, transubstantiation and presumably others which escape my memory (probably including Hell, given you passed up the opportunity to comment on the recent post here on John Stuart Mill).

      If ‘no’, then ? Smorgasboard catholic?

      • Peter Smith says:

        Colin,
        your comments here, over the past several weeks, are worthy of a proseletysing Christian fundamentalist

        First you judge me then you ask questions about my beliefs?
        You must be an atheist fundamentalist.

  3. colinhutton says:

    Well, Peter, given you “feel sorry” for regular atheists, I assume you are weeping tears of blood for me. I can live with that. In the meantime the ad hominem gives you an excuse to avoid clarifying what your actual beliefs are.

    • Peter Smith says:

      I know from long experience that when a person begins a conversation with an insulting remark that the ensuing conversation will not be productive, sincere, thoughtful or useful.
      The tone of your following remarks merely confirms this conclusion.

      • colinhutton says:

        For someone who has routinely accused other commenters here of being “atheist fundamentalist’ you are remarkably thin-skinned. But of course, you need to keep that excuse going. It’s 2.30am here. Ahead of you – so I wish you a good night – after you have had your chat with your invisible friend in the sky.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s