John Stossel discussion about God

One thing I appreciate about John Stossel’s programs is that he brings in some of the best and most articulate spokesmen for views opposite his own, to hash out the issues. But he didn’t do it in my opinion when it came to the issue of believing in God, in the show available at the following link:

http://www.hulu.com/watch/205277/stossel-thu-dec-16-2010#s-p1-so-i0

In fact, the priest he brought on used an argument similar to what I think is the straw-man caricature of faith Carl Sagan put into his novel “Contact”, in which he painted a picture of advanced aliens so benevolent that it boggles the mind how a smart guy can be so hopelessly naive.

The priest in the segment made the argument more forcefully and possibly more convincingly than the one in Sagan’s atheist imaginations, but a believer that holds to evolution cannot say much about the evidence of God. The kind of love people can have among themselves is for sure one of the evidences for God, but it’s not enough at all.

Schermer thinks that he can say are “close to” figuring out where matter came from, and threw out “string theory” as one answer, but string theory has not been demonstrated one time. And even for the universe they think they know, they have no clue as to what 90 percent of the universe consists of!

Schermer has his own confirmation bias.

I just wish he would bring a better spokesman for faith in God there. Maybe he just buys the empty non-logic of thinking creationist arguments and its cousin, design is too fringe. He’s doing himself a great disservice if so.

I was once an atheist, but followed science, history, facts and logic to believe in the Bible again.

I despise the “argument from no proof”, aka “God of the gaps”. Truth is, agnostics are intellectually more honest with themselves than atheists like Schermer, because materialism and faith in what they call “science” is their own “god of the gaps”.

Like he said about Stalinism, his is a faith in materialist explanations, a faith in “godless explanations” so to speak.

Dinesh D’Souza is a better spokesman, and Ravi Zacarias is invited to hostile campuses around the world.

And by the way, despite the offer of sneering arrogance that Schermer offers at creationism, the fact is that the foremost scientist spokesmen for atheism, agnosticism, and evolution, stubbornly refuse to debate creation scientists anymore, because when they first ventured to do so, they were soundly humiliated.

Fact is the major branches of science were founded by believers in creation, including the arguably best scientist of all time, Isaac Newton, the foremost scientists who articulated the formal steps of the scientific method, Roger Bacon.

Advertisements

%d bloggers like this: