Satann Coulter
Out of context: Reply #208
- Started
- Last post
- 261 Responses
- gramme0
Right, it's a supernatural explaination. It claims that the natural world cannot produce life, that it requires a supernatural initiation. That's just not science. Michael Behe is William Paley all over again. Same argument.
Mimio
(Jun 16 06, 07:14)....And I stated in my last post that I have no scientific proof of my belief in God. It is purely philosophical and faith-based. It is a much more tenable position, philosophically speaking, than the idea of infinite regression.
People today do not want to accept the notion of absolute truth because truth, by definition, is narrow; it excludes a host of possible falsehoods. That idea gives people philosophical claustrophobia. Truth, as I understand it, is defined by sources outside of me. My pitifully small mind and extremely limited paradigm of experience is not worthy or capable of creating truth from scratch. People these days would rather determine truth on their own terms than on the terms of some Being greater than them; this allows them to live as they see fit. What people miss is the fact that by thinking/living this way, they become slaves to their own drives, flaws and limitations. If I am to be a slave to something, I would rather have it be Something much bigger than me.
For those intent on calling people like me fundamentalists, please remember tha I didn't write the Bible...I just happen to believe it.
And for the record, if God was proved beyond any doubt to not exist, I would still believe in him, because no other system of belief feeds my soul in the same way. Period.