I'll wait...
Back yet?...
Though I disagree generally with both the review and the book itself, some things stood out to me - the most obvious being:
"Sagan believes that scientists reject sprites, fairies, and the influence of Sagittarius because we follow a set of procedures, the Scientific Method, which has consistently produced explanations that put us in contact with reality and in which mystic forces play no part."Notice the first two words - "Sagan believes". If his materialist worldview is true, there is no reason I should believe him.
(edit: i started to expand on another few points in the article, but later decided to write "upwards" instead of "sideways"... )
I have considered many possible explanations to explain the body of evidence before me. I have considered the possibility and consequences of a large number of -isms, and concluded (like Ferris Bueller) that they are not good. I have not accepted anyone else's "grand unification theory" either blindly or wholeheartedly.
The worldview that best explains the reality I have seen is that the God Jehovah of both Old and New Testament is the only true God, the Creator of every thing, the Author of life, omniscient, omnipotent, omnipresent, and spoke our universe into being just as His Word says. He is love, full of grace and mercy, and still loves us despite how horribly we have all treated Him. He is slow to anger, and is saddened more than we could possibly understand when He grants sinners their desire that He have nothing to do with them.
Despite some slightly more difficult bits, I have read, seen, or heard nothing that could be better explained under another -ism.
1 comment:
Take heart -- The Problem of Pain also points to a deity, through our individual "I am"s. Were there nothing but the material world, there would be no Problem of Pain.
Scientific materialism fails at the point of "I am" -- it has plenty of explanations for my frame, my mind, my personality, fine. But none for *me*.
I find that a pretty big philosophical hole. I am not unsympathetic to atheists, particularly those who reject the notion of an Unjust God. But I do think they have to look *beyond* themselves for their theories to begin to make sense.
And I think that is a glaring error.
If it gets answered? Well -- that would make atheism more attractive to me. But I can't see how they can get in my head and explain my existence. Good luck to them. ;o/
Post a Comment