Pascal’s WagerI was recently asked a question by an atheist we'll call Writer A
in a thread:
"Do you think we should seriously entertain the possibility of God's existence despite its failure as a scientifically-framed hypothesis? If so, why, and what means should we employ to evaluate the question?"
My full response to this was,
"Well, that answer depends on questions only you can answer for yourself. I think if the possibility of eternal separation from God is something one might wish to avoid, then one might be justified in seriously entertaining the possibility of God's existence whether they think God has failed as a scientifically-framed hypothesis or not. Contrary, if the possibility of eternal separation from God is not a big deal to one, then I'd say one has no reason to pursue the matter at all. And should one declare the pursuit worthy, the means one should employ to evaluate the question will likely be as unique and diverse as one's path to reverence of the question in the first place." (emph. added)
False Argument #12: Atheism Is Scientifically TenableIt's often easy to spot faulty reasoning in somebody else's belief system, but how many of us rigorously apply equal scrutiny to our own cherished worldview?
The failure to do so is known as special pleading and I was recently accused of this intellectual atrocity by a good friend of mine while discussing the movie Zeitgeist. After weeks of hearing nothing but hype and praise about this film I'd love to tell you how disappointed I was with it, but now is not the time and you're more than welcomed to read the review. All you need to know for our dialog here is that the opening segments show in quick succession visual images depicting the epic problems of humanity, asking what could possibly be their cause.