"I like your analogy about SETI. Shouldn't a prayer's response, in that context, be worth waiting for? How long has SETI been operational? How many responses have they received? How long are you prepared to wait for a prayer's response?"
These are good questions. SETI has been listening for decades now, and they've only targeted a small fraction of the sky. Why shouldn't we keep the antennas up as well?
I have no problem with the idea of keeping the antennae energized and in position indefinitely with
regard to these prayers. I'd like to think I've been open to any such communication, regardless of whether or not I have sent signals out of my own. Certainly, if there were a supreme being, his, her, or its communication would be of interest. That would be the case even if it were only a carrier signal, like the "Programming Will Resume at XX:00" messages we used to get on the broadcast TV channels in the early morning hours.
regard to these prayers. I'd like to think I've been open to any such communication, regardless of whether or not I have sent signals out of my own. Certainly, if there were a supreme being, his, her, or its communication would be of interest. That would be the case even if it were only a carrier signal, like the "Programming Will Resume at XX:00" messages we used to get on the broadcast TV channels in the early morning hours.
In my experience, however, it is believers that grow impatient with the kind of long-term uncertainty that comes with open-ended listening. What I mean is that believers generally seem to consider agnosticism or skepticism to be "resistance to the gospel," and they demand a verdict based upon what they consider unquestionable evidence. Since they think the existence of gods is self-evident, they don't believe a sincere person of good conscience can find their evidence insufficient.
No comments:
Post a Comment