From a few days ago, the same old dreck – the priest George Pitcher calls Richard Dawkins “shrill.”
First there’s the usual boring empty non-argument –
The narrow and rather meaningless argument to which Dawkins confines himself is the incessant charge that there is no “evidence” for God. And evidence, of course, is defined only within the strictures of his own empirical scientism. The problem is that faith isn’t primarily evidential, as he demands it to be, but revelatory – and we would claim no less true for all that in explaining the human condition. [Read more…]