e it seems pointless. I explained by saying that people use religion to explain their purpose in this universe, and as science continues to disprove religious belief, people will realize there is no purpose in their being. Once again the Priest quickly responded by telling me the thoughts of John Polkinghorne. Polkinghorne conspires to plant the idea that the universe did not just happen, but that there must be a purpose behind it. This great discussion continued when I told the priest that to be a true atheist, one believes in several truths and recognizes that there are other possible truths. To be a true theist you must believe in one truth, and that truth is God. The Priest then asked me how I, and other atheist and advocates of scientism react to religious experience. I told him that in Scientism only material things are real. Since religious experiences cant be proved the must not be real. The Priest then asked, "How can an advocate of scientism prove that religious experience is not real?" Unable to answer that question, I began to tell the Priest of my feeling of people using god as a father figure. Going along with Freud, I believe that the people of this world may need and strong, dependent father figure in their lives. They may turn to God to fill this void in their lives. The Priest answered that argument by saying that religion and God gives people hope. God gives people order and an explanation in their lives, and offers them purpose and hope of an after life. I then combated the Priest's argument by saying that some people only believe in God because they were conditioned to by their environment. If people just took the time to look at the facts, and took the chance to question their beliefs they would soon become advocates of scientism. After talking with this Priest, I came to realize several things. The most important thing that I did take from this debate was that neither science nor religion could...
