Posted on 06/27/2002 9:54:14 PM PDT by Festa
Atheism is stupid---and has no foundation in science
"The only atheism is the denial of truth." Arthur Lynch
If one were to listen to the media, science and religion cannot go hand in hand. Science inevitably proves God cannot exist. Darwin and his crowd showed how life evolved from a simple organism into a complex series of rational animals which were able to organize themselves and think beyond anything else in the universe. But atheist’s and their elite allies have it all backwards: Science does not refute God, it proves God. Atheism is the stupid, unthinking and illogical way. God is logical, thinking, and makes sense. Let’s prove it.
The foundation of all life is contained in microscopic detailed instructions that thinking individuals can act on logically. DNA and/or RNA are these specific instructions upon which all information for a life form is based upon. In order to think logically a problem must first be presented:
I give you a one celled organism. First, I want you to assemble the ribosomes so that they can properly interpret the DNA. Now make the amino acids (CH2 for the laymen which is a part of the carboxyl group COOH). Seriously, go get the material. Devise a means by which these ribosomes and amino acids only act at a specified time without error to create an organism. (No not a human, just a simple organism). Now make sure that the cells can properly replicate themselves without fail and sustain themselves. Then watch it develop into a human.
“Ok so where is the dilemma” you ask. Here. I want you to do this, without intelligent thought at any point. You see something go wrong, you can’t interfere. Whether that means hiring a monkey to randomly type at the keyboard for billions of years. Do not enter a goal for the computer. Phrases like “create life” or “make a living organism” are forbidden. Simply set it up, press start and watch.
Wait! But this experiment will not work. There is no way that these organisms randomly developed on accident. I know. Sorry, find a way around it. Have you solved the problem that has taken mankind centuries to even touch upon? Ok, now subject your experiment to climate and other “x” factors and see what happens then.
Didn’t work? Thanks for helping to prove the existence of god. Oh, it did work? Thanks for helping prove the existence of God. You did help to change the code into a readable form. That required intelligent thought.
You see, atheism is actually stupid when it is thought out logically. The foundational problems inherit in creating any simple organism that it is simply impossible that a random accident caused it. Atheism is an untenable and stupid position because it says precisely that: it was all just a random accident.
Genius scientists such as Albert Einstein and Sir Isaac Newton all believed in the existence of God. (For the laymen out their, Einstein invented the theory of relativity and Sir Isaac Newton invented physics and Calculus (Yes an entire complex form of mathematics’ barely even touched upon until college: and even then only pathetically.) Atheists like to gloss over this fact. They also like to claim that religions are fanatical because they refuse to accept evolution into their teaching. This is a complete lie. The Catholic Church (along with many others) say that evolution is completely kosher with its teachings. No, atheism is fanatical because it simply refuses to recognize an inherit problem in science and since it cannot prove it, it refuses to use logic to explain it. They have not a single shred of evidence to prove their case.
The idea that scientists in general reject God because they are “smart” is the most absurd and indefensible argument ever heard. Sure there were some. But they didn’t think hard enough. For all the great things Darwin did, he was never a philosopher. He asked the question once (paraphrased) that some people are so dull as to think that everything was not created by a random accident, because to think such a thing is illogical. EXACTLY. Sir. Thomas Aquinas noted this almost centuries before Darwin, and said precisely, “it is illogical to think such a thing.”
It is.
If the earth was one degree more off its axis, we would have no seasons. If there were no Himalayan mountains, there could be no agriculture. If we were just a bit more close to the sun, life would be untenable. If there was a bit more nitrogen in the air, say bye bye. To believe that all of this was a random accident is an absurd blind leap of faith because it has no basis in fact, thought, or reasoning. It is more than fanatical belief.
What is even scarier is that these are the smart atheists. God help the dumb ones. Atheists try and claim the high ground when they have no basis to do such a thing. They rant about how they are being mistreated when they have to listen to “under god” during prayer when they haven’t even begun to think about whether or not He exists.
What are we hear for if not a purpose? Is everything simply a random accident? Fine, then I am stealing your 100 dollars. Why? Because I can and if I am smart enough, I can get away without any punishment. Hitler sure got away with a lot. How fair is it that in the end we both end up in the same way: as dust. Scary isn’t it. But this is the belief system of the atheists.
Atheism is an untenable and fanatical position. Many atheists are so blind they are blinded as to what they are blinded about. The next time you come across an atheist do two things, one ask him to use his brain a little more. Two, pray for him. Pray not because he doesn’t have a religion, but pray because his has one.
Based on your statement, I don't see what difference it makes whether or not someone has faith in any god or not. There has to be a reason for faith to exist for it to even be a topic of discussion.
In a nut shell, what is the point or use of "faith in some form?"
This does not surprise me, considering your definitions are wrong. I'm guessing your under 25, or 30 at the most. Keep it up, there's lots more to learn, as there is for me as well.
BTW, in American media, love may be a feeling. But it isn't really. Love is an action! Love is something you do, not something you feel...
(This is what I said, notice the word YOUR)
Prove to me that YOUR God was behind the protein molecule and then we'll have something to talk about.
You seem to fit the word DUH quite well.
Makes sense to me, except my mind is a limited human one. And this life is not the end-all be-all of why we exist. So your position is based on an incorrect assumption - that the preservation of this temporal life is de-facto a good thing.
No, because all people die after being prayed for, eventually.
Everything God does is good, and if it does, in fact defy the laws of physics, it is, then, a miracle. I believe God performs miracles primarily to demonstrate who he is, not to eliminate suffering, which can be quite instructive. Otherwise, why just some and not others? It is obviously not based on who deserves to be healed. If it was Gods will to answer all prayers for healing, there would be very little death in the world.
On a side note, God healed my wifes back a few months ago. She had had the pain for decades and one night I felt compelled (I couldn't explain why at the time) to lay my hand on her back and pray for the Lord to heal it. Her back felt hot for almost a whole day afterwards and she thought she had really messed it up somehow. Anyway, the next day she caught herself moving in ways she had not moved in decades, without pain! This is not a coincidence that in the thousands of days she has had this pain, the day I prayed over it it was healed. I give credit to Him whom I asked for Healing: Jesus Christ.
She will have the occasional minor back ache now like most people our age do, but the ongoing one no longer exists. It's gone!
Well, let me clear one thing up. I'm an atheist. My disdain for agnosticism resides in its unwillingness to address the issue of faith vs. reason. When an agnostic says he has no opinion, he is saying nothing--but hopes that his position will be taken seriously. I point out that his equivocation is a demonstration of his belief in the proposition that there is no way to know if God exists. Of course there is no way to know, since there is no evidence. That's why the belief in God is taken on faith. But instead of recognizing the importance of the lack of evidence, he takes, on faith, that his position is viable and will be understood by everyone as valid. That's how I view agnosticism--faith-based and mealy-mouthed.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.