Archive for June 13th, 2009
A few good reasons why I can’t be an atheist
I have read and watched countless debates on both sides of Theist VS. Atheist and admit each side does commit to convincing arguments with strong key points. Each side has its own aggressive competitive proponents that are intellectual and have something actually good to contribute to a debate. Topics can vary from evolution, morality,possibility of miracles, to biblical credibility and so on. You can even break down the sides into smaller groups; you get those crazy ID proponents or fundamental Christian that are hypocritical by judging you and claim with the help of their supposed “gods-of-the gaps” you’re going straight to hell. Some of them have no idea how to spell “evolution” much more than explain it and that comes altogether with a lovely bundled package of “circular reasoning”. They seem to be using the easy “1 minute-just add water” straw man attacks and the verbal cut and paste from Christian propaganda websites right? On the other hand you get the intelligent atheist that knows more about religion than a Christian does and has pledged allegiance to his Sam Harris’ poster and has every single copy of good ‘ol Dawkin’s books. Or, you sometimes get the idiotic ones that tend to agree with everything the intelligent evolutionist says and has nothing else to say but malicious ad hominem attacks or use the ever so old, over-exhausted, and boring phrase, “there is no god”, thinking they did an outstanding job contributing to the argument because no one has thought of that genius phrase before. You know what I’m taking about especially if you watched them on youtube and chances are, you’re probably thinking, “what a loser, this guy is living in his mom’s basement.” Despite all of this, there are many reasons on why I find it rather difficult to be an atheist which is just as emotionally charged as intellectually motivated. Usually the argument always gravitates towards other subjects deviating from the main point. I like to stick to my main point and that specifically involves a little common sense and cosmology, the perfect theological margarita. Without further due, these are my main reasons:
A majority of scientist now adhere to the belief that the Big Bang in fact did happen and science strongly points this out. This is the same science that atheist claim proves evolution. But what makes something scientific? Well, it must include observation, testing, and retesting. The difficulty in cosmology of when and how the universe was created is that it was never observed or ever will be, never tested, or can never be retested. Now we can only speculate using “logic” and science presupposes logic. The atheist Elvis has left the building of science and is now on the same planes of logic as the theist is. At this point both can agree that the universe was created but both contrast with who or what created the universe.
But this is where the direction of the atheist becomes a burden of a challenge.
According to the famous physicist, Stephen Hawking, he supports the idea that time is a physical property and was also created when the universe was created.
The Nature of Space and Time, Hawking stated, “Today virtually everyone agrees that the universe and time itself had a beginning at the Big Bang.”
Hawking, S.W. and Penrose, R. 1996. The Nature of Space and Time, p. 20.
In other words, time was created during the Big Bang. So whatever created the universe was not operating in our natural linear time. It was transcending it by acting in another dimension of time or it was eternal. Our natural sciences that we use weren’t even born yet. So why should we use natural science to explain a phenomenon before the “natural” was born yet? Science can’t account for its own origin.
It’s like me saying, “I live in a house I built before I was born” or it’s like someone using a ruler to physically measure a thought. It doesn’t make any sense and is completely absurd!
Furthermore there are different models of the Big Bangs that are accepted. The first one is that nothing created everything but we all know that nothing creates nothing much less everything in the universe. That’s illogical so now atheist roll their sleeves and get creative by claiming that scientist explain it by stating that the moment before the Big Bang, matter was infinitely condensed into a point of singularity, with infinite temperature and the forces of gravity, nuclear force, weak force, and electromagnetic force were all unified, it was dimensionless, and infinitely dense, and then exploded. Does this explanation sound like real science to you? In fact it contradicts every science we know of today. So are we using our natural science to explain something that doesn’t behave naturally or governed by natural laws and constants we use for our natural science, that isn’t even calculable, or measurable? What doesn’t align with science is usually scrutinize and labeled as “magic” to an atheist but yet this is what they actually believe!! They are giving a non-scientific explanation. It’s not a matter of science vs. religion it’s a matter of good science vs. bad science.
We also know that a powerful explosion of great magnitude from the Big Bang as scientist claim should never even cause matter to group together. When we observe the natural world we see that explosions do the opposite: they separate matter, not clump them together. In addition, explosions do not create or form new things with complexity, organization, and design. That is 100% consistent 100% of the time and 100% observable. So what makes us think this is possible? So the atheist at this point is left in a 2 way dead end because they unwillingly admitted they either believe in miracles or they believe in what they label as magic as they criticize the theist to. If they believe in miracles then by default God is now possible.
Next, we also understand that in order for things to change states they must have the potential and outside agent(s) to activate its potential to an actual. Let’s use a seed for example. In order for a seed to become a flower it must have the potential to become one and be dependent on forces outside of itself such as air, water, sunlight, carbon dioxide, soil, all combined to catalyze it into a tree. The seed can’t be responsible for its initiation or own change of state unless something acts on it just as this point of singularity cant either. Before altering states and commencing a Big Bang it requires something to depend on outside of itself and must have had that potential to be actual. Any other belief is illogical.
So since the universe was created it must have had a creator. Since it was designed, it must have had a designer. Since time was created then this thing that created the universe was certainly either acting on another dimension of time or is eternal. That is not natural so it eliminates the need for another universe since universes are natural and are also governed by time.
Matter and space were also created so this thing was not governed by space and matter meaning it was non-spatial and immaterial.
So we take a close look at intelligence. Let’s start with what science tells us because science seems to be only source of truth for all atheist for some reason. Well, according to science, intelligence can only be a product of intelligence and that is 100% observable, 100% of the time, 100% testable and 100% re-testable. There is no other way. It never fails so why do atheist suspect otherwise? If an airplane were created and operated by luck and chance then why should we trust it? Likewise, if our minds, the most complex organ in out body were created with luck and chance, then why should we trust what our minds are telling us? So the atheist once again positions themselves in a 4-fold awkward position:
(1) if they consider themselves intelligent then it had to come from an intelligent being (2) if they aren’t intelligent then why should we listen to what they have to say and how would anyone know anything? (3)If their minds came from an unintelligent random process of luck and chance than why should I trust what they are telling me? (4) if they provide an explanation that is not scientific, then they openly admitted that science can not account for everything and that there are other sources for discovering the truth.
Finally, the atheist is left to answer this uncomfortable but fitting question of what supernatural, non-material, non-spatial, eternal, powerful, designing entity with tremendous force created the universe.
The atheist then brings out his rusty, handy old “Carl Sagan-then-what-created-god card”.
Well, with Bob Barker, Survey says: since the universe was created, it must of had a creator. Since time was created, then whatever created it was outside and ungoverned by time meaning it was eternal and didn’t have a beginning or end, thus was never created.
To the theist this conclusion leads to the the obvious and I’m proud to be part of it. Unfortunately, the atheist is left with one finger scratching his head thinking how to find the loopholes in the logic itself. With nothing left to say, they resort to their top secret weapon by saying, “we don’t have the answer just yet and science will eventually reveal it to us”, realizing that it wasn’t an answer and this tactic only gets him off the hook for now (even though I just mentioned that science is rendered useless to explain it because it was not born yet).
They like to hide in fear behind their Uncle Science thinking he’ll protect them but fail to realize that science is not the only way to find truth and no the only begetter of absolute truth.
Science can not explain what mental images you are thinking, it can only measure the chemical reactions and electrical activity in your brain. That’s a matter of introspection.
Science cant tell you happy or sad you were 5 years ago at your aunts house for Christmas. That too is introspection.
Science cant scientifically prove the statement itself, “science proves everything”
Science can’t prove for its own existence.
Psalm 14:1
The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God.
Romans 1:20
For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.
More related Blogs:
Historical Jesus and what the early Church Christians believe he was
Did Jesus die on the Cross and Resurrect?
Was Jesus a copy of the other gods like Horus?
Why does God allow Evil and Suffering?
Where did Morals come from?
What the Bible says about Reincarnation
What the Bible says about Astrology
Did Mary assume into Heaven?
Nephilim, Fallen Angels, Giants, and sons of God
Book of Mormon VS The Bible
Why Won’t God Answer my Prayers?
Why I CAN’T be an Athiest. Athiesm is illogical
Why did God order Genocide and murders in the Bible
