This article is in response to the article posted by
Revelation called ‘The God Debate”. Please read it first so you can understand
the context of my article.
I’ll quote his points and address them chronologically to
ensure I do his arguments and remarks justice. Then after that, I’ll do some
more rambling about religion and end off for the year and apply myself
otherwise.
‘just because someone doesn’t share your point
of view on a matter doesn’t make that person less intelligent than you’
We atheist never said that. Nevertheless, let me state my
opinion on the matter. Science has its grey areas and points of contention
(like string theory for example, and what really killed the Neanderthals), but
as a whole, science is still a much more rational, honest, and a demonstrably
‘true’ argument for reality than ANY religious text is (even when interpreted
to extremes by apologists). If you want to bypass the latest advances in human
reasoning and knowledge and cling to antiquated reasoning that was already outdated
thousands of years ago then let me state it flat out, you can’t expect atheists
to engage with you as if you are an equal. It’s like arguing with a 10 year old
kid about whether or not the Easter bunny is real.
‘…a big bang (which
scientists have spent millions of dollars on trying to recreate, & will
spend much more on before realising it can’t be recreated)…’
Oh so you have performed the hideously complex experiments
to their full conclusions, right? Why didn’t you just publish your data and
spare them the time, effort, and money? You would have been more convincing had
you told me that god told you it can’t be done. At least then you could be
pardoned on the grounds of insanity. That comment is constituted purely from
two ingredients, arrogance and ignorance.
‘Physical biology
aside, how on earth would one be able to come up with a percentage, for
arguments sake(calm down), for the chances of that happening?’
It is much higher than the chances that the bible will be
proven as the ultimate handbook on reality guidebook for our existence. Typical
christian comeback. If you really cared ANYTHING about mathematical
probabilities, you would believe NOTHING that’s written in your bible. Go
calculate the mathematical chance of a man walking on water, or corpses rising
from their graves to interact with the living. It shows you really don’t think
before you talk. You are hurting your religion friend, and doing so without me
having to contribute.
‘Science still cannot
explain how the human brain works; so far we managed to figure out how much we
do use, which isn’t much.’
Not in its entirety, no. But luckily scientists don’t assume
something is impossible or unknowable and then spend the rest of their lives
claiming that it’s a mystery of god. Scientists have accurately reproduced the
hearing circuits of the human brain and the tests ran showed it behaved very
similar to the human hearing system. I can show you research data from medical
institutions if you really are interested, drop me a reply below. Human brains
are more complex yes, but we will eventually unravel how they work, just as we
figured out how disease and weather work (things once attributed to
supernatural causes by superstitious and religious societies). It has also been
shown by neural science that we do not use only a small fraction of our brain.
Perhaps some people from the faith camp deliberately limit how much of their
brains they use? It would certainly better explain some of their arguments, and
even win the sympathy of atheists.
"The greatest
trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.” Think
about it
Yeah and the greatest trick the money grubbing priests ever
invented to keep christians stuck in fossilized thought
was that simplistic one-liner. You have heard of reverse psychology, right? If
not, you’re an example of what the intended effect was. Such a simplistic uttering
does not prove the existence of the devil, but feel free to explain the though
train you use to get to that final conclusion (no really, I want to know).
‘…realise that my
experiences that I've had with God FAR outweigh your criticism that is
undoubtedly going to follow’
The experiences you’ve had with god are no doubt as real to
you as the hallucinations suffered by any mentally ill person. I also
experienced god when I was a christian. I also experienced the dread of having
the boogie monster under my bed when I was 6 years old. Subjective experiences
don’t prove anything to the rest of us. If that is how you cop-out of an
argument you started... then please don’t even bother to retort.
So there we have it folks. Another stunning series of
arguments from the faith camp. Really, and my fellow atheists expect me to
waste the time and effort into writing a master’s thesis with dozens of peer
reviewed scientific sources and evidence. Doing so would simply make me look
desperate. Almost like an adult having a mature conversation with a very young
child. I’ve seen this from very drunk adults, it’s very creepy and unsettling.
So to those annoyed ‘polite’ atheists who again think I
can’t do a real debate with credible facts and sources; you go pull out your
BANKAI (bleach fans will get this) at every foe. I’ll spare mine for an
opponent worthy of the effort.
Now for those who want to delve a little deeper into the
topic of religion VS everything else, here are some areas to get you started.
It’s not hard to
fight for faith
It is well within the reach of any uneducated person to
match the debating style of religious people, but it is damn hard to match the
debating style of a scientist, biologist, or well-educated atheist. In fact, before
one can even attempt to match the great atheist debaters, such as Richard
Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Aron Ra, and James Randi, to name but a very
few, one usually has to spend many years keeping quiet and learning about
science, cosmology, history, paleontology, genetics, evolution, physics,
mathematics, taxonomy, and most of all, the scientific method and the art of
rational thinking!
To debate for the faith camp, you just need to plant your ass
in a chair, profess a belief in some god, make the claims that science is
anti-religion and anti-god, and then declare yourself the winner of every
argument you ever entered because the atheists could not answer your irrational
questions. Like those christian apologetics who claim they can prove religion
using science and evidence, who then simply exploit their followers’ utter lack
of understanding regarding science and what constitutes as real evidence by
making ridiculous arguments that appeal to simple minds already preconditioned
to avoid thinking too hard—if they even think at all. People like Dinesh de
Souza, Frank Turek, and that jailbird nutter Kent Hovend who proclaimed himself
an expert on science because he taught it in school, and released a series of
books and DVD’s to promote his ‘faith filtered’ version of evolution and
science. I honestly could not believe people told me, ‘oh you think you are so
smart, go watch Kent Hovind’s video’s and you will see real science and
evolution explained’. OMFG…
The debate of the faithful is a mixture of evasion and
evisceration. They deliberately distort scientific facts, they play dumb and
deliberately phrase questions and arguments in a way that ridicules the
scientific theory they want to dismiss. They don’t ask questions for which they
want honest answers. And when they are cornered, they cock their argument into
reverse and quickly back out of the avenue they turned in to, racing off onto
another ‘gap’ where they can park and exclaim, ‘look! God did it’! Keep
pointing out the potholes; we’ll fill them with concrete evidence(excuse the
pun) in due time while you are otherwise entertained by the mystery of the hole
itself.
There is a genuine and tangible desperation in the arguments
of the faithful. So much so, that one would almost think they somehow benefit
in some earthly manner from the widespread persistence of these superstitious
beliefs. Some of the biggest christian apologetics have already admitted that
they are not entering into debate with scientists and atheist just to get
bogged down in facts; they are simply there to argue, on the basis of faith,
that their religion is the one true religion, and that it should be left alone
to work its way into our politics, education, and society as it once did … to
great detrimental effect, I might add.
There is no place on earth, no court, no university, no
public platform, where reason and evidence are the order of the day, where a
religious person could ever earn a seat in a debate. But thankfully they are
allowed to face off against the masters of logic every now and again—and what a
spectacle that is. Many of the people who abandon religion and become atheists
do so because the religious arguments presented by the faithful allow them to
see for the first time how absolutely ridiculous their blind faith really is.
Theists forget that most atheists were once devout believers
too. You are ignorant of science and reason, but we
know as much of the bible as you do (if not more), we simply don’t believe it because it
cannot stand up to scrutiny. Anything that demands of to believe it because it
sais so is obviously seriously flawed! Even lowly HUMAN SCIENTIST can give much
more intelligent answers and reasons as to why we should believe in their
theories. Oh like say they invent the transistor from the theory of quantum
physics, or create a nuclear bomb form the THEORY of the atom. What can the
religious claim? Silence…
Were it not for the brilliance of those who follow science
and reason and seek for substantial and verifiable proof before they make their
assertions, we’d still be trapped in the dark ages. We would all be subject to
the clamp down on knowledge and morality that religion is well known for
throughout our history. It is also worrying that these debates could become
endangered as our modern day atheist heroes, at least the ones with the guts to
risk taking their debates into the public, are literally old and dying. We
tragically lost Christopher Hitchens just a few short weeks ago. On his feet,
Hitchens had no rival in debate. He could whip out a counter argument that is
of a caliber that most other intellectuals would have to sit a few long hours
(or even days) to match. Sadly Richard Dawkins is not the youngest either.
James Randi is actually border lining on becoming senile. Who will carry the
torch when our heroes are no more?
What has religion given us that is good in the modern world?
It claims to be the source of morality, but reading its texts one is bound to
conclude that it merely advocates intolerance and conflict. It abounds with
unverifiable claims and the savage beliefs of primitive humans. Of course,
apologetics won’t admit this. They claim atheists are deliberately focusing on
texts that no ‘sane’ christian takes literally. But such is the fine art of
biblical interpretation, isn’t it? If it is too outlandish to believe (even for
the faithful), then simply make it metaphorical and then extrapolate endlessly
as to the ‘true’, or simply non-existent meaning.
Some of the laughable
claims the bible makes
The bible makes the claim that we are the crowning jewel in
what is otherwise a far more majestic material universe. This blatant arrogance
is utterly insulting and solipsism of the highest order. We’re so important and
precious to this god chap that he has to throw the majority of his ‘finest’
work into a fire that will torture them for his failure, for eternity.
The bible claims we have free will, yet we were never given
the choice to not have it. Ok, maybe I should start with simpler ironies.
God made the female gender of our species from the rib of a
Neanderthal! His second mistake perhaps?
According to the timeline derived from following the
bloodline of Adam, you can convince some people the earth was made 6000 years
ago. At least they can count, but the source of the timeline is questionable at
best.
A great flood literally drowned all life on the planet save
for Noah and his family. Where did all that water come from? Christian sheep:
from an ice sheet that surrounded the entire planet—I saw it on a Kent Hovind
DVD!
All the species alive on the planet today, including all
insects (the total biomass of which could never have reached present day
numbers if it had to be replenished from a single male/female pair from each
species, starting 4000 years ago) was housed on an ark which is much smaller
than the seagoing vessels we build today, yet it could carry orders of
magnitude more load! Remember, all those creatures needed food to sustain them,
so that ups the load even more. It is a miracle I tell you! We should use miracle
technology today as it’s obviously so much better. The real miracle is how
people believe this and actually think they can enter an honest debate with
this nonsense and think they have a point.
The bible claims there were giants called that interbred
with humans. Christian scientists commonly say this is the bibles proof that
Dinosaurs existed with man and even did the hanky panky with them. Two major
problems in this one: man and Dinosaurs never met (we can prove that BTW with
EVIDENCE, not conjecture!), and they can’t interbreed because of genetic
differences. I can excuse this one cause Kent Hovind endorsed the idea so those
who believe this are the asinine end of the faith spectrum.
The bible claims that PI is a round number (3) and that the
earth is a flat disk covered by a crystal dome. It also claims if you show a
cloth with stripes to a pregnant cow it would have a calf with stripes.
The bible advocates that people who work on the Sabbath be
stoned and that children who disobey their parents should be killed. Last time
I saw, christians do none of this. WHY? Oh wait, thou shalt not murder! No wait
still too far back, even the 10 commandments now don’t count cause it all
somehow made sense after Jesus died. God changed his mind (strange for a
perfect being) and now christians can do what they want as long as they profess
an irrational belief in the salvation jesus gave them. Again, don’t give me
that look, it’s not my idea, it’s theirs.
Snakes talk. Ok that one is a little cheap I admit. I mean
anyone who has studied the anatomy of a snakes head knows that a forked tongue
and a skull with that shape (let’s not forget the total absence of vocal chords
and the primitive reptilian brain incapable of decoding language) obviously
concluded that the things can’t converse in any human language. Oh, I misunderstood?
They only talk when the devil turns into one! Right, that makes perfect sense!
Moses parted thousands of tons of ocean water with a stick
and an incantation! HAHAHAHAHA! Ok seriously, who wrote this stuff?
I can draw this list out extensively if I had the time. If
anyone is REALLY interested in seeing where all this nonsense is mentioned in
the bible, watch a series on youtube called ‘Falsehoods of Creationism’ by
AronRa, it gives the verses to a multitude of biblical ‘facts’ for you to
peruse.
Oh but wait, the only accurate bible is the Afrikaans one? Doh!
And only if it’s the old translations! I apologise, the church I was in as a
teenager really excelled at apologetics…
Till next year. HAPPY NEW YEAR, and let’s end 2012 with a
bang (even if the Mayans prove to be wrong).
Disclaimer: All articles and letters published on MyNews24 have been independently written by members of News24's community. The views of users published on News24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of News24. News24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.