The problem with arguing the concept of athiesm.
Part 1. Introduction
As an athiest, I have often found myself in the opposition of a debate involving religion. Athiests can never seem to win a debate about religion, and some may put it into poetic terms: Neither side can be proved nor disproved. I do not believe this true, because in reality the only driving factor of the existence of the concept of theism is simple: People believe. Although many points can be made for both sides, but the big difference between athiests and theists is that a theist does not want to relinquish the idealism of a higher power.
Part 2. How the notion of afterlife emerged
I first will discuss the idea of heaven and hell. Imagine nothingness upon death. This thought is in fact impossible due to the fact that you cannot imagine not having the ability to imagine, and in fact have no mental capability at all. This in theory may hve driven the belief that there is something after death. When you do attempt to imagine not being able to think, and nothing being in your perception, you still have the concept in your mind that you'll have the ability to think. This idea can evolve into the concept of ghosts or spirits, people who exist after death but cannot be seen. Life on earth for an eternity would be lonely, especially since you would in fact be nothing, technically. Just because we can't imagine nothingness after death doesn't mean it's not a complete possibility and reality. When the concept of religion arose, along with the afterlife, which has been demonstrated as far back as the Egyptians, the idealism that morals would decide your fate was installed. To further explain this portion of my argument, I will have to explain my next point.
Part 3. Why we could have very well imagined a higher power's existence
Imagine not knowing how anything happened. What is the circle in the sky that moves, and is replaced by another as the sky turns black. What are those white dots in the air? Why can't I touch them? Where did I come from? How did this all come to be? What is sickness, what is death? The answer to all of these questions was this: A higher power did this. Something made this happen. It must be extremely powerful, then... As some of the first in the new race of homosapiens, with a higher thinking capacity, you would fear the power, maybe want to befriend it. You would choose to worship it. The idea of religion came along way before Christianity, Judiasm, Islam, even before the Egyptians. Modern day scientific knowledge only arose around 300 years ago, which is 1700 years after Christ was "Reborn," assuming only for the convenience of making this argument that he was, we didn't know what caused sickness, we didn't know why the sun rose or set, nor did we know about other planets, or that the stars were just more of our sun. How do you explain something that existed before you came to realization? You assume someone created it. Obviously nobody human could create the world.. So the concept of god still stood strong. We now have massive amounts of scientific knowledge that explains things in which god was used to explain. The sun sets and the moon rises because the earth is tilting, disease is caused by microscopic organisms. We know that there's more to the universe than what we see with the bare eye. When an athiest tries to argue science with a thiest, saying the word science may as well be like dropping the F-Bomb. Before I elaborate, I would like to return to a previous point I made involving the after-life.
Part 4. Morals leading to heaven or hell, and the history
Now with the idealism of god, and worship, the concept of after-life served a greater purpose. Now the idea of morals deciding fate after death could arise, although not instantly. Nobody knows the complete history of every human tribe in existance since the beginning, but the idea which I have presented is undeniably valid. Humans were simple minded in the beginning. When theists attack the idea of evolution, they are saying we instantly came from apes. The truth is, hundreds of thousands of years and variables went into evolution, and the appearance of our higher thinking ability WAS NOT instantaneous. On a side note, the acceptance of evolution is not completely denied in the theist community, the main issue is only the humans. This is my segway into my next point about science.
Part 5. SCIENCE!!!!
I have argued with a large number of theists, which all seem to deny the idea of scientific proof. This close mindedness disgusts me personally, as most of the time they won't even pay attention to an argument once the words science and proof are used. The arrogance displayed in this response is childish. Science does prove things. The Earth does in fact spin, gravity can be measured in any situation, we do orbit the sun, the sun is mostly hydrogen, and nuclear fission in the core creates light and heat emitted towards us. A big argument theists pose is that the chances of us living on a planet in the perfect position with the perfect conditions is unreal. First of all, I would like to point out that our conditions are far from perfect. Secondly, the truth is that the true question is not whether we'd exist on the perfect planet or on a unfit one, because the chances of our human existance on a planet with the right conditions is 100% compared to any other, since millions of years of evolution would still bw necessary, and in the wrong conditions, life wouldn't last long enough. The real question is only whether or not a planet with the perfect conditions would exist. The odds in reality are quite good. Of course, with every point made to counteract their theory involving only god, they just back up a foundation point of the proven. It seems almost to be a neverending cycle when arguing the nonexistance of god.
Part 6. The Origin of Life
Where did human's come from? Theists will of course say, "Adam and Eve," but let me remind you that these tales woven in the "Holy Bible" were made long before the Renaissance, the birth of the age of science. They didn't know that people were in fact made of cells which are made up of organelles and truly made completely out of atoms. Let it be questioned how their god managed to pull a feat as complicated as that, and why he did. If man were to reverse engineer a cell on a molecular level, and assemble a new cell EXACTLY the same, would it be alive? Unless life requires "pixie dust" to occur, we would have successfully created life. Life truly I'd nothing but recurring chemical reactions in truth, although it still mystifies.
Part 7. The Origin of the Universe
On a similar note, the big bang theory seems to be a mocking point for theists. I can't say I disagree with their opinion, it is true what they ask, where did the particles to create the big bang come from. The big bang theory is extremely flawed. There are, however, more accurate theories which are completely plausible, just less recognized. Einstein himself proved that matter is just a form of energy. Recently in digital electronics we used 74LS02 chips, known as NOR chips (Not Or, or the inverse of the outputs you would obtain from an or chip). Wiring them up in a certain way, we created a true paradox. The output was random 1's and 0's (On and off signals) being spit out in random intervals.. I would like to point out that the existence of NOTHING is in fact a paradox, an impossible circumstance. Existance implies that something has being. Nothing is nothing, it has no being, yet it has to exist. Energy being spit out randomly is what most likely occured in the creation of the universe. You may realize that this creates another paradox, "The Beginning of Time." From prior research, I have learned that time is really just an illusion created by the subconcious. It is just another manmade tool, used to measure events and distance in another dimension, which is time. Our minds are all connected to this dimension, moving. This dimension was created before man, back along the timeline of evolutionary progress of animals. Time does not exist, and everything is happening at once, we just percieve the events through our dimension called time. So in fact, the random spewing of energy and everything of it's result all happened at one point. This point if put on a graph, would be our universe, where in time, it would be stretched and separated into a straight line. This is my personal theory, derived through research, comparison, and real world observations. This theory is only a theory, but much more viable than god. This opinion is of course biased, I apologize for that, but I felt my thought needed to be shared, and the final judement shall belong to you.
Part 8. Holy Moley! It's the Holy Bible
When it comes to the bible, theists seem to bring up every passage in it, and even the whole bible itself. According to them, if someone says god wrote a story book, it's automatically true, and at the same time it proves he's real. Using their logic, if I titled this book "The holy scripture of the magic leprachaun," it would automatically mean magic leprachauns exist, and can write an extensive thesis. I'd like to bring up a paraphrase from the bible myself. According to god if nobody believes in him, he is nothing. Exact logic. He exists through faith, and only faith.
Part 9. A Thought on the Bible
I personally believe the bible is something sinister. Any half wit can write a book, and a bunch of men in an organization whose aim is to guide the population according to acceptable moral rules can write the bible. I don't want to go all "Conspiracy theorist" on you... But it's extremely more viable than a book from god. Stories from the bible are extremely exaggerated too, who in their right mind would believe god flooded the earth, that water came from nowhere. That the exact molecues Hydrogen and Oxygen out of all atoms, were to appear in enourmous exponential amount and then disappear. The only way to dispel the lunacy of this point is to throw it in their face with an analogy.
More to come
Gender:
Points: 1465
Reviews: 15