No Need For God?

Recently I was surfing the net and an article entitled “No need for God?â€? caught my attention. The summary was telling of Professor Stephen Hawking’s new book explaining his M-theory, (a ‘scientific’ theory which conveniently “enjoys no observational supportâ€? says Stephen Penrose) in which ‘God’ is not needed for the universe to exist. Naturally curious, I clicked and started to read the article. I got less than 10 words in before I did a face-palm, immediately followed by banging my head on my desk. The article started out like this: “Because there is a law such as gravity…â€? We’ll just stop right there for one second. Now I know Mr. Hawking is a super genius and deserves the highest respect for his lifetime contribution to physics and the sciences, but I feel like a few of my exceptionally clever 3rd grade students could figure out the obvious logical fallacy in this. Because gravity exists??? As if to say there is no explanation for gravity needed? And furthermore that science is exempt from providing this explanation? Since when are there “gimmesâ€? in science? It’s as if there is some sort of proverbial ‘naturalistic mulligan,’ as I’ll call it, where an entire scientific theory is based off the false pretense that something simply exists. In this case, gravity seems to simply exist and needs no explanation. And herein lies the deception, because once you get passed the first line unchallenged, then everything else sounds quite believable. To be fair, Professor Hawking isn’t saying that there is no God, nor is that the main focus of his book. But that’s the part that people want to talk and debate about, so it’s plucked out of context to raise attention, because let’s be honest, controversy sells. Hawking actually had argued in earlier books that science and God are not incompatible, but that’s not to say he believes in God. I can respect the fact that he, at the very least, approaches it with an open mind as opposed to the militant atheists we see today. I watched on the news yesterday about how the American Atheists (yes it’s a real organization) were up in arms because of a New York City street sign had been named “7 in Heaven Streetâ€? in memory of 7 firefighters who had been killed assisting victims in the 9/11 attacks. They are claiming the sign “assumes that heaven actually existsâ€? and “that it violates the separation of church and state.â€? (2nd face-palm). What horrid oppression you face!!!

So let’s finish the rest of the first sentence: “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.â€? Interesting. Apparently gravity is nothing, and then the universe created itself from it. Sounds plausible right? Hardly. This is why science can’t and won’t prove or disprove the existence of God, because it only explains how the known forces work together (which is string theory in its most basic definition), not where they came from or why they exist. The naturalists like to challenge the theists and say “the burden of proof is on the theist to prove the existence of God.â€? Here is a classic ‘pass the buck’ cop out statement, which, in its essence, is fallacious to the bone. They are asking you to use the natural to prove the supernatural, the physical to explain the metaphysical. It’s on par with asking “can you empirically prove to me that your mother loves you?â€? No? Well I guess your mother doesn’t love you then. These are 2 different realms of questioning, let us not fall for this classic bait and switch. I say “prove to me in your lab that everything has always eternally existedâ€? or “prove to me that gravity came into existence through natural chanceâ€? What’s that? You can’t prove eternity? Or the existence of chance or its origins? Well I’m sorry but you will just have to take a leap of faith then, and believe what you will. The pride of ‘knowing everything’ will certainly be a trap, and for those who fall in it, I can only pray against the god of this age (Satan) who has blinded your eyes and minds.

The only thing I know is that I don’t know everything. I don’t have all the answers; but Jesus does.

A little later in the article we read this: “Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist.â€? Pardon me if I’m not convinced. Exactly where does spontaneous creation come from? Why? The answer we are given is ‘chance.’ Now I would imagine a physicist should be able to at least get this right. Take ‘chance’ for example and flipping a coin. We would say there’s a 50/50 chance of heads or tails right? Sure, but does ‘chance’ control whether or not it’s heads or tails? No, physics do. The energy exerted flipping the coin, number of rotations in the air, height it falls from, etc., etc. And that doesn’t even begin to address the questions: “Where did the coin come from?â€? and “Why is it flipping up in the air and coming down?â€? etc., etc. The god of ‘chance’ has nothing to do with it. Again, these just raise more questions than answers for the mind of the naturalist, but they don’t always see it that way. And again, these matters don’t contradict faith, but would appear to require it. Faith in the god of ‘chance’ sounds like the atheists believe in a mysterious invisible unproven force that created and controls everything in the universe. Sound familiar? One of my favorite theologians R.C. Sproul once said: “Chance controls nothing, because it is nothing.â€? I couldn’t agree more, after all, can you name one thing ‘chance’ has caused?

So what does all this have to do with Jesus? Not much really. Through all the hatred and theories that Jesus is simply a copy cat figure based on astrology (or whatever the new theory is this year, see documentaries “Zeitgeist� and “The God Who Wasn’t There� for full frontal attacks on Christ if you dare), did anyone ever consider the possibility that the reason billions of people follow Christ is because He is real? Is there a reason why He has prevailed where many did not? Yes, because Jesus IS the savior. That’s the best empirical evidence I can provide, billions of transformed lives all because of a loving God who cared so much, even though we are disgusting unworthy sinners, He made us worthy through the blood of Christ. He followed through with his promises where others did not. Why? Because He’s real, He’s my Savior, and He transformed my life after I gave up trying to do it myself.

Many people are leaving the church in America, and many are coming in. The Atheists are touting this claim and pronouncing victory. From what I’ve seen, the ones leaving are those who never really followed Jesus, and are finally discovering that they never really believed. They’ve recently discovered  that they just like doing other things more than church so they latch on to a worldview that best suits their lifestyle. Most people today try church, but they don’t try Jesus. Skeptics need to go and see for themselves what Jesus is all about. I can’t and won’t ever prove it to you, and people seldom give their lives to Christ because of a scientific or philosophical argument, you just have to try Him yourself. The argument I hear most can be roughly summed up as this: “I don’t like church, therefore God does not exist.â€?  That’s what the militants like Richard Dawkins are throwing around these days, and lots of people buy into it. He along with a few Christian fundamentalist who feed into his deception have made quite a big stink lately trying to make people believe there is this gigantic war between faith and science. They are different no doubt,  but also complimentary and compatible.

The war does exist, but it is not of flesh and blood, religion vs. science, it’s a war of life and death, in the spiritual sense. Jesus is life, sin is death, and we have the freedom to choose in everything we do.

As for the people coming into the church, the atheists should be concerned. A whole generation of leaders is rising up all over the world, educated, motivated, and full of the Holy Spirit. In my city, Shanghai China, the house churches I’ve visited are full of young professionals as opposed to the poor and desperate elderly an outsider skeptic might expect. There are still plenty of poor and the older generation coming to Christ, but it’s absolutely not limited to them. The next decade or two in China is going to be quite fascinating as the ‘mustard seed’ kingdom spreads throughout the atheist nation of China.

I’ll leave you with a lyric from one of my favorite rock bands called “My Broken Hero� off their album “Man of Science, Man of Faith.� The song is entitled: “Man of Science.�

“Tell me man of science what you saw that made you so afraid. There are things your logic cannot explain. But in the end we all believe.�

Please read the (free) book “The Irrational Atheist” by Vox Day to help understand the deception of militant Atheism today.

9 Comments

  1. Good stuff man. Wish more could see and understand what you are saying here. Just gotta keep praying that JC would open eyes and turn hearts.

  2. I love it man. Very well writen and indisputable. The reason I believe is the fact that someone could read something like this and still not believe. As it is writen, “O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, thank you for hiding these things from those who think themselves wise and clever, and for revealing them to the childlike.” Human reasoning or “logic” can only take a person so far.

  3. Gravity is easily explained and he probably just figured he was trying to explain things more complex then gravity which is a basic physics principle. Gravity comes from the fact that everything is attracted to everything else. The force of gravity is related to the mass and inversely related to the distance of the particles and this is very basic scientific knowledge. I doubt he wanted to start his article by teaching every scientific principle. Every particle in the universe exerts a force of gravity on every other particle in the universe. Everything’s connected. I could easily demonstrate that my mother loves me and that yours loves you. Any scientific theory that can’t be tested is only as believable as the theory of God and is about as useful. Science and religion are opposite thinking systems. One is used to determine what you can believe based on objective knowledge, one is used to believe what you want to believe based on your own conscious and unconscious feelings, faith. I can tell you why billions of people believe in Christianity. Because they inherited it from their ancestors, like a cultural gene passed down aka, Zietgiest, from their ancestors spread mostly at the sword to people with no other alternative who had little if no access to other belief systems or even the contents of their own bible. I think its more like a cultural virus because once you are inoculated its really hard to rid oneself of the unique set of beliefs it encompasses. Almost nothing in Christianity is original. Most of these ideas were around, what Christianity did was take the best ideas of the known religions and make an extremely potent combination, which was further refined as natural selection modified this meme over time. This evolution is easily observed in the bible itself and continues as the church fractures into more and more different branches. Christianity is still evolving to suit the needs of its believers. The theory that God created the universe is just as believable as the theory that a giant spaghetti monster created the universe. M theory is only slightly more useful because it does make some predictions that can be tested. But any theory that cannot be tested is unscientific and only someone untrained in the scientific method would be gullible enough to believe it.

    • I was wondering what took you so long to chime in! But I obviously have to address a few issues.

      Now, it’s not that I don’t understand gravity or how it works, or the scientific method, and the M-theory as a whole CAN be explained in layman’s terms. This wasn’t my question at all. My question(s) is the same as everyone else: why is gravity, and all the other natural forces, exempt from needing an explanation of origin/existence. Where does it come from? Why does it exist? Is it fair to assume it has always existed eternally or came into existence at the big bang? These are questions that science is not set up to answer. Science studies how the known natural forces, including gravity work together. To say these forces simply “are,â€? only poses more questions to the truth seeker. Hawking simply states that because the all the positive energy and negative energy in the universe add up to ‘0,’ or ‘nothing,’ then a creator is not needed to explain the universe. So basically, because 1 + -1 = 0, then numbers don’t need any explanation for why the exist. He also states that because of this energy that particles will appear and disappear at the subatomic level out of nothing. Only this requires something(s): space to occur, probably time, and definitely something to throw the energy out of balance. The logical fallacy is very obvious. The point I was making is that there are assumptions being made that aren’t taken into consideration. And I’m not the only one who thinks so. From what I gather, other well know naturalists, scientists, agnostics, and a plethora of other people question the validity of his claims as well. I know not everyone agrees with Hawking when he says the universe came from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing. But the thing is, positive and negative energy are still ‘something,’ and I, along with anybody, have NO reason to believe everything came from nothing. If it did, this would be the first and only event of its kind. If gravity exists eternally, then It would be the first natural thing to do so. If the singularity was infinitely dense, it will be the first only natural thing to ever be infinite. Unnatural events in a natural world.

      The first several hundred years of Christianity were not easy ones. Persecution was the norm, yet it thrived despite it. Even today in many countries that oppress Christians, the faithful followers manage to thrive and grow. Why would anyone choose that if thought it might not be true? After Constantine, many years of corruption followed, and you are right, the church did force feed some, but not all. No matter where you go in the world, the bible holds true. I meet Chinese Christians all time, and I don’t have to guess what they believe, because I know they read the same Word of God I do. The fact that it evolved is another sad result, however this doesn’t nullify or change the words in the Bible in any way. “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.â€? 2 Tim 4:3. So what you have said confirms exactly what the Bible has foretold, that ‘so-called’ Christians would twist the faith into what they want it to be. So it’s not surprising whatsoever that this has happened, but rather quite confirming of Biblical truth. The words I read each day are the same words circulated by the early church movement, the same words my Chinese brothers and sisters read today. Any ‘religion’ that strays from this or ‘evolves,’ is in direct contrast with the Bible. For this reason I have chosen to be part of a church with no denomination, holding firm to the words in the Bible. There are many black and white issues in the Bible, and many not so binary ones. All the major denominations have the exact same core beliefs about Jesus, who He was, is, and what He did. It’s the other not so clear issues that cause division, none of which change who Jesus was and is. I will also vehemently argue that as time goes on, and knowledge/scholarship increases, our understanding of the God, as well as science and nature, will continue to grow without any inherent change of who Jesus is. People to this day continue to discover deeper theological truths in the deep meaning of each sentence in the Bible, just as science continues to make many new profound discoveries. After my lifetime, Christians understanding of the Word of God will continue to grow more and more, as it has over the past 2000 years. Many things we didn’t understand before, we can understand more now. Theological things we don’t understand now may be made clearer in the future.

      Saying that most of Christianity is unoriginal is a ridiculous claim. Just like saying Jesus was a made up legendary figure that didn’t actually exist is equally as ignorant. When you add up all the gospels, biblical and non, the epistles (some written by disciples), and secular historical accounts, there are dozens if not hundreds of 1st century documents citing Jesus and things about His life at various lengths. Yet He is dismissed by naturalists without question because of the supernatural nature of His story. I find it quite ironic, when compared to other mythological figures such as Horus, Mithra, etc., there is drastically more quantity and more recent historical information available about Jesus, yet the recorded history of these older legends is accepted by atheists without question as authoritative history, simply because it fits into their world view better. On top that, Christianity is quite unique and opposite to other religions. ‘Religion’ is always a set of rules made my man to earn their way to God. Christianity is the exact opposite; you can’t earn it, you are too sinful. You can’t build the ‘ladder’ to God, He’s built it for you. By this definition, Christianity is not even a ‘religion’ at all, and that’s where Christ comes in, to destroy ‘religion.’ There are loads of Christ figures in the Bible as you said, such as Adam, Abraham, David, etc. But none actually made the cut because they “missed the mark.â€? That is literally what sin means; to “miss the mark.â€? Jesus was the only one to live a sinless life. Before Jesus were times of widespread idol worship for thousands of years, including God’s own constituents. This pattern of turning from God to idols is as constant in ancient times as it is today. The bible is full of false prophets and false Christs, so it should be no surprise that they also showed up in both Biblical non-Biblical history. That, compiled with the fact that Jews were awaiting a Messiah for centuries, it should not be surprising whatsoever that false messiahs rose up from among the pagans or the Jews or any other religion in that place and era. These stories are seen over and over again in the bible, and the false person always goes down for one simple reason: they are false. So it should stand to say that if one were the true Messiah, it would be known and made clear, and thus would not die out. So when the real one finally came, shall we just say He was a copy of the fake ones and dismiss Him? Prophecies predicted the false prophets and messiahs, so your statement once again confirms the Bible’s truth and prophecy. The Jews are still waiting for the messiah today, and false one continue to rise, creating fake religions, usually to get power, worldly things, or just because they want to play god.

      So are feelings valid or are they not? In one sentence you chastise Christians by saying their beliefs are based on feelings and are worthless from a scientific point of view, then in the next sentence you say you can scientifically prove feelings: a mother’s ‘love.’ This is a highly subjective matter so I encourage you to demonstrate how to prove our mothers love us. It would certainly be more productive than simply making unsupported truth claims. So feel free, but you must use objective parameters, not based on human opinion or popular vote, on what constitutes motherly love. Also you will have to take into account that our mothers are telling the truth. Unfortunately, you can’t possibly know this 100% unless you are said mother. Everything is based off of subjective observations, not objective physical ones. Sure you can scan her brain and observe different patterns, but all this proves is that chemical reactions happen in the brain due to stimuli. The same thing may happen when she thinks about chocolate and palm trees. Then you have to subjectively quantify what amount equals love. So I’ll stand behind my claim, science cannot prove my mother loves me, nor can it explain why we ‘love,’ it’s simply not set up to. Or why humans, among millions of species, are unquestionably unique in this way, among countless others. This also proves science is not the only ‘truth.’ One can follow scientific thought, as well as theology, philosophy, and believe in love too. Yes they are different ways of thinking, because metaphysical things actually exist in reality outside of natural science. Now, I DO believe in love and that my mother loves me like yours loves you, but this is something I accept in faith.

      As for so called ‘memes,’ well I guess I can make up words too. How about ‘Edirp.’ Edirp is when someone becomes so close minded that they adopt a limited narrow worldview, stubbornly clinging to illogical purposeless truths about the universe, puffing themselves up as the center of said universe. And even if said person had a ‘road to Damascus’ experience, where a bright light blinded them and Jesus Himself spoke to that person to turn from their ways and run to Him, they still would immediately dismiss it as there is already no possibility of a the divine in their worldview. I know I once suffered from a bad case of Edirp, and it still tries to creep back into my life today occasionally. Sure my theory lacks any scholarly research, but in my personal observation, it has held true without exception. Dawkins’ psychology is a pseudoscience at best. You can study things in human behavior that sometimes or usually happen, but never 100% of the time. If we only get our beliefs from our parents/ancestors and memetics, then I guess you yourself are perfect proof that this theory is false considering the stark contrast of your beliefs and your parents’. Heck, maybe the idea of ‘memetics’ is in fact a meme itself. If you can’t find the proof in genetics, something physically real, then why not just make up something such as memetics to try to prove your point? This hypocrisy is the exact criticism used against Christians: decide your worldview based on what you like, THEN find something to prove it. Here is a meme for you: all known civilizations past and present, no matter how isolated, have had the idea of ‘god.’ How did they come up with it? Can you think of something that’s never been thought of before? Sure maybe they just wanted more rain, but here again, memes only create more questions than answers. I know what you’re trying to prove with meme theory, but here in China more often than not, Chinese believers find Jesus apart from their parents and ancestors. In fact most people I know here, Chinese or international, don’t come from believing families. Memes don’t actually exist. You can’t see them, you can’t feel them, and you can’t weigh them or measure them, So if you can believe in so called ‘memes’ with FAITH, why can’t you believe in God? “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.â€? Romans 1:20

      Suffice it to say, I could give you an exhaustive list of reasons to believe in God should you desire, but I wouldn’t be able to give you 1 reason to say the ‘spaghetti monster’ created the universe. And I don’t really think childish name calling is going to resolve much. However, if the spaghetti monster rumor started to go around, I would certainly be more inclined to think it’s infinitely more plausible than the universe created itself out of nothing, by nothing, and for nothing, as Hawking claims. I can at least appreciate the fact that Hawking is not militant in his views towards people of faith. These militant atheist dogmas are quite radical as well as a little scary; make that very scary. One quick look at the American atheists website and the anti-Semitism and anti anything ‘God’ reeks of the next holocaust. And God, as well as most of the modern world, knows what this type of thinking has done in the past century in several Marxist regimes and dictatorships, the names of which I needn’t mention. When you replace God with government and force feed atheism on everyone, the result has inevitably been corruption and reduced value of life for the lower classes it creates. Some classes are obviously expendable, and anyone that contradicts your atheistic dictatorship, anyone who isn’t ‘worth’ saving, you simply kill them or let them die; millions of them. The institution that is responsible for these atrocities, in religious countries and non, is the institution of government. You can blame religion for many things, and never give it credit for anything like helping feed millions worldwide or creating running water in undeveloped countries, etc.. I could make the same argument that though science has done great things for this world, it is also responsible for nuclear bombs, weapons, gas chambers, and an array of other awful inventions. If, as a Christian, I must accept the good with the bad, so must science. Following that line of logic, couldn’t we also say we should eliminate science because of the devastating things that can come from it? Once all religion is wiped off the earth, then what? Persecution will continue against any person or group who opposes those in power who are tripping on their own god complex, most likely a severe case of Edirp.

      After watching ‘Religulous’ by Bill Maher, I must admit I was quite in shock at the end when his suggestion was to eradicate religion and people of faith. If these views of eliminating the ‘virus,’ as you so eloquently put it, become accepted, then I can only imagine what horrors will undoubtedly follow.

  4. does the bible explain god’s origins? or heaven’s origins?

    • The answer is yes!….sort of

      Firstly, the Bible says over and over again, from the old testament to the new testament, that God is eternal.

      John 8:58: Jesus said to them, “Truly, I tell all of you with certainty, before there was an Abraham, I AM!”

      “JHVH” (Jehovah/God) means, “I AM.” His name is a “state-of-being.” It means. “was, is, shall be.”

      Revelation 1:8: “I am the Alpha and the Omega,� says the Lord God, “who is and who was and who is to come, the Almighty.�

      Psalm 90:2: Before the mountains were brought forth, or ever thou hadst formed the earth and the world, even from everlasting to everlasting, thou art God.

      So not only is God eternal, but that is also what his name means.

      As incomprehensible as this is to our finite human understanding that requires “boundaries” on everything… our Creator has no beginning or end. He is our beginning and our end. Eternity has no starting point… or end. If something can be infinite it has no origin. So there is no “origin” of God. The Bible also alludes to the fact that time is meaningless to God:

      (1 Pet. 3:8) But do not overlook this one fact, beloved, that with the Lord one day is as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

      About heaven/hell:

      Perhaps the most famous verse in the Bible:

      .John 3:16 “For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.

      Everyone agrees that everything in this universe is finite, has a beginning and has, or will have an end. But God says the spiritual realm is not like that. It’s eternal, no beginning, no end. Heaven is simply eternity with God. Hell is simply eternity without God. We all have a choice to seek Him or not, to try and know Him or not.

      Matthew 25:46: “These, then, will be sent off to eternal punishment,
      but the righteous will go to eternal life.”

      Does this help answer your question??? Thanks for reading my blog.

  5. Goffman,

    What is this babble?

    Now, it’s not that I don’t understand gravity or how it works, or the scientific method, and the M-theory as a whole CAN be explained in layman’s terms. This wasn’t my question at all. My question(s) is the same as everyone else: why is gravity, and all the other natural forces, exempt from needing an explanation of origin/existence. Where does it come from? Why does it exist? Is it fair to assume it has always existed eternally or came into existence at the big bang? These are questions that science is not set up to answer. Science studies how the known natural forces, including gravity work together. To say these forces simply “are,� only poses more questions to the truth seeker.

    Gravity exists. We don’t know all the details about its origins. Any real truth seeker wouldn’t look for more than 1 minute into the bible or the koran or any similar backwards and dated text in order to find answers.

    Hawking simply states that because the all the positive energy and negative energy in the universe add up to ’0,’ or ‘nothing,’ then a creator is not needed to explain the universe. So basically, because 1 + -1 = 0, then numbers don’t need any explanation for why the exist. He also states that because of this energy that particles will appear and disappear at the subatomic level out of nothing. Only this requires something(s): space to occur, probably time, and definitely something to throw the energy out of balance. The logical fallacy is very obvious. The point I was making is that there are assumptions being made that aren’t taken into consideration. And I’m not the only one who thinks so. From what I gather, other well know naturalists, scientists, agnostics, and a plethora of other people question the validity of his claims as well. I know not everyone agrees with Hawking when he says the universe came from nothing, by nothing, and for nothing. But the thing is, positive and negative energy are still ‘something,’ and I, along with anybody, have NO reason to believe everything came from nothing. If it did, this would be the first and only event of its kind. If gravity exists eternally, then It would be the first natural thing to do so. If the singularity was infinitely dense, it will be the first only natural thing to ever be infinite. Unnatural events in a natural world.

    This paragraph includes insane amounts of babble, again. You are tripping over nonsense and not doing any justice to Hawking. Ok, you say you have no reason to believe everything came from nothing. Now you want reasons for belief?

    The first several hundred years of Christianity were not easy ones. Persecution was the norm, yet it thrived despite it. Even today in many countries that oppress Christians, the faithful followers manage to thrive and grow. Why would anyone choose that if thought it might not be true?

    There are a bunch reasons why someone might choose to believe something… even if it weren’t true. There are also a bunch of reasons why someone might choose to follow something… even if they thought it wasn’t true.

    After Constantine, many years of corruption followed, and you are right, the church did force feed some, but not all. No matter where you go in the world, the bible holds true.

    These sentences are insane. The bible holds true? Is this because it is the undisputed word of god? The word of a man (not a woman) who can hear your thoughts? Seems to me that god would be able to write a little better. Or at least inspire a little better. Also seems to me the bible wouldn’t be riddled with errors. The bible was written a long time ago by men to control other men and especially women. Don’t steal your neighbors goats!

    I meet Chinese Christians all time, and I don’t have to guess what they believe, because I know they read the same Word of God I do. The fact that it evolved is another sad result, however this doesn’t nullify or change the words in the Bible in any way. “For the time will come when men will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear.� 2 Tim 4:3. So what you have said confirms exactly what the Bible has foretold, that ‘so-called’ Christians would twist the faith into what they want it to be. So it’s not surprising whatsoever that this has happened, but rather quite confirming of Biblical truth.

    I bet Obama wins the upcoming presidential election. If it happens, it will confirm the truth of my words.

    The words I read each day are the same words circulated by the early church movement, the same words my Chinese brothers and sisters read today. Any ‘religion’ that strays from this or ‘evolves,’ is in direct contrast with the Bible. For this reason I have chosen to be part of a church with no denomination, holding firm to the words in the Bible.

    The words of the bible are crazy man. They were written a long time ago. There now are many more interesting books out there. Especially because the church doesn’t still have the power to burn books.

    There are many black and white issues in the Bible, and many not so binary ones. All the major denominations have the exact same core beliefs about Jesus, who He was, is, and what He did.

    Jesus was a man. Sure. Here are the facts about him: he wasn’t born to a virgin and he didn’t defy gravity/science (walk on water, heal people through touch, etc.).

    It’s the other not so clear issues that cause division, none of which change who Jesus was and is. I will also vehemently argue that as time goes on, and knowledge/scholarship increases, our understanding of the God, as well as science and nature, will continue to grow without any inherent change of who Jesus is. People to this day continue to discover deeper theological truths in the deep meaning of each sentence in the Bible, just as science continues to make many new profound discoveries. After my lifetime, Christians understanding of the Word of God will continue to grow more and more, as it has over the past 2000 years. Many things we didn’t understand before, we can understand more now. Theological things we don’t understand now may be made clearer in the future.

    There is no such thing as god. No understanding of him will grow.

    Saying that most of Christianity is unoriginal is a ridiculous claim. Just like saying Jesus was a made up legendary figure that didn’t actually exist is equally as ignorant.

    Saying this is not ridiculous. It just goes to help show that Christianity is not special. It has plagiarized up the wazoo. Saying jesus is a made up legendary figure is not equally as ignorant. There is evidence for jesus existing as a person.

    When you add up all the gospels, biblical and non, the epistles (some written by disciples), and secular historical accounts, there are dozens if not hundreds of 1st century documents citing Jesus and things about His life at various lengths. Yet He is dismissed by naturalists without question because of the supernatural nature of His story.

    This is not true. His existence is not dismissed. The crazy powers he has are dismissed.

    I find it quite ironic, when compared to other mythological figures such as Horus, Mithra, etc., there is drastically more quantity and more recent historical information available about Jesus, yet the recorded history of these older legends is accepted by atheists without question as authoritative history, simply because it fits into their world view better.

    This is more nonsense.

    On top that, Christianity is quite unique and opposite to other religions.

    Christianity is a religion. There have been over 10k religions in this word.

    ‘Religion’ is always a set of rules made my man to earn their way to God. Christianity is the exact opposite; you can’t earn it, you are too sinful. You can’t build the ‘ladder’ to God, He’s built it for you. By this definition, Christianity is not even a ‘religion’ at all, and that’s where Christ comes in, to destroy ‘religion.’

    No you are just getting strange.

    There are loads of Christ figures in the Bible as you said, such as Adam, Abraham, David, etc. But none actually made the cut because they “missed the mark.� That is literally what sin means; to “miss the mark.�

    oooo sin. sin sin sin!

    Jesus was the only one to live a sinless life. Before Jesus were times of widespread idol worship for thousands of years, including God’s own constituents. This pattern of turning from God to idols is as constant in ancient times as it is today. The bible is full of false prophets and false Christs, so it should be no surprise that they also showed up in both Biblical non-Biblical history. That, compiled with the fact that Jews were awaiting a Messiah for centuries, it should not be surprising whatsoever that false messiahs rose up from among the pagans or the Jews or any other religion in that place and era. These stories are seen over and over again in the bible, and the false person always goes down for one simple reason: they are false. So it should stand to say that if one were the true Messiah, it would be known and made clear, and thus would not die out. So when the real one finally came, shall we just say He was a copy of the fake ones and dismiss Him? Prophecies predicted the false prophets and messiahs, so your statement once again confirms the Bible’s truth and prophecy. The Jews are still waiting for the messiah today, and false one continue to rise, creating fake religions, usually to get power, worldly things, or just because they want to play god.

    More nonsense babble.

    So are feelings valid or are they not? In one sentence you chastise Christians by saying their beliefs are based on feelings and are worthless from a scientific point of view, then in the next sentence you say you can scientifically prove feelings: a mother’s ‘love.’

    Feeling are ‘valid’ if you are asking whether the exist. Feelings do not play a huge role in determining science. You can prove feelings exist. But what does this have to do with anything?

    This is a highly subjective matter so I encourage you to demonstrate how to prove our mothers love us. It would certainly be more productive than simply making unsupported truth claims. So feel free, but you must use objective parameters, not based on human opinion or popular vote, on what constitutes motherly love. Also you will have to take into account that our mothers are telling the truth. Unfortunately, you can’t possibly know this 100% unless you are said mother. Everything is based off of subjective observations, not objective physical ones. Sure you can scan her brain and observe different patterns, but all this proves is that chemical reactions happen in the brain due to stimuli. The same thing may happen when she thinks about chocolate and palm trees. Then you have to subjectively quantify what amount equals love. So I’ll stand behind my claim, science cannot prove my mother loves me, nor can it explain why we ‘love,’ it’s simply not set up to. Or why humans, among millions of species, are unquestionably unique in this way, among countless others. This also proves science is not the only ‘truth.’ One can follow scientific thought, as well as theology, philosophy, and believe in love too. Yes they are different ways of thinking, because metaphysical things actually exist in reality outside of natural science. Now, I DO believe in love and that my mother loves me like yours loves you, but this is something I accept in faith.

    Science can have quite an interesting discussion regarding feelings. And yes, it can even prove that feelings exist. Why are you trying so hard to play gotcha games about science? It’s not perfect but it is the best we have. And it is beautiful.

    As for so called ‘memes,’ well I guess I can make up words too. How about ‘Edirp.’ Edirp is when someone becomes so close minded that they adopt a limited narrow worldview, stubbornly clinging to illogical purposeless truths about the universe, puffing themselves up as the center of said universe.

    Please don’t be an Edirp.

    And even if said person had a ‘road to Damascus’ experience, where a bright light blinded them and Jesus Himself spoke to that person to turn from their ways and run to Him, they still would immediately dismiss it as there is already no possibility of a the divine in their worldview. I know I once suffered from a bad case of Edirp, and it still tries to creep back into my life today occasionally. Sure my theory lacks any scholarly research, but in my personal observation, it has held true without exception. Dawkins’ psychology is a pseudoscience at best.

    This is not true. Have you ever read the God Delusion. Dawkins goes through all your nonsense and address what we know and what we don’t know.

    You can study things in human behavior that sometimes or usually happen, but never 100% of the time. If we only get our beliefs from our parents/ancestors and memetics, then I guess you yourself are perfect proof that this theory is false considering the stark contrast of your beliefs and your parents’. Heck, maybe the idea of ‘memetics’ is in fact a meme itself. If you can’t find the proof in genetics, something physically real, then why not just make up something such as memetics to try to prove your point? This hypocrisy is the exact criticism used against Christians: decide your worldview based on what you like, THEN find something to prove it. Here is a meme for you: all known civilizations past and present, no matter how isolated, have had the idea of ‘god.’ How did they come up with it? Can you think of something that’s never been thought of before? Sure maybe they just wanted more rain, but here again, memes only create more questions than answers. I know what you’re trying to prove with meme theory, but here in China more often than not, Chinese believers find Jesus apart from their parents and ancestors. In fact most people I know here, Chinese or international, don’t come from believing families. Memes don’t actually exist. You can’t see them, you can’t feel them, and you can’t weigh them or measure them, So if you can believe in so called ‘memes’ with FAITH, why can’t you believe in God? “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.� Romans 1:20

    This is such babble. Do you notice a pattern? We are all afraid of the dark. Just cause we are human and are emotional and have feelings and want to learn and know more doesn’t mean the answer is some white dude who can apparently walk on water and hear our thoughts.

    Suffice it to say, I could give you an exhaustive list of reasons to believe in God should you desire, but I wouldn’t be able to give you 1 reason to say the ‘spaghetti monster’ created the universe. And I don’t really think childish name calling is going to resolve much. However, if the spaghetti monster rumor started to go around, I would certainly be more inclined to think it’s infinitely more plausible than the universe created itself out of nothing, by nothing, and for nothing, as Hawking claims.

    There is not one good reason you can give to believe in god. Meanwhile, there’s actually an exhaustive list to believe in science and to understand how and why christianity developed and spread.

    I can at least appreciate the fact that Hawking is not militant in his views towards people of faith. These militant atheist dogmas are quite radical as well as a little scary;

    Am I being militant because I’m saying your beliefs are wacky? Because your beliefs are backwards and continue to stand in the way of science? Maybe science is dangerous in some ways but that is a discussion that reasonable people can have.

    One quick look at the American atheists website and the anti-Semitism and anti anything ‘God’ reeks of the next holocaust.

    This is a joke. Religion is the true force of evil.

    And God, as well as most of the modern world, knows what this type of thinking has done in the past century in several Marxist regimes and dictatorships, the names of which I needn’t mention.

    Please mention the names and discuss without inserting babble. Atheism was not the problem or the root cause.

    When you replace God with government and force feed atheism on everyone, the result has inevitably been corruption and reduced value of life for the lower classes it creates.

    Not true. I find immense value in science and nature and people and life.

    Some classes are obviously expendable, and anyone that contradicts your atheistic dictatorship, anyone who isn’t ‘worth’ saving, you simply kill them or let them die; millions of them. The institution that is responsible for these atrocities, in religious countries and non, is the institution of government.

    Now you’re an anarchist? The church is the most disgusting organization of all time.

    You can blame religion for many things, and never give it credit for anything like helping feed millions worldwide or creating running water in undeveloped countries, etc..

    Religion has inspired many people to do good things. This does not make it true.

    I could make the same argument that though science has done great things for this world, it is also responsible for nuclear bombs, weapons, gas chambers, and an array of other awful inventions. If, as a Christian, I must accept the good with the bad, so must science. Following that line of logic, couldn’t we also say we should eliminate science because of the devastating things that can come from it? Once all religion is wiped off the earth, then what? Persecution will continue against any person or group who opposes those in power who are tripping on their own god complex, most likely a severe case of Edirp.

    This is a huge stretch.

    After watching ‘Religulous’ by Bill Maher, I must admit I was quite in shock at the end when his suggestion was to eradicate religion and people of faith. If these views of eliminating the ‘virus,’ as you so eloquently put it, become accepted, then I can only imagine what horrors will undoubtedly follow.

    Religion is not true. Period. Perhaps it is a force for good. Perhaps it is a force for bad. This can be discussed:

  6. Also, for your reference, here are some words on another made up religion:

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/features/2007/god_is_not_great/mormonism_a_racket_becomes_a_religion.html

    http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/fighting_words/2011/10/is_mormonism_a_cult_who_cares_it_s_their_weird_and_sinister_beli.html

    What will it make for you to actually realize that god is not white? That he can’t hear your thoughts? That he doesn’t exist. It takes a real strong person to admit when they are wrong. Religion continues to stand in the way of progress and promote insane amounts of bigotry and babble. Gay marriage, stem cell research, rape, abortion, women’s rights, education, science, etc. You are too smart and too good to not be on the side of the enlightenment:

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Age_of_Enlightenment

  7. Actually think a think

    You are spewing absolute nonsense left and right. Insert Allah every time you type God or Jesus. Or insert the Spaghetti Monster. Or Zeus. Or Thor. Or anything. Science is entirely capable in all ways — unless you set it up to fail by seeking perfect answers and explanations to very difficult questions. Science has given us the world. It has informed us that we are not the center of the universe. It has given us the internet. Medicine. Cars. Computers. Etc. It can also say a lot about whether your mother loves you. Believing in science is not ‘taking a leap of faith.’ Science would be the first person to say ‘hey this is the best we can do, at the moment!’ Why is the ‘only thing you know’ that Jesus (Allah)(Zeus) has all the answers? Do you also think the world is flat? Do you also think cell phones are magic? Do you believe in witches and demons and satan (don’t answer that).

    You say insane things like this:

    So let’s finish the rest of the first sentence: “Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing.� Interesting. Apparently gravity is nothing, and then the universe created itself from it. Sounds plausible right? Hardly. This is why science can’t and won’t prove or disprove the existence of God, because it only explains how the known forces work together (which is string theory in its most basic definition), not where they came from or why they exist. The naturalists like to challenge the theists and say “the burden of proof is on the theist to prove the existence of God.� Here is a classic ‘pass the buck’ cop out statement, which, in its essence, is fallacious to the bone. They are asking you to use the natural to prove the supernatural, the physical to explain the metaphysical. It’s on par with asking “can you empirically prove to me that your mother loves you?� No? Well I guess your mother doesn’t love you then. These are 2 different realms of questioning, let us not fall for this classic bait and switch. I say “prove to me in your lab that everything has always eternally existed� or “prove to me that gravity came into existence through natural chance� What’s that? You can’t prove eternity? Or the existence of chance or its origins? Well I’m sorry but you will just have to take a leap of faith then, and believe what you will. The pride of ‘knowing everything’ will certainly be a trap, and for those who fall in it, I can only pray against the god of this age (Satan) who has blinded your eyes and minds.The only thing I know is that I don’t know everything. I don’t have all the answers; but Jesus does.

    Science says things like this (note, this is very high level discussion — if you’d like to read more I would direct you to google):

    I could easily demonstrate that my mother loves me and that yours loves you. Any scientific theory that can’t be tested is only as believable as the theory of God and is about as useful. Science and religion are opposite thinking systems. One is used to determine what you can believe based on objective knowledge, one is used to believe what you want to believe based on your own conscious and unconscious feelings, faith. I can tell you why billions of people believe in Christianity. Because they inherited it from their ancestors, like a cultural gene passed down aka, Zietgiest, from their ancestors spread mostly at the sword to people with no other alternative who had little if no access to other belief systems or even the contents of their own bible. I think its more like a cultural virus because once you are inoculated its really hard to rid oneself of the unique set of beliefs it encompasses. Almost nothing in Christianity is original.

    What happens when we fall in love is probably one of the most difficult things in the whole universe to explain. It’s something we do without thinking. In fact, if we think about it too much, we usually end up doing it all wrong and get in a terrible muddle. That’s because when you fall in love, the right side of your brain gets very busy. The right side is the bit that seems to be especially important for our emotions. Language, on the other hand, gets done almost completely in the left side of the brain. And this is one reason why we find it so difficult to talk about our feelings and emotions: the language areas on the left side can’t send messages to the emotional areas on the right side very well. So we get stuck for words, unable to describe our feelings.

    But science does allow us to say a little bit about what happens when we fall in love. First of all, we know that love sets off really big changes in how we feel. We feel all light-headed and emotional. We can be happy and cry with happiness at the same time. Suddenly, some things don’t matter any more and the only thing we are interested in is being close to the person we have fallen in love with.

    These days we have scanner machines that let us watch a person’s brain at work. Different parts of the brain light up on the screen, depending on what the brain is doing. When people are in love, the emotional bits of their brains are very active, lighting up. But other bits of the brain that are in charge of more sensible thinking are much less active than normal. So the bits that normally say ‘Don’t do that because it would be crazy!’ are switched off, and the bits that say ‘Oh, that would be lovely!’ are switched on.

    Why does this happen? One reason is that love releases certain chemicals in our brains. One is called dopamine, and this gives us a feeling of excitement. Another is called oxytocin and seems to be responsible for the light-headedness and cosiness we feel when we are with the person we love. When these are released in large quantities, they go to parts of the brain that are especially responsive to them.

    But all this doesn’t explain why you fall in love with a particular person. And that is a bit of a mystery, since there seems to be no good reason for our choices. In fact, it seems to be just as easy to fall in love with someone after you’ve married them as before, which seems the wrong way round. And here’s another odd thing. When we are in love, we can trick ourselves into thinking the other person is perfect. Of course, no one is really perfect. But the more perfect we find each other, the longer our love will last.

    Do you think you’re being tricked? Actually think. Before. You. Answer.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *