Sunday, August 14, 2011

Nature and Religion: Part IV

Such is the true condition of Christianity/Religion: Christianity/Religion is a school of belief (yes, a school of belief and NOT a school of thought) that is built on the lack of knowledge and lack of understanding of man. It does not matter if the lack of knowledge/understanding is in the nature of this planet and the universe, or in the physical and emotional nature of man, or in those things man considers to be supernatural, or in the positive and negative situations that occur every moment in every facet of life, or in the amazing things that are all around us (to include ourselves).

Consider that the very term 'lack' is indicative of an absence of something. The lack of the ability of an atheist to explain everything in the universe is repeatedly utilized by Christianity/Religion to prove God/Creator. Now, understand that to prove God/Creator fact must be presented; substance must be present. In fact (no pun intended), in order to prove anything as truth a fact must be presented. I know I keep saying this over and over, but it is essential that you understand.

A deficit cannot be used to bolster proof of another deficit. Look at it this way: A hole in the ground cannot be filled with another hole in the ground.

Would you agree that understanding is a consequence of the acknowledgement of proof and evidence? For example, man once believed that what made a harvest a good harvest was the blessings of gods of harvest. Man now understands that honey bees, bats, moths, and a wide variety of creatures in nature are responsible for the pollination/cross-pollination that is essential to the good harvest of many crops.

How does man know this? Man knows this because he has watched and studied and witnessed and recorded these creatures and how they help to pollinate. By acknowledging the facts, the truth, the proof man now understands that the harvest gods have crappy-doo to do with a good harvest.

Say for the sake of argument that two ancient farmers are celebrating a good harvest. One farmer offers a sacrifice of thanks to the harvest gods, and the other farmer does not.

"Why haven't you made a sacrifice of thanks to the harvest gods?" asks the one farmer.
"Because I do not believe that the harvest gods exist, much less that they have anything to do with this good harvest," answers the other farmer.
 "Then what or who is responsible for the good harvest?"
"I do not know."
"See! You cannot explain it, can you? You have no other explanation! It is because of the harvest gods. You know it but simply do not wish to admit such."

How stupid is this argument? Pretty stupid. This is the same argument used by Christianity:

Believer: "God created everything."
Atheist: "That is not true."
Believer: "Oh, yeah? Where did that tree come from?"
Atheist: "From a seed in the ground."
Believer: ""Where did the first trees on earth come from? How were they formed? Who made them?"
Atheist: "I do not know."
Believer: "See! You cannot explain it, can you? You have no other explanation than God put the first trees here on earth. You know this! You just will not admit to this."

This is an argument that cannot hold water. Here is why:
1) A belief needs fact in order to be justifiably be labeled as truth.
2) Truth is substance.
3) Some people believe that God/Creator is the reason for everything.
4) Atheists do not believe God/Creator is responsible for anything.
5) To prove God exists evidence, fact must be presented.
6) Believers do not have proof God/Creator exists. Therefore, God/Creator lacks fact/substance and is not true.
7) The atheist does not know the reason for existence/First Cause, and the inability to explain such is indicative of a lack of substance.
8) Believers insist that the atheist's inability to answer or explain everything/First Cause is evidence or proof that God/Creator exists. According to Christianity/Religion, the atheist's lacking of an explanation provides the proof Christianity needs.
9) Lacking infers deficit. Proof infers a positive. Therefore, positive proof must be used to remove any element of lacking in order to participate in truth and fact.
10) Christians/Religion cannot prove God. Therefore, God is lacking and a deficit.
11) When Christians/Believers try to use the atheist's lacking as proof of the truth of God it is the same thing as trying to use a 'nothing' to prove that another 'nothing' actually IS something.
12) Lacking cannot be used to validate (remove) lacking. Deficit cannot be used to remove deficit.
13) Therefore, the Christian/Religious attempt to use the atheist's lacking to prove God/Creator, or to fill what Christians themselves lack makes no goddamn sense whatsoever.
14) Debt is not lowered with more debt. Hate does not diminish with more hate. Ignorance does not transform ignorance.

You cannot fill a hole in the ground with another hole in the ground.

Visit this website for more information:

No comments:

Post a Comment

Drop a line. Say something, anything. You know you want to.