One who has tough questions should never ask them of those who fear the answers.
Have you ever had one of those moments growing up when you were presented with an idea that you immediately accepted, but deep in the recesses of your mind, something didn’t add up? That was my entire childhood really. That’s basically how I grew up with religion. This post is for all the younger folks out there who have questions they are either afraid to ask or were given circular, useless answers. Read on to see what all your church elders were so afraid of.
■ E-mail: accordingtoxen[at]gmail[dot]com
“When people go in search of the truth, they tend to find whatever it is they’re looking for, whether it is the truth or not.”
Remember when Pluto was a planet? Now it isn’t. Remember when removing tonsils cured tonsillitis? Now we know better. Or what about when the moon was completely devoid of water? Recent discoveries show otherwise. All of these things were true once. So I’ve got to ask a really tough question of you:
What is truth?
“We are mechanical creatures of little importance in the cosmic scheme of things.”
The Michael Travesser cult in the New Mexico desert reminded me about the Biblical prophecy that we are in end times, that many will come claiming to be the Christ and that many will be deceived. So I got to the point of thinking: Why would God in all his wisdom, allow his own people to be deceived? I found this thought to be most troubling. In fact, I am now more certain than ever before that the general well being of mankind was never in God’s interest at all.
“The domain of natural science is natural science, not metaphysics. The fields are logically incompatible.”
Naturalists are the strongest of all atheists. They believe that all things can be explained by natural laws and causality. They believe that nature is all that there is and therefore, natural science can be used to invalidate God’s existence. The obvious challenge with this position is that it presumes the domain of natural science extends to all other fields of knowledge. Not only does it make this imprecise leap of logic, but it also misconstrues the intention of Charles Darwin’s theory of Evolution with the intention of using it for something it was never designed. This is the fifth and final post in the series exposing the innate fallacies of atheism. Be forewarned; this one’s an epic.
“Sometimes the truth is inexplicable – and that is the plain and simple truth.”
Consider this: If a dog really did eat your homework, how’re you going to prove it? You could examine the bowel movement of the animal. However, assuming your homework was written on paper, it would have already become an indistinguishable, finely digested mulch at that point. The teacher’s skepticism about your story is palpable though, largely because of their inability to prove it and the unlikelihood of its occurrence. Does your teacher’s doubt about your story prove that it isn’t true? No. Yet, this is how skeptics think. They believe that whatever can be doubted is not likely to be true. Skeptical Atheists love this technique for asserting the “likely” non existence of God. While that is true on some level, it’s easily the worst way to make any kind of assertive proof of anything.