Atheism Is Dead
One of the “virtues” of atheism that attracts its adherents is the promise of an amoral philosophy of life; a liberating system of belief in the fallacy of allegiance to higher authority and of responsibility to a creator. The atheist dialog glows with this victory over the tyranny of the ignorance of man and his allegiance to the deity he created. This victory is ill founded and dubious when held up to the light of modern scientific advances. Mathematical reason also has something to say about the nihilism of atheism. In summary, it goes like this.
There are some postulates that are inherently unprovable and the one relevant to this discussion is the proposition that some particular thing does not exist. To illustrate: If I should say that there are no x’s, I have in effect said that I have been throughout all dimensions of time, space and all other yet undiscovered universes and there is not one x in any of them. The atheist may bring forward mountains of evidence to support his opinion but they are never sufficient because they can only be circumstantial. There is, in fact, only one proposition provable of nonexistence: nothingness. Thus the rigors of mathematical logic illuminate the fact that the atheist’s opinion is an act of faith. Interestingly enough, this makes him guilty of the crime he most loathes and stamps him with the label he most abhors for he must accept his position on more or less blind faith which in turn makes him religious.
|
Good science, based as it is on the rigors of calculated skepticism, is not particularly speedy in its discovery of the true nature of our universe. It too is based on a faith in the virtues of investigation of circumstances, the projection of theories and the testing of propositions. Nevertheless, in the last few decades it has uncovered some truths whose implications are intriguingly intertwined with the proposition that at least there is a creator who just might turn out to be deity. This leads to a question that ought to plague the mind of the atheist: “Upon what basis do I reject the testimony of the astronauts?”
The astronauts, every one of them, and with no dissenters, have returned to earth bearing testimony that the earth is indeed round, that is moves majestically in its orbit around our sun and that indeed our entire solar systems appears to be exactly as modern astronomy has described it. They saw it from a new and distant perspective and witness its accuracy. This gives great credence to astronomy and to the claimed recent discoveries of planets where life is almost sure to exist. If we are to accept the objective testimony of the astronauts and their associates the astronomers, then we must venture into a realm that denies atheism its fundaments. Here’s why.
|
There is serious discussion among astronauts and astronomers about the existence of other habitable worlds and the possibility; nay, the likelihood of life on other orbs and, of course, that can only lead to the possibility of beings with intelligence superior to our own, perhaps even far superior. Besides that, there are well thought out plans on our table for the conversion of the atmosphere of Mars to an oxygen rich gas that could support human life without any special provision for breathing. These plans include a kind of mega-leveraging of natural processes to cause the planet’s present gas balance to shift to one where oxygen is released and retained. The whole study of this group of intelligent beings is to create a new habitation for our race. This would make these beings creators in at least a limited sense. There can be no other conclusion if we are to adhere to the commonly accepted usage of these words.
It is thence a simple matter to add together the testimonies of the astronauts, the plans of their associates and the postulates of beings of superior intelligence to arrive at the exciting possibility that this earth may actually be the creation of such beings and, by extension, that we, the human race, could actually be their creation, perhaps even their offspring. Furthermore, we are naturally led to the supposition that we may have been placed here as a test to see what we would do in our tiny home in the heavens.
Thus, by scientific discovery and by definition we have arrived at the distinct possibility, nay, the likelihood of the existence of beings whose description falls ever closer to that of deity. Thus the opinion of the atheist has come into serious doubt and atheism’s promise of amorality falls empty at the feet of the ongoing scientific discovery of deity and the true origin of man.
|
 |
The atheist, upon considering all this may well ask, “If I suppose that this is all true, then why haven’t we been told.” and I answer that we have. There have been many prophets in the world, most of them have self-serving agendas and should be ignored, but there are a few that we may call “holy”. This leads to a final question for the atheist, “Upon what basis do I reject the testimony of the all the holy prophets?”
Jackson Pemberton
November 5, 2008
Back
Last update:Thursday, 05-Mar-2009 00:27:15 MST
