This is Not a Political Article
This is not a Political Article:
For true believers of the lochness monster or Bigfoot, every photo, every film clip, no matter how grainy or poorly shot, are proof that unknown monsters roam the earth. Watch as UFO fanatics try and convince themselves and others of the veracity of their beliefs. Religious fanatics are no different. Because a fanatic is a fanatic, no further explanation, is needed.
This neither proves or disproves the object of their fanaticism. The existence of God, is not a matter of personal speculation. That is left up to the evidence. Even then, evidence for or against God, is little more than a few straggling pieces, at the outer edges of a trillion piece puzzle. And, regardless of what scientists say, that’s about all they really have.
It appears that evidence for God is everywhere. If you can see it. Or, it may be that evidence for God is simply evidence for something that will be explained by other means, at some point in the future by science. Those who wish to believe, do so very personal reasons. Just as those who wish to deny the existence of God, do so in spite of the lack of evidence, to support their thesis that God does not exist. It takes a seriously arrogant son-of-a-bitch to argue otherwise.
Evolutionists will say the concept of God evolved to satisfy the need to explain the inexplicable. Who can deny this? No one, rationally. This, of course, does not explain their ability to explain things. Or, why there should be things at all, or space, or time, or matter, let alone our minds, which are the most complex things in the universe. Or, our minds are merely creating the illusion of order, which then is imposed on my conscious mind. In that case, disregard everything I just wrote, because the same process that allows me to contemplate evolution, is also creating the illusion of reality. Therefore, evolution is no more valid a concept than seven days of creation.
“What would the world look like if there was no reality, just meaningless brain activity?”
It would mean a slaughterhouse, where there could be no right, no greater good, nothing of value. Why act civilly? To whom would I be acting civilly, since my civility is no more real than my the person standing in front of me, or the color blue, or love, hunger, mercy, none of these things would be meaningful.
Simply look to the most depraved human societies for your answer. Virtually any communist country created a prison camp and a slaughterhouse. China killed seventy five million, living, breathing, human beings, in the search for utopia. Not war, not in any traditional sense, but the search for the good society. That goes well beyond the thousands of years of struggle that all humans have engaged in, since the beginning of their hunt for food and land, for basic survival.
Communists, in the search of utopia, created a godless, purposeless, supremely powerful government. That was supposed to be the mechanism for utopia. The vast accumulation of governmental power. Marxism as science, which isn’t really science, but is lauded as such, through sheer acts of faith, because science becomes faith, when it abandons science. It is always a circular problem.
Nowadays, the common scapegoat is religion. Hell, science makes religion seem angelic, by comparison. And that is not an attack on science. It’s an attack on human nature, at its lowest, which always begins with the reduction of living things to their most basic forms, “matter in motion,” which is what science tells us we are. Here’s the dilemma; scientists won’t assume a sense of purpose, because that’s not how science works. In other words, if we had to wait for science to determine what was good and what wasn’t, we would never have lasted long enough as a species to begin to unlock the beauty of science.
Morality did not come from science. It came from religion. And, no matter how much we come to know, as the result of science, science will always be the slow moving tortoise by necessity. That isn’t a bad thing. It’s just what is.
There is something deeper within us, however, a spark of the divine, which gives us vision to see and know what is still a mystery, but is known, nonetheless, even if it’s only in part. As the apostle Paul said; “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.”
Mark Magula
For true believers of the lochness monster or Bigfoot, every photo, every film clip, no matter how grainy or poorly shot, are proof that unknown monsters roam the earth. Watch as UFO fanatics try and convince themselves and others of the veracity of their beliefs. Religious fanatics are no different. Because a fanatic is a fanatic, no further explanation, is needed.
This neither proves or disproves the object of their fanaticism. The existence of God, is not a matter of personal speculation. That is left up to the evidence. Even then, evidence for or against God, is little more than a few straggling pieces, at the outer edges of a trillion piece puzzle. And, regardless of what scientists say, that’s about all they really have.
It appears that evidence for God is everywhere. If you can see it. Or, it may be that evidence for God is simply evidence for something that will be explained by other means, at some point in the future by science. Those who wish to believe, do so very personal reasons. Just as those who wish to deny the existence of God, do so in spite of the lack of evidence, to support their thesis that God does not exist. It takes a seriously arrogant son-of-a-bitch to argue otherwise.
Evolutionists will say the concept of God evolved to satisfy the need to explain the inexplicable. Who can deny this? No one, rationally. This, of course, does not explain their ability to explain things. Or, why there should be things at all, or space, or time, or matter, let alone our minds, which are the most complex things in the universe. Or, our minds are merely creating the illusion of order, which then is imposed on my conscious mind. In that case, disregard everything I just wrote, because the same process that allows me to contemplate evolution, is also creating the illusion of reality. Therefore, evolution is no more valid a concept than seven days of creation.
“What would the world look like if there was no reality, just meaningless brain activity?”
It would mean a slaughterhouse, where there could be no right, no greater good, nothing of value. Why act civilly? To whom would I be acting civilly, since my civility is no more real than my the person standing in front of me, or the color blue, or love, hunger, mercy, none of these things would be meaningful.
Simply look to the most depraved human societies for your answer. Virtually any communist country created a prison camp and a slaughterhouse. China killed seventy five million, living, breathing, human beings, in the search for utopia. Not war, not in any traditional sense, but the search for the good society. That goes well beyond the thousands of years of struggle that all humans have engaged in, since the beginning of their hunt for food and land, for basic survival.
Communists, in the search of utopia, created a godless, purposeless, supremely powerful government. That was supposed to be the mechanism for utopia. The vast accumulation of governmental power. Marxism as science, which isn’t really science, but is lauded as such, through sheer acts of faith, because science becomes faith, when it abandons science. It is always a circular problem.
Nowadays, the common scapegoat is religion. Hell, science makes religion seem angelic, by comparison. And that is not an attack on science. It’s an attack on human nature, at its lowest, which always begins with the reduction of living things to their most basic forms, “matter in motion,” which is what science tells us we are. Here’s the dilemma; scientists won’t assume a sense of purpose, because that’s not how science works. In other words, if we had to wait for science to determine what was good and what wasn’t, we would never have lasted long enough as a species to begin to unlock the beauty of science.
Morality did not come from science. It came from religion. And, no matter how much we come to know, as the result of science, science will always be the slow moving tortoise by necessity. That isn’t a bad thing. It’s just what is.
There is something deeper within us, however, a spark of the divine, which gives us vision to see and know what is still a mystery, but is known, nonetheless, even if it’s only in part. As the apostle Paul said; “For now we see in a mirror dimly, but then face to face. Now I know in part; then I shall know fully, even as I have been fully known.”
Mark Magula