Science versus God...must read

@greengal (4288)
United States
March 8, 2007 1:04pm CST
This is a bit long but worth the read, please read till the end. An atheist professor of philosophy speaks to his class on the problem science has with God, The Almighty. He asks one of his new students to stand and..... Prof: So you believe in God? Student: Absolutely, sir. Prof : Is God good? Student: Sure. Prof: Is God all-powerful? Student : Yes. Prof: My brother died of cancer even though he prayed to God to heal him. Most of us would attempt to help others who are ill. But God didn't. How is this God good then? Hmm? (Student is silent.) Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fellah. Is God good? Student: Yes. Prof: Is Satan good? Student : No. Prof: Where does Satan come from? Student: From...God... Prof: That's right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world? Student: Yes. Prof: Evil is everywhere, isn't it? And God did make everything. Correct? Student: Yes. Prof: So who created evil? (Student does not answer.) Prof: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don't they? Student: Yes, sir. Prof: So, who created them? (Student has no answer.) Prof: Science says you have 6 senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son...Have you ever seen God? Student: No, sir. Prof: Tell us if you have ever heard your God? Student: No, sir. Prof: Have you ever felt your God, tasted your God, smelt your God? Have you ever had any sensory perception of God for that matter? Student: No, sir. I'm afraid I haven't. Prof: Yet you still believe in Him? Student: Yes. Prof: According to empirical, testable, demonstrable protocol, science says your GOD doesn't exist. What do you say to that, son? Student: Nothing. I only have my faith. Prof: Yes. Faith. And that is the problem science has. Student: Professor, is there such a thing as heat? Prof: Yes. Student: And is there such a thing as cold? Prof: Yes. Student: No sir. There isn't. (The lecture theatre becomes very quiet with this turn of events.) Student : Sir, you can have lots of heat, even more heat, superheat, mega heat, white heat, a little heat or no heat. But we don't have anything called cold. We can hit 458 degrees below zero which is no heat, but we can't go any further after that. There is no such thing as cold . Cold is only a word we use to describe the absence of heat . We cannot measure cold. Heat is energy . Cold is not the opposite of heat, sir, just the absence of it . (There is pin-drop silence in the lecture theatre.) Student: What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness? Prof: Yes. What is night if there isn't darkness? Student : You're wrong again, sir. Darkness is the absence of something. You can have low light, normal light, bright light, flashing light....But if you have no light constantly, you have nothing and it's called darkness, isn't it? In reality, darkness isn't. If it were, you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn't you? Prof: So what is the point you are making, young man? Student: Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed. Prof: Flawed? Can you explain how? Student: Sir, you are working on the premise of duality. You argue there is life and then there is death, a good God and a bad God. You are viewing the concept of God as something finite, something we can measure. Sir, science can't even explain a thought. It uses electricity and magnetism, but has never seen, much less fully understood either one.To view death as the opposite of life is to be ignorant of the fact that death cannot exist as a substantive thing. Death is not the opposite of life: just the absence of it. Now tell me, Professor.Do you teach your students that they evolved from a monkey? Prof: If you are referring to the natural evolutionary process, yes, of course, I do. Student: Have you ever observed evolution with your own eyes, sir? (The Professor shakes his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument is going.) Student: Since no one has ever observed the process of evolution at work and cannot even prove that this process is an on-going endeavor, are you not teaching your opinion, sir? Are you not a scientist but a preacher? (The class is in uproar.) Student: Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor's brain? (The class breaks out into laughter.) Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor's brain, felt it, touched or smelled it? No one appears to have done so. So, according to the established rules of empirical, stable, demonstrable protocol, science says that you have no brain,sir. With all due respect, sir, how do we then trust your lectures, sir? (The room is silent. The professor stares at the student, his face unfathomable.) Prof: I guess you'll have to take them on faith, son. Student: That is it sir... The link between man & god is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving & alive. The student was none other than the current President of India, Dr.APJ Abdul Kalam.
3 people like this
3 responses
8 Mar 07
All this prooves to me is that religious people can find an answer for everything, but it doesn't mean that the answer is the right one. We know that man has evolved because of the presence of fossils so there is facts to back it up, it certainly isn't faith.
3 people like this
@greengal (4288)
• United States
8 Mar 07
Well that is right, but this was to show that you can't question the existence of God. That's the other side to this argument.
1 person likes this
• United States
9 Mar 07
I looked at this discussion earlier but at the time didn't have time to respond and if I remember correctly was getting rather nasty. Did the rest of it get removed or am I getting mixed up. If so forgive me it's been a long day
2 people like this
@greengal (4288)
• United States
9 Mar 07
Hehe, not this one heather..
1 person likes this
@Thomas73 (1467)
• Switzerland
8 Mar 07
What bugs me here is that people always tend to oppose science and the notion of God. Science is often based on indirect evidence, and because we cannot observe a phenomenon directly doesn't mean that it doesn't exist. The means of observation are simply different. We have never observed an elementary particle with the naked eyes, but the traces left in accelerators indicate that they are indeed there. The 'God hypothesis' cannot be verified or observed, directly or indirectly, which makes it flawed from the start. Basically, both the professor and the student are having a rethorical discussion with no valid arguments. It's all on the philosophical level, but not on a scientific level. An honest Theist will say, "I have my faith and do believe that God exists, although I actually don't know if He does." Likewise, an honest Atheist will say, "I have no evidence that God doesn't exist, although the evidence available doesn't require the existence of a superior being, but in fact I really don't know if there is one or not."
2 people like this
@greengal (4288)
• United States
8 Mar 07
hmm, that is thought provoking. But I think the way the student chose to prove to his professor that God exists is good. The professor attacked the student for no reason and the student in turn chose the same methods to prove his point. This obviously isn't the right or wrong way, but more to show how smart our President is. :)
2 people like this