“TAKE TIME TO READ. It’s worth reading it. Trust me :)”
QUIT SHOUTING ASSHOLE! THATS MY JOB!
So what is it exactly that I’m responding to? You know, I could point out how its a modified version of other posts (see here, and here)that name the student as Albert Einstein, but quite frankly, that doesn’t seem like it’d do the piece the proper degree of respect it deserves.
The piece thought of as being worth reading, with commentary
Professor : You are a Christian, aren’t you, son ?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, you believe in GOD ?
Student : Absolutely, sir.
Professor : Is GOD good ?
Student : Sure.
Professor: Is GOD all powerful ?
Student : Yes.
Professor: 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 was silent.)
Professor: You can’t answer, can you ? Let’s start again, young fella. Is GOD good?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Is satan good ?
Student : No.
Professor: Where does satan come from ?
Student : From … GOD …
Professor: That’s right. Tell me son, is there evil in this world?
Student : Yes.
Professor: Evil is everywhere, isn’t it ? And GOD did make everything. Correct?
Student : Yes.
Professor: So who created evil ?
(Student did not answer.)
Professor: Is there sickness? Immorality? Hatred? Ugliness? All these terrible things exist in the world, don’t they?
Student : Yes, sir.
Professor: So, who created them ?
(Student had no answer.)
Professor: Science says you have 5 Senses you use to identify and observe the world around you. Tell me, son, have you ever seen GOD?
Student : No, sir.
Professor: Tell us if you have ever heard your GOD?
Student : No , sir.
Professor: 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.
Professor: Yet you still believe in Him?
Student : Yes.
Professor : According to Empirical, Testable, Demonstrable Protocol, Science says your GOD doesn’t exist. What do you say to that, son?
Comment – really, the professor is an idiot. I’d say that this is a strawman of what every atheist would come up with after about two and a half minutes of thought.
First of all, it doesn’t take much to realize the severe limitations of our senses. Its because of that limitation that we depend on testing and experiments. After all, our senses are unable to see microscopic organisms, they are unable to sense most of the electromagnetic spectrum, unable to smell carbon dioxide, and even more of a reason to be concerned, can’t smell carbon monoxide.
Second of all, just think it over. X-rays didn’t suddenly begin to exist once an image was produced using them. It means that there is insufficient basis on which to honestly claim that there is a deity of any kind, let alone satan, angels, or demons.
Student : Nothing. I only have my faith.
Comment – When left with nothing, the only resort left is to say you only have faith, which struck me as a poor basis for believing even when I was a christian. Its weak because
a) theists like to use different definitions of the word to suit their purposes, and would rather not clarify which meaning was intended.
b) even if we were to grant any definition that they wish to use, it doesn’t answer why they have faith. It doesn’t provide a basis on which we are to see if the idea is even valid.
Professor: Yes, faith. And that is the problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as heat?
Student : And is there such a thing as cold?
Student : No, sir. There isn’t.
(The lecture theater became 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 was pin-drop silence in the lecture theater.)
Student : What about darkness, Professor? Is there such a thing as darkness?
Professor: 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 its called darkness, isn’t it? In reality, darkness isn’t. If it is, well you would be able to make darkness darker, wouldn’t you?
Comment – good defense, but unfortunately for christianity, the deity is argued as being infinite and omnipresent. So, which one is it? The deity is infinite, in which case, it should be absolutely impossible for there to be a lack of it in any place, or not, in which case they sacrifice the “greatest conceivable being” argument, one that William Laine Craig uses to tie his other arguments together?
Professor: So what is the point you are making, young man ?
Student : Sir, my point is your philosophical premise is flawed.
Professor: 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.
Comment – The difference: we can test one, and we can demonstrate an improvement in our understanding of thoughts by means of better means of promoting and maintaining good mental health. The other one, any deity, is unable to be tested, because every time we’ve come close to debunking them, they’ve moved. They changed their address. They start out on the mountains and high hills. El Shaddai. The Olympians. Then they moved to the sky. Then they went way beyond that, to the point where they aren’t even in the same universe. Or in one. It seems to me like as though they keep digging in hopes of finding gold while hiding.
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?
Professor: 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 shook his head with a smile, beginning to realize where the argument was 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?
Comment – Will he ignore all of the documented instances of speciation, the changing of allele frequencies within populations, the development of ring species, and the papers documenting phylogenetic relationships using genetics? Damned right. If he wants to ignore things, I can ignore half the shit the kid spews. And if he really is Einstein, fuck him. Just make sure it isn’t a woman that does it because that’d put whatever genes he has back into what appears to be the shallow end of gene pool he just crawled out of.
(The class was in uproar.)
Student : Is there anyone in the class who has ever seen the Professor’s brain?
(The class broke out into laughter. )
Student : Is there anyone here who has ever heard the Professor’s brain, felt it, touched or smelt 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?
Comment – And he shows exactly why the earlier part was a strawman, by using the same strawman. We can infer that human beings have a brain, because every instance of removal or sufficient damage has so far shown that lacking one would result in death. And we don’t even need to do an inference. If we wanted to, we can scan the brains of every single person, find out what their brain looks like, which regions are slightly different from the average, and then open up the skull just to confirm.
But of course, this is yet another difference between grey matter (something which I’m inclined to suspect that the author of the piece is lacking) and any deity you wish to name. We can actually verify that the brain exists. We can measure it. Hell, we can even do surgery on it to attempt to heal it should the brain become damaged. We can’t do that with a deity.
(The room was silent. The Professor stared at the student, his face unfathomable.)
Professor: I guess you’ll have to take them on faith, son.
Comment – bullshit son. If somebody who isn’t a professor can smell your shit, and shovel it back into the hole you’ve dug yourself, I doubt any professor worth their salt would say “take it on faith.”
Student : That is it sir … Exactly ! The link between man & GOD is FAITH. That is all that keeps things alive and moving.
Comment – I was pretty certain what kept things alive was a combination of processes, such as respiration, metabolism, and reproduction.
I believe you have enjoyed the conversation. And if so, you’ll probably want your friends / colleagues to enjoy the same, won’t you?
Forward this to increase their knowledge … or FAITH.
By the way, that student was EINSTEIN.
Comment – Or to increase the number of lols, or the amount of bullshit they can produce.