Random Firings of Neurons

The rest of your life is going to be spent getting back up after life has knocked you down again. You might as well just get used to it.

My Photo
Name:
Location: Round Rock, Texas, United States

Monday, February 12, 2007

In the interests of continuing friendships....

..I won't Fisk Harvey's post about atheism. It would just take too long, and I'd have to stomp on some egos to do it.

In the comments of the post, I made a reference to being able to use logic, reason, and observable science to prove the existence of *A* creator. That is absolutely true. About 4,000 years ago (give or take a couple of hundred years), a bunch of barely literate shepherds had a run-in with a being who claimed to be self-existent, meaning, he needed nothing else in order to exist. He existed merely by existing. Fast forward about 1,500 years, and an amateur philosopher deduced, using pure logic ALONE, that a self-existent being must logically exist in order for the Universe to be here. Fast forward to today, and, for some reason I cannot fathom, theists and atheists alike operate under the idiotic and irrational notion that the existence of *A* creator can't be proven. For centuries, humans have logically deduced the existence of things that they had no hope of ever being able to prove, such as the planet Pluto (I don't give a flying leap what some idiotic astronomers have decided about Pluto. It's a 'planet' on this blog.), which later generations proved, BY USING THE LOGICAL DEDUCTIONS OF THE PREVIOUS GENERATIONS! The planet Pluto was only found because the astronomer looked in the area of the sky that someone several hundred years ago deduced it would be. No such discovery method is necessary for the existence of *A* creator, since, at one's death, one will get to find out, one way or another.

Now, here, and at Harvey's, and at other sites, I have mentioned that I happen to know the logical and rational proofs for the existence of *A* creator, but, have never actually posted them. Well, actually, I did, in the comments of a thread at Original Musings. But, I haven't done it any other time, quite simple because it would be a waste of my time. You see, ALL objections to the existence of *A* creator are morally, not logically or rationally, based, so, providing a logical proof to a moral dilemma would be counter-productive. The atheist isn't looking for Reason. They're looking for justification, or absolution. Telling them that, yes, there really IS someone/something that just *might* take offense to their immoral behavior exacerbates the problem. It doesn't solve it. So, until I'm actually asked for it, I don't provide the proof, because it wouldn't do either of us any good.

Want it? Ask for it. But, once you get it, you ARE responsible for what you do with it. Doing what you have been doing is no longer an option. If there really is *A* creator (and there is), then, you owe EVERYTHING you have to he/she/it. Once *A* creator exists, He gets to make the rules, not you.

Semper Fidelis: Always Faithful, to God, Corps and Country