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? Hummmm???
(Student is silent.)
Prof: You can't answer, can you? Let's start again, young fella. 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 5 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, and smelled 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 its 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 endeavour, 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 %26amp; god is FAITH. That is all that keeps things moving %26amp; alive.
That young man was ALBERT EINSTEIN.......
* If this kind of thing interests you, and you want to understand the science of self realization based on an experiential intelligent approach to higher consciousness and God realization come visit us at the following link:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Krishnacon...
Or email me at mark48226@yahoo.com
What do you guys think of this post, a real conversation between an Atheistic professor and his student?
HOAX
HOAX
HOAX
LIAR
LIAR
LIAR
LIAR
A LIAR STANDS AMONGST US!! SPREADING HIS LIES, HIS HOAXES, DECIEVING THE MASSES!!
Reply:The problem is that the brain of the professor hasn't been searched for. Faith is accepting that there is an end to the experimental possibilities. We have senses which are far more developed than the 5 classical ones, such as intuition and FAITH. If those aren't counted as senses, then the world's view of someone is limited. Faith is a sense that the human being has, such as the tasting sense.
Reply:I can answer easily. I see evolution all the time. down at the pond. It happens over a period of a couple of weeks. the tadpoles turn to frogs......micro evolution. If you have small changes over small amounts of time (weeks, or months) then you can have large changes over larger amount of time...macro evolution.
If you have one you must have the other, for there would no reason to name or distinguish between the two.
Reply:Your scenario has some good points but then when you go advertise for your Krishna religion you get off the track. In your scenario of Einstien it has to be noted that in real life he never envisioned God to be as you propose. You are hijacking Einstien's view of God to introduce yours. Unfortunately your religious foundations are not based on very much proven reality but more mythical stories without regard for historical, geographical or artifactial accuracy nor historical eyewitness accounts as the Bible offers. When it comes to being a vegetarian, its ok to promote that but don't use the Bible to mistranslate "you shall not murder" to mean you cannot kill an animal to eat it as some of your fellow followers have told me. Here again is another example of hijacking, in this case trying to use the Bible to support your views. The Bible clearly tells that even though man first was a vegetarian that later after the world flood, God commanded that man could eat animals for the most part. He even required some animals to be sacrificed as a measure of devotion to Him and to serve the purpose of feeding the priests in addition to grain and oil offerings in olden times. If your religion will not stand alone without using someone elses (using the Bible) to validate it then maybe you need to find another one. Why not pick up a Bible and read it for yourself and not just the parts that your leaders tell you to use?
Reply:that's a good story, although i doubt it's validity. Unfortunately, I'm going to report you for advertising your site. This is a Q%26amp;A site, not an advertisement site for your particular agenda.
Reply:Sounds like a good fictional story.
Reply:Isn't jerkoff having a hissy fit...As for the tadpole bit from the other guy, that is called infancy to adulthood. No matter what any living creature becomes, it has to begin in infancy. Even we looked like a tadpole in our mother's womb at one point.
Reply:I like it.
Really doesnt matter who the student was, its how the dialogue put things into perspective.
Reply:How very contrived... Which Chick Tract did you rip that out of?
By the way, those arguments are non sequiturs.
Reply:“If there is any religion that would cope with modern scientific needs it would be Buddhism.”
A Genuine quote from Albert Einstein.
There is no evidence that this exchange ever took place.
This eRumor has circulated without Einstein's name and someone added it to a version that started circulating in the summer of 2004.
Also, it is not likely that young Einstein would have presented this argument.
In his Autobiographical Notes, he states that even though his Jewish family was not religious, he developed a "deep religiosity" as Jewish child that came to an end when he was 12.
He says he developed a skeptical attitude that never left him.
He made reference to "God" on many occasions but also said he did not believe some of the stories in the Bible and did not believe in a personal God.
What you said is total b_____ see the link below
Reply:Sounds perfect! I mean perfect in the sense that the convo. moves really smoothly and accurately.
The student (Einstein?) proves his point in a very forceful, spear-heading way :P
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment