There is this email that has been going around for god knows (no, actually he doesn't) how long, and I thought I would deviate from my usual indifference and write a response to it, only because it irritates me so much how people buy into anything they read, especially when a figure of authority is quoted, or in this case, libeled.
This is the email that's been going around:
A VERY INTERESTING CONVERSATION
An Atheist Professor of Philosophy was speaking to his Class on the
Problem Science has
with GOD, the ALMIGHTY. He asked one of his New Christian Students to
stand and . . .
Professor : You are 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?
Student : Nothing. I only have my Faith.
Professor : Yes, Faith. And that is the Problem Science has.
Student : Professor, is there such a thing as Heat?
Professor : Yes.
Student : And is there such a thing as Cold?
Professor : Yes.
Student : No, sir. There isn't.
(The Lecture Theatre 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 Theatre )
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 it's called Darkness, isn't it?
In reality, Darkness isn't.
If it is, were you would be able to make Darkness
Darker, wouldn't you?
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.
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
Endeavour,
Are you not teaching your Opinion, sir?
Are you not a Scientist but a Preacher?
(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?
(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.
Student : That is it sir . . . Exactly !
The Link between Man & GOD is FAITH.
That is all that Keeps Things Alive and Moving.
NB:
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 them to Increase their Knowledge . . . or FAITH.
That student was Albert Einstein! And here is my response:
A very interesting conversation? Perhaps, to the naive.
Regarding heat and cold, yes, cold is simply the absense of heat and darkness is simply the absense of light, evil is the absense of good etc etc, but how does that explain a omnipotent, omniscient deity? The only thing the student proved is that the professor cannot prove the non-existance of God. But when something extraordinary (i.e God) is claimed, it must be backed up with extraordinary evidence. The burden of evidence does not fall on the unbeliever, it falls on the believer. I can say that an Invisible Pink Unicorn exists and it watches over all our lives. It is good and evil things happen because the Unicorn has allowed it. I can say that you cannot disprove my unicorn, therefore it is true. In fact, the Unicorn (blessed be her holy hooves) even has Her own
website. Of course she exists. But this is wrong. Again, I must prove it exists to convince you. The burden of empirical proof falls on the asserter of the claim.
Secondly, the purported argument against evolution is based on a false and/or deceptive premise. Biological evolution is scientifically proven. There is micro-evolution (small changes and adaptations to species) which is immediately observable, tested and documented and macro-evolution (change of species), which is micro-evolution over a long period of time. Christians, or people is general, have a common misunderstanding that human beings have evolved from monkeys.
This is not true. Rather, human beings and modern apes have evolved from the
same ancestors. This is why modern apes and human beings share much of the same DNA.
Thirdly, the argument about being able to see/feel/hear the professor's brain is simply childish and again, based on a false premise. Scientific evidence does not reply solely on crude human sensory perception. You can cut open the professor's head and find the brain. You can perform a brain scan and see an image of the brain. Can you cut open the clouds and find God?
Lastly, what makes the student so sure that his God is real? For ANY claims ANY one can make about their God, someone from a different religion can assert the exact same thing, only using a different name. Muslims say Allah is real. We can't prove them wrong. The ancient greeks say Zeus is real, we can't prove them wrong. I say the Invisible Pink Unicorn is real, and you can't prove me wrong either, but does it mean that since you can't prove me wrong you must believe what I say is true? And quoting bible verses as proof of what the bible asserts is not proof. This is circular reasoning. Or, you can base your argument on anecdotal evidence, and say that you know
your God is true because you feel him in your heart, have seen him do miracles in your life, can hear him speak to you, move your emotions etc etc. For one thing, anecdotal evidence is not fact, and secondly, all the other religious people can say the same about
their God too. So who is right? The only thing we can really count on is testable, observable scientific evidence. Otherwise nothing can ever be known as absolutely true.
Let me also take the chance to talk about Pascal’s Wager. This is the challenge that goes something like this: "Ok, I can’t prove my God exists, but I'd better play safe to believe in my God because if I don’t I will go to hell. In the end, if God and hell doesn’t really exist, I don't lose anything. At least I didn’t take the risk." – I only have one answer to this: How do you know
your hell, or rather, the hell of your religion is the real one? The Christian is going to Muslim hell, the Catholic is going to Protestant hell, and the Hindu is going to the Mormon hell. How are you going to play safe?
Atheists (people who don't believe in the existance of deities) are the same as theists (people who believe in a deity/deities), it's just that Atheists believe in
one less god than the theist. You don't believe that any of the thousands of gods exist in the world except your own right? The atheist simply agrees with you, but includes your god in the list of thousands of gods he doesn't believe in.
Don’t believe everything you read in an email. Creationists and fundamentalists try hard to convince people that Einstein was Christian with quotations taken out of context and twisted to suit their ideas, or by simply propogating false stories as in the "Interesting/Brilliant conversation" email.
Do you think that the genius behind the Theory of Relativity would have misunderstood that evolution teaches the decension of man from monkey? or believed that nothing that cannot be directly perceived with the human senses can be proven as scientific fact? I think not. Einstein would turn in his grave if he saw this email.
"It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it." - Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman
