1. INTRODUCTION
The twenty-first century is characterized by an
active militancy of atheism. This new ideology is called Neo-atheism. Your fans
are characterized by a total active manifestation against any religion, faith,
or notion of any god. Today, it is easy to see phrases atheist billboards,
buses, books that become best seller and blogs that ridicule religion. They claim
that the religious abandon science or eliminate their worldview.
However, the great debate is not between
science and religion and theology or science, but between atheism and theism,
because there are scientists on both sides. The big question is the worldview that
both follow. Atheism has as main assumption materialism, believing that the
ultimate reality is matter and the universe explains itself. Have theism has
the main assumption that ultimate reality is God and the universe does not
explain himself. Nevertheless, the big question is which one is more reasonable
in the face of scientific advances.
Thus, comes the question: why more educated
people, educated and most scientists adhere to theism or Christianity as in the
case of Francis Collins is a researcher and director of the human genome
project, responsible for DNA mapping. He declared his rejection of atheism in
his book The Language of God: A Scientist Presents Evidence for Belief. Why are
there a large number of scientists who say they are theists, including teachers
from the same university in one of the main leaders of atheism, Richard
Dawlkins? Some of them are: John Lennox, PhD in mathematics and Alister
McGrath, a postdoctoral fellow in molecular biophysics.
The answer is that theism answers to great
questions of humanity and atheism has failed to refute or bringing coherent and
scientific responses, since they advocate science as the only epistemological.
Bertrand Russell said: "whatever knowledge is attainable must be attained
by scientific methods, and what science can not discover, the man can not
know."
However, the reason for this is a reaction
against militancy evidence in biology with microscopic structures that are real
machines, the source of the information in DNA, the mathematical formulas in
the universe that scientists are calling for "Fine Tuning". Those
studies that have intrigued scientists, coupled with the inefficiency of
science to answer basic questions have been factors that scientists have seen
with other eyes atheism. As stated by Oxford biologist Sir Peter Medawar,
"The existence of a limit to science is made clear by his inability to
answer basic questions concerning children and the first and last things -
questions such" how it all began? "," Why we are here
"" What is the reason to live? "
2. THE HISTORY OF THE CONFLICT BETWEEN RELIGION
AND ATHEISM
Since Democritus, the originator of the atomic
theory, and Lucretius, Latin poet and philosopher, the tension between the
existence of God as first cause and matter as early existed. This went on for
Socrates and Plato.
However, from the Enlightenment, philosophers
and scientists have abandoned the assumption of a personal God, majestic,
eternal creator. Rene Descastes began with the Cartesian method, which affirmed
the existence of something only by evidence. Your question was extended to the
very existence. So your phrase cogito, ergo sum shows that only realize when we
think of our existence.
With the Enlightenment in the eighteenth
century, experience, reason and the scientific method became the only ways to
acquire knowledge, because they say it is the only way to take the man out of
the darkness of ignorance. Among the thinkers who advocated this idea are:
Immanuel Kant, Friedrich Hegel, Montesquieu, Diderot, D'Alembert and Rousseau.
In the nineteenth century the influence of
positivism of Auguste Comte asserted that the ideal society was to "order
and progress". He stated that the historical fact should speak for itself
and the scientific method, controlled and measured. So this is the only way to
attain knowledge.
Karl Marx's historical materialism uses to
develop its Marxist theory. The famous phrase of Marx who said: "Religion
is the opium of the people" brings a basis for the communist and socialist
ideology, it led many to death as happened in the regime of Josef Stalin in the
Soviet Union called.
However, it was with Friedrich Nietzsche that
the worldview of a God or a creator was remote, since he declared the
"death of God." For him, Christianity or religious moral values had
no more sense since been exceeded by the values of this world. Therefore, one
can see that these ideologies eliminate altogether the idea of a Creator to
another who claimed that science and what we can know enough to explain the
existence in the world and all human ontological questions.
As if all this were not enough, the lack of
intelligible answers from atheists with respect to the main questions that
theists put God as the solution became the basis of atheism are increasingly in
danger of crumbling under pressure by the research and scientific discoveries
that point to a Designer or a Creator.
3. THE ATHEIST PILLARS IN RUINS
The neo-atheists insist on bringing some
arguments for its ideology, although they say you can not prove something that
does not exist. However, this does not happen in practice. There are several
books written by various authors who try to bring arguments that God does not
exist. These arguments are continuously repeated in lectures and books, thereby
demonstrating that they are the pillars of neo-atheist.
3.1. God is not necessary
The first pillar is the futility of atheists
God because science answers everything, they say. However, this argument is
very weak. When we say that God is unnecessary, one needs to have answers to
many questions that only the idea of a sovereign God, mighty and wise answer.
For example, atheism would have to have convincing answers to the origin of all
things. This includes everything from the universe, which has mathematical forms
and aesthetic and biological machines to high-level information in DNA. We need
to remember to atheists that the universe is not disorganized, but completely
organized and governed by laws so accurate that would impress a sincere and
intelligent. The very word κόσμος Greek means "ordered". Κοσμέω She
comes from the verb meaning "put in order", "take into
harmony." Therefore, the Greeks understood that the cosmos was something
that was in order and completely systematic.
Microscopic biological structures like the
bacterial flagellum is a real machine and has an entire structure of a
water-cooled rotary engine, rotor bearing, clutch and brake, high level
information encrypted in the DNA and moves like Mobile DNA are examples
organization, planning and intelligence. Not to mention the complex organic
structures that demonstrate high-level planning as the ocular system, blood and
nerve.
So all this leads to be wise, powerful and
transcendent. To deny this is to go against rationality and through a sea of
doubt totally unnecessary.
The neo-atheists argue that this is to put God
into something that science can not explain and call it "gaps."
However, the "gaps" exist only when a response does not fit or has no
logical conclusion. When we conclude that an intelligent being could be behind
the universe and the complexity of life, we are doing what we would naturally
realize the structures of this nature. Therefore, there is no "gap",
but very precise and logical conclusion, and the conclusion that the Egyptian
pyramids were built by intelligent people, even if we do not know exactly who
made them and how they did.
Therefore, science has increasingly confirmed
the existence of God because it demonstrates scientific structures with
microscopic irreducible complexities, as well as fine tuning in the universe.
Also, science will never answer for ethical,
aesthetic and ontological. Atheism comes with a cover of scholarship claiming
that the true scientist has to be an atheist. However, currently there are
scientists on both sides. The great scientists, before the Enlightenment,
admitted the assumption of a personal Creator. For example, Galileo, Kepler,
Newton, Copernicus, Linnaeus, Ampere. All these scientists had assumed that as
all things came from a wise and powerful Creator. Then God was replaced by the
belief that only matter can cause physical and biological laws. However,
everyone admits that only intelligence can create laws, planning and
complexity.
3.2. The religion is evil and the cause of many
conflicts and deaths
The second pillar is an atheistic attack on
religion. This argument is the most obtuse and not intelligent. In fact, this
argument will never fit in the matter of showing that God does not exist,
because even though religion were not bad at all deny the existence of God.
It's like someone who wanted to prove that Christopher Columbus did not exist
saying that America is bad or that American presidents are criminals or
something. Therefore, this argument is completely mediocre.
However, the accusation that religions have led
to deaths, further confirms the religion, because the Bible speaks of the total
failure of humanity. Even atheism has its representatives criminals, like
Stalin and others. Therefore, the problem is not religion, but the man who turned
away from God - this further confirms the Bible texts.
CONCLUSION:
Atheism, therefore, does not answer the main
human questions: what is the purpose of man? How it all began? Why should I be
good or protecting the environment to think about my neighbor?
Only religion can deepen these answers and show
purpose, beginning and morality, as they are in the dimension of faith.
Therefore, atheism should be called "no answers" Also, because
atheism deprives people of having the main responses of its existence, purpose,
basis for morality and altruism.
We can only say that the militant atheist
requires more than faith. It requires total abandonment of rationality in favor
of an ideology to cover scientific, but completely dogmatic and irrational.