Evidence for God from Science

Hello, from reading some of the replies on this thread it makes me wonder even more (and I've been open to this theory for quite some time) that people like Hawking are working hand in hand with other secular elites like the ones in our government, with other governments around the world and with various organizations to forward the cause of communism. And by trying to disprove God's existence, he and others like him hope that it will crush the spirits of the masses by taking away their life's meaning and purpose along with their personal beliefs that they are entitled by God to have certain rights and privileges (like the ones we still currently have in America). Because, think about it, if you prove to the world and offer irrefutable( or close to irrefutable evidence) that God doesn't exist or at the very least make a solid intellectual case against God and feed it to enough people, over time large groups of people will de convert, and in the process of de converting, most people will have a gaping hole in their morale or in their spirits or emotions, like a sense to find a replacement for God or to find something to fill that void for meaning. Now people can usually find temporary hope and meaning in money or in having material things, but since this same group that I'm referring to wants unemployment to keep going up and wants the "system to crash"and help establish the "worldwide utopia", it appears that the one source that many freshly de converted and penniless people will flock to will be the "STATE".

Since Hawking and many people of this same group are big environmentalists and global warming alarmists, once they establish the utopia that they want so bad, they will have us all do our "green task" in helping to save the planet from a problem that may or may not be happening. Not to mention, even if it is a real problem, we have the WRONG KIND OF PEOPLE in place to really help the situation. Since all they really want to do is use that as an excuse to later develop false "crisis scenarios" (look at history of previous communist establishments to find out more about what I mean by false crisis) where they say "well the earth is too hot or too messed up to grow a lot of food so such and such numbers of people will have to do without". When in reality, the earth may very well be in as good of shape to grow enough food. It's history basically repeating itself. It's also interesting to note that many of these environmentalists and global warming alarmists deeply believe in population reduction, many of them have said that the earth can only comfortably sustain about two billion people. So from that, it's easy to see how they could easily try to meet that goal by suppressing the food supply and using the excuse of climate change as something to fool or force the public into their own graves.

But back to taking God away, since most Americans are not warm to communism or socialism if you take away all their stuff and leave them broke, they will first flock to God for their ultimate hope, meaning and inspiration (and rightly so) So then, if you were to take God away, then, you would start seeing more and more people get more warm to the idea of having the government or the state give you a certain portion of food, clothing, and shelter for doing a specific job or task. And in theory, this is basically what were are dealing with on both fronts from the secular establishment, groups working in unison to take away jobs, crash the economy, TAKE AWAY GOD, and establish a worldwide order all in the name of "saving mother earth". That way, the establishment and all their friends can hoard most of if not all of the land, resources, money and power so their own little group can have everything they want and give the rest of us nothing. That's the way I"m seeing things currently, I hope I'm wrong and I"m open to any credible evidence and arguments that show otherwise, but as of yet I haven't seen anything that disproves this theory. But anyway, let me know your thoughts. Thanks.

derrick09 wrote:. But anyway, let me know your thoughts. Thanks.

Derrick.. Again I wouldn't worry about.. These conspiracy theories are just what they are. Dead ends..

There will always be atheists and crazy people trying to promote their ways...

Well, at the very least, it's food for thought, it's something to have in the back of your mind just in case we start seeing alot of these things working together. Here are a couple of threads that are related to this.

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 30&t=34591

http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... =3&t=34593

Derrick,

While I'm not a serial conspiracy theorist by any stretch, I do see some merit to your concerns. Rather than dismiss your concerns out of hand, I think it would be wise to ponder them. So I am off to ponder, and will give you a detailed response in a couple of days.

DannyM

Thanks Danny, regardless it does seem to me that if atheists (or at least the group of atheists who want to bring about social change or who try to convince Christians to give up their faith) want to bring about something else other than to make Christians cry and lose their faith. Because, since a lot of if not most of atheists are big into philosophy and science you know they just don't want to play the ultimate high school bully and just rake random havoc on the lives of Christians just for the sake of doing so. And since the new atheists and atheist groups on the Internet and elsewhere haven't stated their main goal or their main purpose for doing what they are doing, to me, it begs the question of what is their exact end goal in selling books and engaging Christians with debates and insults? For instance, if they were able to de convert most of the world's Christians in time, what would be their next step? If there is no next step, then why bother trying to win debates, de convert Christians and prove to humanity that their view is the correct and most reasonable view? Why not be like the atheists of old and just "live and let live"? Because after all, since Christians (for the most part) are loving and nice and don't forget where most charities come from. So much good as come from Christianity (especially compared to the little bit of evil that has been done in the name of Christianity) so why can't they just call a truce and let us be and us let them be? But because of their attitude and their utter relentlessness against Christianity and people of faith along with seeing the kind of causes and groups they like to surround themselves with, it currently compels me to the ideas of my original post. I don't mind if people disagree with me, in fact, I encourage it and I encourage those who do disagree to show me where I"m wrong and even better yet, to show me what these top atheist, humanist, and secular groups are indeed trying to accomplish and then go from there. Thanks again, and God bless.

Also on another note, before the site's server went down, someone posted well informed reply talking about the Humanist Manifesto, and if anyone has bits or pieces of that, feel free to share it. It gave a few hints to what I was referring to in my original post.

Eph 6:12
For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms.

Good point. It is a spiritual issue. Unbelievers do not want to be confronted on spiritual issues. You won't find atheists harping about Buddhism, because one is basically given free reign to find one's own way - no accountability. However, Christianity preaches that there is such a thing as righteousness and that none of us measures up. Atheists would prefer a world in which the conscience is never tweaked. Hence, Christianity must go.

Rich wrote:Atheists would prefer a world in which the conscience is never tweaked.

"Atheist" and "sociopath" aren't synonymous.

You don't need to be a sociopath to dislike being challenged on moral grounds. The Christian's first reaction is usually denial or deflection. However, often the Holy Spirit convicts us of our error and we repent. For the atheist, the process ends at the first step.

Rich wrote:You don't need to be a sociopath to dislike being challenged on moral grounds. The Christian's first reaction is usually denial or deflection. However, often the Holy Spirit convicts us of our error and we repent. For the atheist, the process ends at the first step.

I'm sure people believe what they believe for any number of reasons. I can't speak for any other atheists, but I know that my non-belief has nothing to do with disliking being challenged on moral grounds.

An honest atheist:

Cosmic Clowning: Stephen Hawking's "new" theory of everything is the same old CRAP

I agree that Hawking is full of it. As for anybody "taking God away" that just isn't possible. If God is there, then nothing a mortal man can do can take Him away.

I think you know what people are talking about when they say this.

jlay wrote:I think you know what people are talking about when they say this.

I thought I did. Maybe I don't. I'm wrong often. Could you explain it to me?