About     ENCOURAGEMENT     Abortion     Bible Versions     END TIMES     Online Books     Homosexuality     ATHEISM     Evolution     Catholicism

Home     FAQ's     Islam     FAMILY     Marriage & Divorce     Pornography     Doctrine     Cults & False Doctrines     SERMONS     Various     Self-Help

Atheism Is Funny, Part 2
By Brian Price 8/23/2012



Click Here for Part 1     Click Here for Part 3

Why is atheism funny? Well, to illustrate just how funny some of its claims are, let's talk a little bit about rednecks.

Where did they come from? If you travel to Alabama, you'll find that there is an abundance of rednecks. But where did they all come from?

Certainly, there must be a logical explanation.

If we take one of the basic beliefs of atheism, such as abiogenesis (which tries to explain the beginning of life without God) we can explain this phenemenon by saying that they "somehow" got there in the form soup, then they slowly, but gradually evolved into fish, then monkeys, and finally they evolved into rednecks.

Of course, this process took millions of years.

You see with atheism, the belief is that we all somehow made ourselves. That we somehow all got here because we are superior in intelligence than other animals, and that we somehow did it all without God.

That's exactly the opposite of what God's word says.

The Bible says, "Know ye that the LORD he is God: it is he that hath made us, and not we ourselves; we are his people, and the sheep of his pasture." - Psalms 100:3

But all the proponents of atheism say, "But we have science! We have evidence! Yes, science is on our side."

Science and evidence is on their side? Is it now?

If that's truly the case, then let's take a quick look at their evidence for evolution.

According to Britannica's 1986 encyclopedia, volume 18, there are about 8 basic pieces of evidence that unbelieving scientists use to conclude that evolution is true.

Those 8 basic pieces of evidence are:

1. Evidence from structural similarities.

2. Developmental evidence.

3. Evidence from behavior.

4. Comparative biochemistry.

5. Evidence from parasitology.

6. Biogeographical evidence.

7. Evidence from paleontology.

8. Genetic evidence.

For the sake of time, we are going to examine only 2 of these 8 pieces of evidence.

First, what does Britannica say about the evidence from structural similarities?

"The indirect evidence for evolution is based primarily on the significance of similarities found in different organisms." - page 983, The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 18, 1986 edition.

According to atheists, animals share similiar structural qualities, so much so, that it must be evidence that we all share some sort of common ancestor. Just like horses and camels both walk on four legs, have tongues, and both have brains, and bones all similar in shape and size, this is somehow evidence for a common ancestor. We Christians agree with this. The difference though is that we know that the common ancestor is God. For atheists, the common ancestor is something else.

Charles Darwin said in his book, Origin of the Species, "Therefore I should infer from analogy that probably all the organic beings which have ever lived on this earth have descended from some one primordial form, into which life was first breathed." - Darwin, C. (1859), The Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, John Murray, pp. 490

So what was that first primordial form Mr. Darwin? A worm? A fish? A paramecium? Or maybe it was a space alien?

Well, the great thing about their evidence of structural similarities is that it leads you to speculate as much as you want.

But the truth of the matter is that structural similarities is as much evidence for evolution as is the structural similarities between a Ford Taurus and a Ford Ranger prove their common ancestor was a bicycle.

Sure, both the Taurus and the Ranger share some similarities, but that does not mean that they both evolved from some primitive life form. It just means that they were both created by the same company.

Now, let's look at the next piece of evidence.

Evidence from paleontology.

Britannica says of Evidence from paleontology:

"Paleontology occupies a key position in evolutionary studies; the fossils in the Earth's crust are objective evidence of the course taken by living organisms in their evolutionary history, or phylogeny. By themselves, fossils do not 'prove' evolution, for it could be argued that they had all been specially created and then succumbed to catastrophes." - page 984, The New Encyclopedia Britannica, Volume 18, 1986 edition.

Here we read that Britannica first goes on to say that fossils are "objective evidence of phylogeny" which means evolution.

Then it goes right on to admit in the next sentence, that fossils do not prove evolution. But I thought that's what atheism claims? "We have proof! Science is on our side!"

Hmmm... So are they, or are they not evidence for evolution?

According to Dr. Duane T. Gish, the fossils say NO!

He wrote in his book, The Fossils Say NO!, "More recently, [D. M. Raup] with reference to Darwin's awareness that the actual fossil record was hostile to his theory, states, 'Well, we are now about 120 years after Darwin and the knowledge of the fossil record has been greatly expanded. We now have a quarter of a million fossil species but the situation hasn't changed much. The record of evolution is still surprisingly jerky and, ironically, we have even fewer examples of evolutionary transition than we had in Darwin's time." - Duane T. Gish, Evolution - The Fossils Say NO!, page 103.

What Dr. Gish is saying here is that there are absolutely no transitional fossils to prove evolution from one primitive animal to another.

Here's the bottom line, if only two of these pieces of evidences for the general beliefs of atheism hold no water, then what about the other 6 pieces of evidence? Perhaps they too hold no water.

And why is that?

The answer is because atheism has no proof. If one diligently considers all of the evidence found in the world, it would point him to God, not to some worm, or bacteria, or other 'primordial lifeform.' Just take for example the human body. It is so intelligently designed, complete with a nervous system, a lymphatic system, and various other systems that helps the human body to function. Yet, atheists say that "nothing" created it.

And I suppose nothing created robots either, right? I mean, if you cut open a fully operational robot, you'll find that it has parts and systems that all help it to function. And how silly would it be to deny that this robot had a creator? Someone, somehow, thought up its existence, and created it with his own hands.

Any hardcore unbeliever could speculate all day long what might have happened as far as the beginning of life is concerned, as long as the explanation is not biblically based.

Any notion of God to an unbeliever is silly. And the reason why is not because there is a lack of proof for God, but rather because the unbeliever has a lack of faith.

1 Corinthians 1:18 says, "For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God."

Hebrews 11:1-3 says, "1 Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

2 For by it the elders obtained a good report.

3 Through faith we understand that the worlds were framed by the word of God, so that things which are seen were not made of things which do appear."

Here we read in Hebrews that faith is the evidence of things not seen. It goes on to explain that we get our basis of faith from the word of God, from which word all of the worlds were made. We believe that God created the universe because there is evidence. And on the other hand, atheists do not believe based upon their lack of faith in the evidence.

You see the Bible's claims are foolish to the unbeliever because he has no faith. The major hinderance in his faith towards God is not a lack of evidence, but rather his prosperity in this world.

Jesus said, "23 ...How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the kingdom of God!

24 And the disciples were astonished at his words. But Jesus answereth again, and saith unto them, Children, how hard is it for them that trust in riches to enter into the kingdom of God!

25 It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God." - Mark 10:23-25

The more pleasures that a man has in this life, the less he will be inclined to believe God and his word.

God says in James chapter 2:5 that the poor of this world are rich in faith.

So in conclusion, I'd like to say, rednecks. Rednecks spontaneously generating in Alabama. It's quite a leap of faith to believe if you ask me. But it's a belief endorsed by scientists all over the world. And if you believe that, then my friend, that is funny.

If You Died Today, Would You Go To Heaven?

Atheism Is Funny, Part 10 - The Invincibility of the Bible

Atheism Is Funny, Part 9 - Haters of God

Atheism Is Funny, Part 8 - Evolution is NOT a Fact

Atheism Is Funny, Part 7 - Rejecting God's Gift

Atheism Is Funny, Part 6 - Thunderf00t Response

Atheism Is Funny, Part 5 - Proof Of God

Atheism Is Funny, Part 4 - Houses Create Themselves?

Atheism Is Funny, Part 3 - The Blind Leading The Blind

Atheism Is Funny, Part 2 - Soup to Fish to Monkeys to Rednecks

Atheism Is Funny, Part 1 - Infallible Atheists