December 30, 2006: I just reread this and realized how short and incomplete it is. Please take into consideration that for the speech, I was under a strict time limit. There is a lot more to all of this, and I am willing to discuss it with anyone who wishes to.
This is a speech I recently wrote for my school's annual public speaking competition. I won first prize there and went on to the EMSB school board competition, where I placed second. I'm posting it because I'd like to have some feedback and discuss the issues with intelligent people...
Is there a God? Honorable judges, respected teachers, and fellow students, this question has puzzled humanity for centuries. Now, with the numerous advances science has made, the general public has been led to believe that "creation theory" is no longer valid, and hence, that God does not exist. Is this truly the case? I believe that science has not only not disproved the existence of God, but that there is substantial evidence that actually supports His existence.
The Big Bang theory states that the universe exploded into being from an infinitely small dot of infinitely strong gravitational force. But how can anything be infinitely small? Even the smallest atom is, by definition, infinitely larger than anything infinitely small. Since the atom is obviously not infinitely large, the only way this can be possible is for that dot to be equivalent to zero. Did the entire universe appear out of absolute nothingness? How can you get something out of nothing? It is illogical. The non-theistic version of the Big Bang theory, then, is nothing short of ridiculous. There must have been some infinite source to start it all.
Let’s move on to the Theory of Evolution. In passing, let us remember that Charles Darwin was not an atheist, but a deeply religious man. He never proposed anything against God or religion. The church sprung to conclusions without even considering the validity of his work, or understanding it.
If evolution theory explains the variety of life forms on Earth, can we not say the process of evolution is the means used by God to create that variety?
According to one scientist:
"If one wishes to believe that the universe and everything in it were created by a supreme being, there is nothing in the theory of evolution to contradict that."
Another issue I am compelled to address is that of "Evil and the God of Good". The atheists say, "If a Good God exists, how is it that there is so much evil in the world?" But, "If God were Good, would he force us to always do what he deemed good? " "Free will" is what defines us as human beings. Animals behave in a way natural to their species. We humans can "behave" any way we want. Freedom is a far greater gift than perpetual "good". Do we challenge God for giving us this liberty?
The existence of evil, and of evil acts, is necessary as a direct consequence of the existence of good and of good acts. Thus, evil exists, not because "God does not exist", but because of the necessity of "The absence of good", just as cold and darkness are defined respectively as "the absence of heat" and "the absence of light".
Einstein once said, "The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible." In truth, our universe is so fine-tuned that the notion of the nonexistence of intelligent design is, itself, incomprehensible. And for those to whom this is still not apparent, I have one last statement: Things are rarely, if ever, the way they superficially seem to the naked eye.
Thank you.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Désolé de ma réponse en français, comprenez que c'est plus facile pour moi de débattre dans ma langue mais si je dois traduire, je le ferai!
Dans le texte suivant, notez que le mot "dieu" est écrit sans majuscule, comme j'écris le mot "science".
Jusqu'à maintenant, les déistes ne font qu'essayer de prouver l'invalidité des autres théories qui ont maintes fois été prouvées mais je n'ai jamais vu de texte apportant vraiment une quelconque preuve de l'existance divine.
Je pense que la meilleure façon de prouver quelque chose est de passer par le processus scientifique :
Une théorie est faite
si quelqu'un en a une nouvelle, il attaque l'ancienne théorie pour prouver en quels points elle de marche pas et comment la sienne est plus valide et pour cela, et c'est là la partie importante, il se base sur des FAITS prouvés et prouvables.
Puis, j'aimerais rappeler que les peuples ont déja cru que le ciel était une toile tenue par des piliers géants, ou que la terre était plate, et c'était la parole de dieu et personne ne pouvait rien y faire.
Or ce fut prouvé totalement faux!
Est-ce que les "religions contemporaines" sont vraies tandis que les autres ne le sont pas?
Y a-t-il une seule bonne religion?
Finalement, je voudrais m'opposer au tabou que représente l'opposition à la théorie déiste. On peut publiquement dire que une théorie (ex: le bing bang) est impossible, mais si l'on essaye de dire publiquement que l'existance de dieu est impossible, on se retrouve attaqué par la communauté religieuse, on se fait traiter de raciste, on s'aliène completement le peuple! Pourquoi?
Pourquoi?
Je vais vous le dire!
Si il était permis de publiquement remettre en question l'existance de dieu, cette théorie ne tiendrais pas bien longtemps! L'église a instauré ce tabou public dans le but de protéger la religion contre la logique!
La religion me semble n'être qu'une façon d'éviter de voir la complexité des chose, voire même une raison pour ne pas observer les phénomènes en profondeur.
Bref, je reste athée.
Tristan,
Comme ta commentaire est longue, je vais essayer de te repondre paragraphe par paragraphe. Mais d'abord, je vais essayer de m'expliquer. Je vais ecrire en Anglais, car c'est la langue que j'utilise sur mon blog et que presque tout le monde comprend:
This is a speech that I have written which had to be around 3 minutes long, for English class. I actually had more material (almost 8 minutes' worth) but had to delete it because of the time constraint. If you like, I can either send it to you or publish it here, but I must warn you that it is underdeveloped and incomplete.
I believe you are the first to have criticised my speech after having read or listened to it. Even one of my teachers, who is an agnostic, liked it. We often debate these sort of issues and he is a very scientific person, so it surprised me that you, with the same sort of mindset, did not appreciate it as much.
All this aside, I will now begin to respond to your paragraphs individually.
3. As you can probably see, I have not tried to prove the invalidity of other theories; rather, I am saying that these theories do nothing to refute the existence of an Almighty being. Mind you, I have not proven the existence of such a being, but I have gone as far as the time, audience, and my limited research have allowed.
I will try to finish this later.
4. I agree with you on this point, but we all know that, at least for the moment, it is not possible to prove the existence of a God by tangible means. Therefore, the only way to attempt to do so is by philosophy.
5. I am not completely sure of your point in this paragraph. But I can tell you for sure that Islam (my religion), which is not a contemporary religion, but the oldest of monotheistic religions (Judaism = Christianity = Islam) has always encouraged the search for truth and knowlege. There have been many Muslim scholars who were far ahead of Europe during the Dark Ages. To answer your question, I cannot say that there is just one "good" religion. Most religions are "good" (I am excluding here any and all religions that infringe on human rights, such as those religions that offer human sacrifice, etc.) And, the basic principles of most religions are the same. In my personal opinion, any religion that refuses to uphold proven scientific data on the basis of "It goes against the scriptures" is wrong. As far as I know, no scientific data has surfaced that has gone against what is written in the Quran, which, by the way, is very similar to the Bible. The problem with the fundamentalist Christian leaders is that they take everything in the Bible literally, which has resulted in the issue of "God vs. Science". Science is from God and God is Science. They do not understand this.
6. Unfortunately, it is true. Fundamentalist Christians refuse to even listen to the arguments for evolution, and that is their problem. BUT, I have as yet not seen a single theory that supposes the inexistence of God proven. Of course, it is impossible to prove the non-existence of anything, so the atheists have a big problem on their hands...
To conclude, religion is not against logic, although some people see it to be so.
If I have not answered your questions/argument properly, please let me know. Have a nice day.
Post a Comment