We learned how to make a bomb, which is enough to destroy a lot of planets like Earth. What do we justify their invention? The opportunity to put an end to wars. So, the war in Korea, Vietnam, the Persian Gulf, in the Falkland Islands, in Yugoslavia, and so on - just a fiction, the fruit of our imagination.
Yes, but we could not prevent them from using the bomb: the bomb would destroy not only ourselves, but all life on the planet. We have made the Doomsday weapon, unable to perform its unique function. Value at all to invent the bomb, the use of which we do not run the risk? No problem, she decided not only create new ones. And even if we successfully eliminate all stocks of weapons, whether it is possible to destroy the knowledge of how to do it again, and to prevent the spread of this knowledge? If we are smart and civilized, why do not we find another, more simple method to avoid war and not to destroy the planet at the same time? Undoubtedly, the easiest way to end all wars - not to unleash them.
Now think about other significant achievements of civilization: the disastrous scale of pollution of the planet, the destruction of our natural environment, the depletion of earth's mineral resources, overpopulation, destruction of fish and animals, turning fertile land into desert, unemployment, drugs and violence with impunity.
How many times have you heard that unbelted football fans behave like animals? These misconceptions civilized man of the wild beasts. In nature, animals do not behave. They kill only in order to survive, and even for this purpose is rarely kill their own kind.
You must have heard that if a fox gets into the chicken coop, she will not rest until all the chickens strangle one of them. But the laws of nature do not trample the fox, and the people. That he puts natural prey fox in unnatural circumstances. If the fox in the wild will fall flock of chickens is unlikely to catch more of them. A man robs production opportunities to escape. Put yourself in a fox. You seek only to one - to seize one of the chickens and quietly slip away unnoticed, and there was uproar. And even if the fox will kill all poultry in the hen house, to eat it until the last chicken it will not be! Only reasonable, civilized human beings kill and maim each other for reasons beyond any logic!
Think about it: it took us three billion years to evolve to its current state of biodiversity. But only in the last few centuries, technology has reached the current level. Having the opportunity to look back and carefully examine the past in the future, do you think, what factors should be recognized as critical for our development? The invention of the internal combustion engine, the computer or TV? Flying to the moon? Or the most important thing for you - the invention of a variety of methods to destroy something that has developed three billion years, awareness of the danger of such weapons, but the reluctance to get rid of at least one of them?
Perhaps you think that I stare at only one side of the coin. You can not deny the remarkable achievements of mankind in the field of medicine! And I do not deny them. I am convinced that these achievements because we seem to be so great, that we forget about the fact that the disease, to which we aim to eradicate, the results of civilization. So Lenny from Steinbeck novel "Of Mice and Men" was so grateful to George, who did not let him drown, that had forgotten that began to sink due to the fault of the same George.
If we are so smart, why only we (and our domesticated animals) die mostly from disease and manifestations of aggression from our relatives? Wild animals rarely die from disease - except for illnesses from environmental pollution caused by man or deliberate spread of pathogens, intended to destroy certain types of animals - a goal that is not usually done, for example, artificial infection myxomatosis wild rabbits. Most wild animals are killed by accidents, exhaustion, fall prey to humans or other animals.
Over the past hundred years, our knowledge of the structure of the human body have improved immeasurably. We learned how to transplant organs, achieved the dizzying success in the field of genetic engineering. But leading experts in these areas are recognized: the deeper they penetrate into the mysteries of the human body the device, the more clearly understand how little we know about the work of this amazing machine. Too often, our limited knowledge create more problems than they solve.
I wonder why my cat drinks water from the pond and feels great, but enough for me to put ice in celebration his glass to make severe indigestion? Why wild animals within a few hours after birth are able not only to get up on their feet, but also to run and maintain the immobility of human babies for months?
Modern medicine deals primarily seeking miraculous tablet or powder, which removes one or another symptom. For years, I was plagued by constipation. And no wonder. From birth, we hammered that illness and disease are completely natural. We are expected to chicken pox, measles, whooping cough, cold and flu, indigestion, constipation, diarrhea, and so on and so forth. This is normal. The doctor will prescribe the medicine and cure us. My doctor prescribed me a laxative, and the problem of constipation was solved in a matter of days.
But do you really think that such an intricate mechanism of how the human body is designed to tolerate the constipation? Think of the many sophisticated devices trillion cells. Were they created in order to eventually become cancerous? Why did not the doctor explained that my constipation - a consequence of malnutrition?
Almost all problems in life we tend to solve by acting on the source of the problem, rather than through the relief of her symptoms. If you have a roof leaks, how do you do - all life will expose a drop of basins and buckets or replace broken tiles? Perhaps an example is too obvious, and perhaps this is the reason for our illogical approach to medicine: the human body is so complex that even the doctors who know more about it than anyone else, can do little - just as well You can instruct the macaque computer repair.
If your car flashing light oil, whether or not to solve the problem by disabling this light bulb? Such a decision would not only absurd, but also extremely risky. Yes, the engine is hardly stuck once, but the flashing indicator is not to blame. On the contrary, it is a very useful warning about problems in the mechanism. We tend to perceive aches, headache, cough,
Prev. - Next. "
That is how the Creator and entered
Table of contents
That is how the Creator and entered
Page 2
Are you surprised that the Supreme mind, able to create such a sophisticated human body, not to mention the other wonders of Mother Nature, could have been so stupid and forget about elementary instruction? Do not tell us that, as and when we need to eat?
How, in your opinion, wild animals have existed for millions of years? And by the way, how our ancestors survived, who had no supermarkets, no microwaves, and especially therapists and nutritionists? And about the existence of calories and vitamins, we know only the last hundred years.
The Creator has provided instructions on how to operate all living beings, including us. And wild animals successfully use them! Because I do not know what is overweight.
Most likely, at you dominates the same error, which prevented me many years. In childhood and youth, I seriously doubted the existence of the Creator, which is typical for a representative of Western society. Early in life I had no tunnel vision was not observed. I told about the fairies, Santa Claus and God - the old man with a long white beard who created us and defends to this day, knows every thought and deed, and in the end we will be judged.
That Christmas fairies and Santa Claus - pure fiction, to make sure it was not difficult. Already at that time I doubted the existence of God. Because we all know that newspapers can not be trusted, even if they are writing about the events of yesterday. How can you believe the tales that was two thousand years ago? Especially from the book, translated from ancient languages.
Confusion and controversy was too much.
- Someone almost drowned, but miraculously escaped - praise the Lord?
- And what he did the earthquake?
- Who are we to judge the Almighty? Our business - to believe in him!
With this, I could not accept. If God is credited with all that is good in the world, it means that the responsibility for the disaster, he also has to take over, I thought.
If God created the universe, then, and hell too. Why he needed such a good and forgiving God? If God really created us, why he is not taken care of, that we have not sinned? Bad dancer interfere shoes, but what kind of craftsman who blames the failure does not itself without tools, and the fact that he created? How can you teach a child to be a believer or even God-fearing, if he is condemned to eternal torment just because God in the creation of faked?
My young mind was not able to figure it all out. But most of all I was puzzled categorical statements preachers thoughts about God and about what he expects from us - as if they communicate directly with the Almighty. If he makes contact with the preachers, and they could find out what he has created an earthquake!
I longed for the information and the answers I was never satisfied. But the main reason for my lack of faith in God, despite the conviction of preachers remained multiplicity of religions and faiths, adherents of each of which saw their faith as the only true. If there are thousands of religions and each has its own view of the creation of God and, therefore, in error all but one. Faith, which taught me nothing confirmed its validity. On the contrary, I was asked to just trust her. But if all religions are wrong, but one of the laws of probability, and it may be only a false, like the rest.
I not only lost faith in God, but came to the conclusion that such doubts and hesitations should occur at all, despite the credibility and confidence of the preachers. In the end, the contradictions and irrationality in their reasoning should be obvious not only for me. The latest on the scales fell another argument: Are people would sin, if sincerely believed that God was looking at him? Suppose you think that would be. Can you imagine a thief is able to steal the eyes of a policeman? Of course, no. If everyone really believed that our every thought and action known to God, and he always remembers them in the day of judgment, sinners would not exist in nature.
And then I found out about Darwin, his book "The Origin of Species" and the big bang theory. This was a deeper meaning. Doubts and confusion vanished again. God is not and was not. From primordial soup, formed after the big bang, as if by magic any simple one-celled creatures amebopodobnye and three billion years in the evolution by natural selection have developed into complex human organism.
At the time it seemed to me that I have attained enlightenment. But actually I had blinders - the same ones who for years remained downcast. Many look at the contradictions of religious teachings through his fingers because it is difficult to reconcile with the absence of God, and I clung to the theory of evolution and natural selection because it does not want to acknowledge its existence.
So I raised the issue of religion. Aides advised me not to, so as not to scare away readers. And I understand the reasons for such advice. Atheists certainly had the impression: "Now Allen will offer me to believe in a Creator and will convince lose weight - because God created me fit, and healthy." Let me just clarify: I urge you not to a religious faith, and to believe in the undeniable fact which is evident regardless of whether you believe in a Creator or not. Those of you who believe in God, certain fear that I shall receive or have already questioned your beliefs. But this conclusion is infinitely far from the truth.
How did the universe: it was created by higher intelligence, which we call God, or was the result of pure coincidence? Some perceive the evolution and natural selection as an alternative to the theory of creation. I once belonged to one of these people. How can you be so stupid? For many years I was proud of his logical, analytical thinking expert accountant. And in fact, my brain was like a giant clams in the shell. I denied faith in the Creator, because he could not just believe - I needed proof. I guess I just was blind, because the evidence around me throughout life.
Imagine that you are the first people were on the moon. And we saw that among the lunar dust and rocks glistening diamond ring. What do you think? "What a miracle among this chaos emerged a diamond ring? "Or" how it got here? "However, a ring with a stone - a pretty simple thing. You do not need a sophisticated play of the imagination to believe that it could well be formed by itself under natural conditions.
And if in the dust stood all alone a new "Rolls-Royce"? Would you believe that it is reasonable to set up the Creator, or would have doubted even for a second? Or do you seriously think that such a complex, intricate thing as the "Rolls Royce", may itself? Such a conclusion is able to reach only a hopeless idiot.
If you find it hard to believe that the "Rolls Royce" on the moon appeared by chance, not by plan of a higher intelligence, why do you think that the mechanism which is a million times more complicated, "Rolls-Royce", you may be the world itself?
There is no contradiction here, I do not see. The appearance of a hypothetical "Rolls-Royce" on the moon should be attributed to the Creator. The people there, and the mathematical probability that we are having themselves void. Therefore, it is reasonable to assume that we have created.
Evolution and natural selection - is also an indisputable fact. But they do not contradict the theory of the creation of mankind. "Rolls-Royce" did not appear in a moment as if by magic. It took thousands of years of mental work, actions by trial and error, to go from being a modern invention of the wheel to the "Rolls-Royce". If you think about it, the process is largely similar to the development of the human being from the rather primitive single-celled organisms. Similarly, both the single-wheel model appeared thousands of machines, the process of evolution and natural selection appeared countless different entities. Evolution and natural
