It’s been said, “You are what you eat.”
Maybe it’s also true that you are what you read and the larger society tells you what you must believe because “it’s science.”
For decades we’ve been told there is no God and we’ve evolved from the slime of a self-generating cosmos. As Carl Sagan so aptly put it, “The Cosmos is all that is or was or ever will be.” This is the official dogma of our nation’s schools. Mention God or post a Bible verse, and you will have the atheists breathing down your school’s legal neck threatening to sue the school and the school district to the point of insolvency if you don’t stop. And the courts have agreed.
Atheism and Darwinism, in their many incarnations, rule the day. Yes, you and I can believe what we want in the solitude our homes and churches (for now), but when it comes to government education, God is out and genes are in. You and I can “rant and rave against humanism and feminism and any other ‘ism’ on Sunday, but come Monday the children belong in school.” ((Rheta Grimsley Johnson, “‘People’ vs. fundamentalists,” The Marietta Daily Journal (September 2, 1986), 4A.)) Where young people are taught that we are nothing more than evolved carriers of genetic material.
Famed atheist Richard Dawkins has written, “We — and that means all living things — are survival machines programmed to propagate the digital database that did the programming.”1 How romantic.
We’re struck by the horror of the Las Vegas massacre, but given what we are told we must believe is true, maybe Stephen Paddock, with all his unknown troubles, decided to put what we are being told is the absolute scientific truth into practice. On what basis could any of the following atheists argue that what Stephen Paddock did was a moral wrong?
If it’s OK to blame guns for what Stephen Paddock did, then it’s OK to blame the conclusions of atheistic scientists…