Bang ! What ?? Nothing !!!!

it’s a much putrid or rather a deluded idea if we say that we don’t believe in our own existence, without babbling on this idea, In simple words I will try to clarify that when a person neglects God he basically negates his own existence, even we know whereas common sense testifies to the fact that things which we see are real we are living in a real world, we feel, think, we have our own choice there is nothing matrix kind of situation. Then what do you comment over a person who says that I am from nothing?  Or I am a product of a chance? Or I have been here from an infinite time. I must say that these all are felicitous ideas. These are some muddled ideas which destroying human senses of feel and believe something. These lax ideas are nothing but a unnecessary wastage of time and brain.

Now the question that arises is that by rejecting God, how a person remonstrates against his own existence? When a person rejects this basic or the natural belief than he actually remiss his own rational existence. But what is the “basic belief”? the basic belief means which doesn’t require any information, that basic belief is inbred  like the existence of the God. For not believing on the existence of God you change your thoughts about God, but for believing on God you don’t need to ask from anyone it’s a natural believe.

Over the last decade some really startling facts have been found that show that children have an innate belief in God. Dr Justin Barrett, a senior researcher at the University of Oxford Centre for Anthropology and Mind, states “The preponderance of scientific evidence for the past 10 years or so has shown that a lot more seems to be built into the natural development of children’s minds than we once thought, including a predisposition to see the natural world as designed and purposeful and that some kind of intelligent being is behind that purpose…” He adds that “If we threw a handful [of children] on an island and they raised themselves…they would believe in God”.. To put it simply, his answer as to why anyone would believe in God is that, our minds are designed to do so  Disbelief in God is something which is unnatural to the human being. Oxford University development psychologist Dr Olivera Petrovich, who is an expert in the Psychology of Religion states that, belief in God develops naturally and that ‘‘atheism is definitely an acquired position’’ [1]

So where did this natural belief in a creator come from? We can’t say it is taught by society as this belief is innate, and studies show that it is independent of societal pressures and is cross-cultural.

Or you came from nothing? There are some neo kinds of atheists who claim as some of atheist “scientists “claim (using an inductive argument which makes no sense) I want you to use some of your brains that did you really come from nothing? I man 0 which means nothing + zero which also means nothing = you? What a messy mathematical idea… The implications of “nothing” is that it can be reasonable for someone to assert the following:

“I had a wonderful dinner last night, and it was nothing.”

“I met nobody in the hall and they showed my directions to this room.”

Nothing is tasty with salt and pepper.”[2]

Why it cannot be a ‘chance occurrence’?

Some people who do not understand the impossibility of the universe coming into being by chance exclaim, “It could have happened by chance!” However would they say chance explains how an elephant was sleeping in their garage overnight? Or how a 747 ended up parked in their garden? Even after their irrational perspective is highlighted, they still hold on to the theory that the universe can exist due to chance. In response to this I would argue that it is not just about chance but something the theorists such as William Dembski call “specified probability.”

Specified probability is a probability that also conforms to an independent pattern. To illustrate this, imagine you have a monkey in a room for twenty-four hours, typing a way on your laptop. In the morning you enter the room and you see, “To be or not to be!” The monkey has miraculously written out a part of a Shakespearian play! What you may have expected is random words such as “house,” “car,” and “apple.” However, in this case not only have you seen the improbability of typing English words – but they also conform to the independent pattern of English grammar! To accept this is just the result of blind chance would be irrational and counter discourse, as anyone can claim anything from this perspective. To put this in to context, British mathematicians have calculated that if a monkey did type on a laptop at every possible moment, it would take 28 Billion years (!!!) to produce “To be or not to be”. In conclusion, accepting the chance hypothesis is tantamount to rejecting the existence of our own universe![3]





Leave a Reply