There is an alarming increase in atheism around the world. It is a disbelief and denouncement of God that is not just reserved for Christians. People of all religious backgrounds are shunning belief of God and embracing atheism, agnosticism, or science instead.
Although most people would consider me to be agnostic, I believe in God because I want to, not because someone has shown me proof of his existence. Not only do I believe in God simply because I want to, I believe in God because it's the smart bet, as I will explain in a little bit.
Just as atheists have a problem with the existence of God, I have a lot of problems with science. There are a lot of scientific claims that I just can't buy into because the scientist's name ends with Sc.D., D.Sc., S.D., D.S., or Dr.Sc. any more than others buy into someone's claim because their name ends with Rev., Fr., RR., Msgr., Ep., H.H., etc.
We're supposed to believe the archaeologist who points at ancient hieroglyphics from 3000 BC and tells us, "This says....". We accept it because we can't refute it. It's not like some 5000 year old man is going to shuffle up behind him, smack the back of his head and say, "Dumb ass, that's not what that says. Here's a dictionary."
We're supposed to believe the astrophysicist's 'big bang' claim that "something" farted out the universe and planets formed from gas and dust that are solid enough to support millions of tons of weight. Gas and dust that gave us food, water, air, and life, both human and animal.
We're supposed to believe Darwinian theorists that claim man evolved from apes. What did apes evolve from? Or as George Carlin asked, "If man evolved from monkeys and apes, then why do we still have monkeys and apes?"
We're supposed to believe the geophysicist that claims a rock is 4 billion years old because it was proven by machines and tests like carbon dating and radiometric testing that were invented by humans. There's even disagreement on how old the earth actually is.
Many scientists are atheists or agnostics because, (in my opinion), it would be counter narrative to their theories or their theories are biased in conclusion by their atheistic or agnostic beliefs.
When it comes to science and religion it's not always an either/or position. There are great thinkers and innovators who are atheists or agnostics and there are great thinkers and innovators who have a belief in God or creative entity,
As I said earlier, I choose to believe in God. It is an insane, sick, violent world out there. I find comfort in the thought that if need be, there is a greatness out there that can solve all the world's problems if enough people pray and ask for God's intervention.
I also believe in God because it's the smart bet. It's called "Pascal's wager." "Pascal's Wager" is the name given to an argument due to Blaise Pascal for believing, or for at least taking steps to believe, in God.
His conclusion is:
Wagering for God superdominates wagering against God. The worst outcome associated with wagering for God is at least as good as the best outcome associated with wagering against God and if God exists, the result of wagering for God is strictly better that the result of wagering against God. Pascal draws the conclusion that rationality requires you to wager for, (believe in) God.
In other words. If you believe in, (or wager for), God and it turns out he does exist, you win everything.
If you believe in, (or wager for), God and it turns out he doesn't exist, you lose nothing.
However, if you don't believe in, (or wager against), God and it turns out he does exist, you lose everything!...God, eternity, heaven, and infinite gain.
As you can see, "the smart money is on God."
