The defining religion of the 20th century was Atheism. I say “was” because even though the number of Atheists continues to grow in Western civilisation, the idea itself is obsolete. While the mantra of the 20th century was “God is dead,” the mantra of the 21st century will be “Atheism is dead” and that will be painfully obvious within a few decades. Before its end, the 21st century will become the most religious century in modern history.
The Atheism of the 20th century was defined by the ideas of Charles Darwin and Karl Marx in the 19th century. From these two men, the Marx-Darwinian ideology would spawn the systematic murder of over 100,000,000 people in the 20th century under Communism and Nazism. (And that’s not even counting the wars spawned by these ideologies, which amounted to over a hundred million more.) The bloodiest century in the history of the world was given to us by institutionalised Atheism. No other century can compare, and if we add up all the casualties and holocausts caused by religions throughout the history of the world, they don’t hold a candle to the bloodbath given to us by Marx-Darwinian Atheism.
Atheists have been with us since the dawn of time. There is really nothing new about the idea of Atheism. What made the 20th century different, however, was the militant nature of the Marx-Darwinian brand. You see, prior to the 20th century, Atheists were usually just considered the typical village idiot. Every village had one, just like every village had a town drunk. Often they were the same person. However, in the 19th century, with the publication of just a few widely popular books, Karl Marx was able to give Atheism a systematic social-political worldview, backed by the evolutionary theories of Charles Darwin. This gave Atheism an appearance of social-political-scientific legitimacy. In other words, Marx and Darwin made it intellectually fashionable to be an Atheist. I say the “appearance” of social-political-scientific legitimacy because as science, politics and sociology would later discover, it’s just an illusion. The end result was the worst bloodbath in the history of the world, lasting a whole century, coupled with the complete destruction of Western Civilisation (Christendom) and the apparent ascendancy of Islam as a major world religion. For the first time in a thousand years, we are now looking at the real prospect of Europe becoming a new Islamic stronghold, all thanks to the century-long progression of Marx-Darwinian Atheism.
If the goal of Marx-Darwinian Atheism was to create a “scientifically-enlightened society” wherein nobody believed in God or religion then the mission was a complete failure. If, however, the goal of Marx-Darwinian Atheism was to weaken Christianity to a point when Islam would threaten to take over the entire European continent, then mission accomplished!
Marx-Darwinian Atheism takes on two manifestations — Political Marxism and Cultural Marxism.
Political Marxism took hold primarily in the East during the early 20th century. It was a top-down management approach to the Marx-Darwinian ideology that takes hold of governments first. Examples of Political Marxism include the Soviet Union, Communist China, North Korea, Vietnam and Cuba.
Cultural Marxism took hold primarily in the West during the middle to late 20th century. It’s a bottom-up approach which takes hold of social institutions like colleges, schools and the media. The idea is to change the attitudes and opinions of society first, with the end result being a government takeover. Examples of cultural Marxism include the European Union as well as most of the nations of the Anglophone and Hispanophone world. Cultural Marxism is still on the rise today, but it will soon become a victim of its own success. Cultural Marxists don’t reproduce. They don’t build their numbers naturally. They must rely on recruitment efforts to bring in more converts, and they’re quickly reaching their maximum capacity. Europe is where it will all come to a head, within this century, when the forces of cultural Marxism will come into direct competition with the forces of Islam. Cultural Marxists will quickly discover that Muslims are not nearly the pushovers that Christians were. The clash will end in another continental-wide bloodbath, wherein Marxism will lose, and Europeans will be forced to choose between rising Islam and what’s left of Christianity. The children born today will be the ones who make this decision as adults. Regardless of which religion they choose, Cultural Marxism will cease to exist, and just as Political Marxism collapsed in the Soviet Union, before the end of the 21st century the entire edifice of Marx-Darwinian Atheism will collapse into the ash heap of history’s failed ideas.
During the 20th century, political history proved that Marx-Darwinian Atheism was an absolute failure. It resulted in the economic and political oppression of billions, and the systematic execution of at about a hundred million, in addition to the Second World War, which was the greatest conflict in human history, as well as a bloody Cold War which many historians will tell you wasn’t really so “cold” at all. There were plenty of heated clashes, including Korea, Vietnam, Latin America and a host of covert operations the media was never told about, in which thousands of Russian and American soldiers died in “unfortunate accidents” and “strategic mishaps.” Yes, the Russians and Americans directly shot at each other multiples times (secretly) during that 44-year conflict from 1947 to 1991. Under Political Marxism (Communism) misery and oppression reign. Outside of Political Marxism (Communism), there is nothing but fear of expansion and attempts to stop it (war). Likewise, under Cultural Marxism, there is nothing but social upheaval, the destruction of social institutions, anarchy, and the rise of Islam. On a social level, Marx-Darwinian Atheism is proving to be an absolute failure. Wherever Marx-Darwinian Atheism advanced, either under the political or cultural banner, nothing but turmoil and misery have followed.
The 20th century also saw the failure of the scientific side of Marx-Darwinian Atheism. It began when the Catholic Church and mainstream Protestantism accepted the possibility that since God is the God of nature, he could use natural evolutionary processes to guide the earth into its present evolutionary state, the earth and universe may be much older than previously thought, and that the Biblical creation accounts need not be read literally. Many scientists embraced this idea of a Creator because it seems to solve a good deal of mathematical improbabilities related to evolution happening solely by random chance. When Marx and Darwin were writing their books, they were operating on a 19th-century scientific model. In the century and a half since then, science has seen some remarkable advances that have left the Marx-Darwinian scientific worldview obsolete. For example, in the century and a half since Darwin’s book “Origin of Species” there has been not a shred of evidence uncovered that organic matter can transform into living cells of its own accord by random chance. With all the scientific capabilities developed in 150 years, even to the point of sending men to the moon, we have not yet produced a single repeatable experiment demonstrating how this is possible. There is simply no scientific evidence supporting the Atheistic notion that life on earth is a product of random chance. The 19th-century scientific worldview, upon which Marx-Darwinian Atheism is based, is also obsolete in the realm of physics and chemistry. During the 19th century, all scientific disciplines put forward the idea that the universe is eternal. All matter in the universe always existed, according to this understanding, and always will. This notion was scientifically proved false by a Catholic priest and physicist named Fr Georges Lemaître. His theory of an expanding universe, when calculated backwards, pointed to a definite beginning of the universe and all matter. Initially called the “Big Bang Theory” by its detractors, Lemaître’s theory of universal expansion has now been accepted as a fact by nearly all of the scientific establishment. The universe had a definite beginning, which points to the religious idea that it was created by some type of “First Cause” or Creator.
While mainstream society continues to follow the obsolete 19th-century scientific basis of Marx-Darwinian Atheism, it’s just a matter of time before mainstream society eventually catches up with 20th-century science. When that happens, and it’s already starting, Atheism will be put back on track to becoming the rare and comical ideology of the village idiot. Just give it a hundred years. By the dawn of the 22nd century, the world will be more religious than anything we’ve seen in centuries.
While science cannot prove the existence of God, it cannot disprove it either. Scientific theories on origins that do not include the possibility of God leave the scientist with significant mathematical improbabilities. A good number of scientists today believe in some kind of Creator or “First Cause” to grapple with these mathematical improbabilities, even if they are neither religious people outwardly nor members of religious organisations. Some of these scientists explain it this way.
The chance that higher life forms might have emerged in this way [random chance] is comparable to the chance that a tornado sweeping through a junkyard might assemble a Boeing 747 from the materials therein… Life as we know it is, among other things, dependent on at least 2000 different enzymes. How could the blind forces of the primal sea manage to put together the correct chemical elements to build enzymes?
— Sir Fred Hoyle (1915 – 2001), British astronomer who formulated the theory of stellar nucleosynthesis.
The problem with random chance producing life in this universe is that it violates the first law of thermodynamics, which is entropy. All matter, when left to its own development, unless acted upon by an outside force, will gradually move from a state of order to disorder and not vice versa. In the case of the order and symmetry that exists in complex life, one must ask, what is the outside Force that acted upon this universe to bring about that order and symmetry. For without it, entropy dictates disorder and chaos.
Still, one doesn’t need to be a scientist or a philosopher to determine that God exists. All one really needs is good gambling skills. All of life is a gamble anyway, and this is the same when it comes to the existence of God. While modern science, philosophy and mathematics strongly stack the deck in favour of theism, the hardcore Atheist will cling to the smaller odds of a universe created by random chance. So this argument needs to be taken seriously as well. If there is a 90% chance that God does exist, and only a 10% chance that he doesn’t, then we need to consider our own personal odds in all this. However, just to give the Atheist the benefit of the doubt, let’s dismiss modern science for a moment and give the Atheist a 50/50 chance that he’s right.
A 17th-century philosopher, mathematician and physicist by the name of Blaise Pascal postulated that human beings bet with their lives that God either exists or does not. This is because human beings, unlike animals, are rational creatures that are able to think outside of their immediate carnal and emotional needs. Thus their entire lives are a gamble on whether or not God exists. Under “Pascal’s Wager,” as it came to be called, theology and doctrine are unimportant. What is important is the result of the wager.
Whether or not God exists cannot be changed. The only thing that can change is whether or not you believe God exists. Therefore…
If you believe and you’re right, you stand the greatest chance toward infinite gain in the afterlife. If you believe and you’re wrong, nothing happens in the afterlife, because if there is no God then there is no afterlife. When you die, nothing happens, and you have no consciousness. So if you have no consciousness, then you’ll never know you were wrong, and you lived a relatively happy life and a less frightening death because you believed that something better comes after you die. But you’ll never know you were wrong because you can’t know if you have no consciousness. So believing in God gives you a chance of infinite gain if you’re right, and nothing happens if you’re wrong. It’s a smart wager you place with your life, in which you could win but can’t lose.
If you don’t believe in God and you’re right, nothing happens. You win the bet but you literally gain nothing. You’ve lived your life in fear of death because you believe that this life is all there is, and when you die you just cease to exist. Your consciousness is gone. Congratulations! You were right, and now you have nothing to show for it. You can’t even gloat about it, because you have no consciousness to gloat with. You’ll never even know that you were right because after you die, you won’t “know” anything. However, if you’re wrong and God does exist, then you’ve got a real problem. Your life’s wager has now placed you in a position of potential infinite loss. Regardless of what God it is, whether the Christian God, or the Muslim God, or the Hindu gods, or maybe some other “God” unknown to religion, the prospect of being conscious after death and confronting a God who you denied your entire life, probably won’t end well for you. Thus by refusing to believe in God, you’ve just placed a wager with your life that you cannot win. You will either gain nothing if you’re right, or you’ll potentially lose everything if you’re wrong. It’s a stupid wager.
Smart people don’t place dumb bets. Yes, I’ve been to Las Vegas. I’ve played the lottery, and I’ve invested in the stock market. Every one of these things is a gamble — a wager with money. I’m pretty careful with my money. When I visit a casino or play the lottery I only use the money I would have spent on entertainment anyway. That way, if I lose everything I’ve budgeted, I’ve lost no less than I would have spent on dinner, a movie and a few drinks. That’s how smart people gamble. I play the stock market in a similar way. Some money I set aside for fixed interest accounts to ensure that I’ll never lose what I’m unwilling to, then I’ll gamble in the market with what I’m willing to risk. If this is how a smart person handles his money, how should a smart person handle his life — indeed his very soul! The smart person places his life (soul) on the wager that God does exist. It’s a wager he can’t lose and just might win. Only the stupid man (the village idiot) places his life (soul) on the wager that God doesn’t exist. It’s a wager he can’t win and just might tragically lose.
So is there a God? Science can’t prove it, but believing that God exists does solve some mathematical improbabilities. Philosophy doesn’t dictate that God must exist, but it tends to lean strongly in that direction, especially in light of 20th-century scientific discoveries about the universe having a definite beginning and verifying the “First Cause” hypothesis. Logic doesn’t demand that there be a God, but it does demand that smart people should place their bets on his existence. History tells us that Atheists have always been with us, but the world has known no suffering like when they are in charge. Atheism becomes a victim of its own success because when they rule everybody hates them, and when their ideas prevail, atheistic people stop reproducing and a sustainable rate. Eventually, theistic people take over again — in our time that would be Islam or Christianity. Take your pick. Is there a God? I’m going to say yes, there is a God, and based on current trends, by the end of this century, most of the world will agree. If you’re a smart person who places smart wagers, maybe you too will believe there is a God.