The Atheist Enigma

Intelligent Design

Some people really believe that this realm just sprouted out of an evolutionary process. A natural, biological, scientifically explained mechanism that has nothing to do with anything, “except that.” To them there could absolutely, positively be no type of “intelligent design” or “Source intelligence” involved, and to believe such is preposterous. They have that right. However this is not supported by science or mathematics.

See, I get the statement of the Atheist, “There is no God,” but the statement itself confirms what I believe is a shallow comprehension of what exactly “God” really is. I mean, Western religion, and more specific, “Messianic Judeo-Christian religion” has distorted, twisted and obscured “religion,” and changed it into some sort of depraved, stage play of evil. A evil that holds a captive, hostage audience under a violent, Babylonian, phallic worshiping, witchcraft spell; and to which most are mostly oblivious, manifestly. This is why people proclaim the aforementioned, “no God mantra.” The “stuff” they’ve been exposed to is devilish, so their assessment is correct.

Of course anyone sane will look at Messianic “religion” and immediately say, “Their words, deeds and history manifest that they can’t possibly believe in a “god” and if they did the “god” they believe in is no “god” at all, “It’s a devil.” So yes, I absolutely comprehend why Atheists believe as they do. I absolutely align myself with their position of, “I don’t want no part of that “god.” But……..It’s not that simple.

I posed this issue to A.I. A Summary of that exchange in report form is here:

Title: The Bible as a Tool of Contradiction, Control, and Violence: A Critical Historical Analysis

I. Introduction
This report presents a critical analysis of the Bible, particularly the King James Version (KJV), with a special emphasis on the more than 1,000 documented contradictions that exist within the text. These contradictions are not simply anomalies; they have historically caused confusion, fostered dependence on religious authorities, and enabled manipulation by political and ecclesiastical powers. This document synthesizes secular scholarly views, historical data, and specific examples to illustrate how the Bible, while a revered spiritual text, has also functioned as a powerful sociopolitical instrument.

---

II. The Scope and Impact of Biblical Contradictions

1. Volume and Variety of Contradictions

• There are over 1,000 documented contradictions in the Bible, affecting theology, chronology, morality, genealogy, and historical facts.

• These contradictions often appear without editorial comment or contextual explanation, leaving the reader to struggle with conflicting truths.

2. Numerical Contradictions

• 2 Samuel 24:9 vs. 1 Chronicles 21:5: Different troop counts—800,000 vs. 1,100,000.

• 1 Kings 7:26 vs. 2 Chronicles 4:5: The "molten sea" holds 2,000 vs. 3,000 baths.

3. Theological Contradictions

• Exodus 33:20 vs. Genesis 32:30: God cannot be seen vs. Jacob saw God face to face.

• Romans 3:28 vs. James 2:24: Justification by faith alone vs. justification by works.

4. Historical and Narrative Contradictions

• Matthew 27:5 vs. Acts 1:18: Judas hangs himself vs. falls and bursts open.

• Resurrection accounts vary: one angel (Matthew), two angels (John), one man (Mark), two men (Luke).

5. Genealogical Discrepancies

• Matthew 1 vs. Luke 3: Different genealogies of Jesus, with inconsistent names and lineages.

6. Moral Contradictions

• Exodus 20:13 ("Thou shalt not kill") vs. 1 Samuel 15:3 (command to slaughter infants).

• Proverbs 26:4–5: Opposing instructions on how to respond to a fool—contradicting within two consecutive verses.

Sources: Skeptics Annotated Bible; Ehrman, Bart D. Jesus, Interrupted (2009); Friedman, Richard E. Who Wrote the Bible? (1987).

---

III. The Confusion Caused by Contradictions

1. Undermining Clarity
The presence of such a vast number of contradictions leads to theological disorientation and inconsistent moral guidance. Readers are often left without clear answers, fostering confusion.

2. Dependency on Religious Authority
Because of these contradictions, laypeople have historically relied on priests, pastors, and theologians to interpret the "true" meaning—giving religious institutions enormous interpretive control.

3. Psychological Impact
Contradictions introduce cognitive dissonance in believers, leading to:

• Selective reading

• Rationalization or denial of inconsistencies

• Increased susceptibility to doctrinal manipulation

4. Example: Creation Accounts

• Genesis 1: Plants before humans

• Genesis 2: Humans before plants
  This not only confuses the order of creation but raises questions about whether these stories are meant to be literal, allegorical, or both.

---

IV. Strategic Use of Contradictions for Control

1. Political Redaction and Unification
Contradictions were preserved to unify competing theological or tribal traditions. Rather than eliminate inconsistency, editors often retained divergent versions.

2. Justification of Power and Violence

• Romans 13:1–2: Used to demand submission to rulers.

• Joshua 6, 1 Samuel 15: Used to justify genocide.

• Ephesians 6:5: Used to justify slavery.

3. Functional Ambiguity
Contradictions create a system where nearly any action—war, peace, mercy, punishment—can be justified biblically. This makes the Bible a tool of extreme versatility for those in power.

Secular Quote:

"The Bible is not simply a book of religion. It is also a political document, edited and re-edited to serve the needs of emerging empires." — Dr. Hector Avalos, The End of Biblical Studies (2007)

---

V. Gatekeeping and Suppression of Independent Interpretation

1. Language and Access

• Historically locked in Latin, Hebrew, or Greek.

• Mass illiteracy ensured interpretive monopoly by clergy.

• Translators (e.g., William Tyndale) were executed for attempting democratization of scripture.

2. Implications
With a confusing and contradictory text in hand, populations were more easily controlled by those who claimed divine authority and scriptural expertise.

---

VI. Conclusion: Manipulation Through Confusion

Given the sheer volume of contradictions (over 1,000), it is historically and rationally supportable to conclude that the Bible:

• Was heavily manipulated and edited for theological and political aims

• Contains contradictions that are systemic, not incidental

• Has been used to justify control, conquest, violence, and suppression

• Created a structure where confusion and reliance on authorities ensured obedience and stability

While the Bible retains profound cultural and spiritual significance, it also serves as a case study in how sacred texts can be shaped for power. A critically informed and historically grounded approach is essential for honest engagement with the text.

---

Suggested Reading:

• Bart D. Ehrman, Misquoting Jesus (2005)

• Richard Elliott Friedman, Who Wrote the Bible? (1987)

• Hector Avalos, The End of Biblical Studies (2007)

• John Dominic Crossan, *The Christianity (1998)

• Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (1979)

  (finis)

Just because peoples minds and hearts have been poisoned by “man created, ancient Babylonian mind control techniques,” this does not negate the existence of ONE CREATOR. Religion was designed to make people despise All Mighty God. Period. It was created to cloak evil, evil doers, and specifically to “mentally, spiritually, emotionally, or financially crush the person who falls under its spell.” Most of the time people are being crushed by, “All four.” Religion, I believe, was created to control the population and destroy their ability to connect with The Source in the MANY WAYS WITHIN US THAT WE CAN.

I posed this “no god enigma” to the A.I. I felt that this matter of high emotions needs a rational, pragmatic deduction based upon know sciences and mathematics in order to ferret out what may or may not have validity. That exchange is here:

Title: Evidence of Intelligent Design in Nature: A Rational Case with Emphasis on Abiogenesis

Abstract:
This report explores the argument for intelligent design from a rational and interdisciplinary standpoint, with a focus on the origin of life (abiogenesis). It examines scientific challenges to naturalistic explanations, highlights philosophical and informational considerations, and incorporates perspectives from prominent scientists and philosophers.

---

I. Introduction: The Question of Origins

The origin of life is one of the most profound questions in science and philosophy. While naturalistic frameworks attempt to explain life’s emergence through unguided physical and chemical processes, many researchers and thinkers argue that the informational and structural complexity of living systems points toward intentional design.

---

II. Abiogenesis: Scientific Challenges

1. The Improbability of Spontaneous Life
Abiogenesis refers to the emergence of life from non-living matter. Despite decades of research, no empirically verified model explains how a self-replicating, metabolically active cell could emerge by chance.

"The simplest cell is unimaginably complex and contains many molecular machines. It’s like believing a Boeing 747 assembled itself in a hurricane."
— Fred Hoyle, astrophysicist

2. The Problem of Information
Life is not merely a collection of chemicals; it is driven by encoded information, primarily in DNA. This digital code uses four nucleotide bases (A, T, C, G) in specific sequences to direct the synthesis of proteins.

"The machine code of the genes is uncannily computer-like. Apart from the difference in chemistry, the logic is the same."
— Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker

Claude Shannon’s information theory distinguishes between order (repetition) and information (meaningful variation). DNA meets the criteria of high-information content, akin to a computer program.

3. The Role of Proteins and Enzymes
Proteins are essential to life and require highly specific amino acid sequences. The odds of randomly assembling even a short functional protein (e.g., 150 amino acids) are astronomically low.

"Even the simplest of the known autocatalytic cycles is far too complex to have arisen by chance from prebiotic chemistry."
— James Tour, synthetic chemist

4. Lack of Empirical Models
Origin-of-life simulations (e.g., Miller-Urey experiment) have not produced life or self-replicating systems. Laboratory conditions often rely on directed outcomes, which unintentionally simulate design.

---

III. Philosophical and Logical Implications

1. Information Requires a Mind
Information, as defined in semiotics and information theory, is a product of intentionality. Functional, specified information is best explained by an intelligent source.

"Information is not a property of matter. It is something that must be imposed upon matter by intelligence."
— Werner Gitt, information theorist

2. The Principle of Sufficient Reason
Philosopher Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz argued that everything that exists has a reason for its existence. The presence of biological information implies a sufficient cause—possibly a rational mind.

3. Teleology in Biology
Many biological systems exhibit purpose or goal-directed behavior. Aristotle called this "final causality," and it remains a core feature of life that purely mechanistic explanations struggle to address.

"Biology is the study of complicated things that give the appearance of having been designed for a purpose."
— Richard Dawkins (ironically acknowledging design-like features)

---

IV. Cumulative Case from Nature

1. Fine-Tuning of Physical Constants
The laws of physics appear finely tuned for life. Constants such as the gravitational force and the cosmological constant must fall within narrow ranges for atoms, stars, and planets to form.

2. DNA as a Code
DNA functions like a computer program, complete with syntax, semantics, and error-correction. This suggests that life's foundation is not just chemistry but coded language.

3. Irreducible Complexity
Many systems in biology (e.g., flagellum, ATP synthase) require all components to function. The removal of any part renders the system useless.

4. Mathematical Structure in Nature
The universe is permeated with mathematical structures that govern natural phenomena:

• Orbital mechanics follow Kepler's and Newton's laws.

• Crystals form with geometric regularity.

• The Fibonacci sequence and the Golden Ratio appear in everything from sunflower spirals to nautilus shells.

These phenomena are not only describable by mathematics—they appear to be inherently mathematical.

"The book of nature is written in the language of mathematics."
— Galileo Galilei

"It is therefore not unreasonable to describe the universe as being made of mathematics."
— Max Tegmark, physicist

"The most incomprehensible thing about the universe is that it is comprehensible."
— Albert Einstein

This profound order suggests that the universe is governed not by chaos, but by logic, symmetry, and pattern—all hallmarks of rational structure. From fractals in nature to the predictive power of equations, the universe operates like a system designed to be understood.

---

V. Alternative Views and Counterarguments

1. Evolution as Explanation
Critics argue that natural selection and mutation explain complexity. However, this presupposes an already functioning replication system, which abiogenesis does not account for.

2. Self-Organization Theories
Some propose that simple molecules naturally form complex systems (autocatalytic sets), but these do not yet explain functional, goal-directed systems or information encoding.

3. God of the Gaps?
Skeptics argue that invoking design fills a knowledge gap. However, the design argument is not from ignorance but from positive inference to the best explanation based on analogy with known intelligent causes.

---

VI. Conclusion: A Rational Inference to Design

The presence of high-level information, fine-tuning, and specified complexity in even the simplest living systems provides a rational basis for inferring intelligent design. While naturalistic models have explanatory value, they currently fall short of accounting for the origin of biological information and functional systems.

To paraphrase Antony Flew, a former atheist philosopher:

"It is simply inconceivable that blind forces could create life. The integrated complexity of life shows the mind of a divine intelligence."

Design is not the only interpretation—but it is a logically and scientifically responsible one.

---

Appendix: Key Sources and References

• Stephen C. Meyer, Signature in the Cell (2009)

• Michael Behe, Darwin's Black Box (1996)

• James Tour, “Abiogenesis: Is it Reasonable?” (YouTube, 2016)

• Werner Gitt, In the Beginning Was Information (1997)

• Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (1986)

• Fred Hoyle, “The Intelligent Universe” (1984)

• Anthony Flew, There is a God (2007)

• Claude Shannon, “A Mathematical Theory of Communication” (1948)

---

(finis)

Intelligent design is not a question. Neither is guidance for people in all traditions. See most people don’t grasp that “all of this is about energy,” and the individual’s “function within it.” That’s it. What role does each person play in the “energy matrix,” and how does that role effect others. It really is that simple. It starts with just looking within. Looking at the character, the treatment of others, and deliberately “transforming where necessary in energy” to become a “light in the realm.”

SPECIAL THANKS TO: SpiritualRelief. Support the work. Wear the wool. https://www.youtube.com/@spiritualreliefchannel

There is a intelligent design, however somewhere that intelligence in some people has been lost. There is only ONE GOD, ONE SOURCE OF CREATION. If that were not the situation, the evil ones would not have spent so much time, effort and money, OVER THE CENTURIES, to convince everyone, realm wide, otherwise.

Lord have Mercy