A case for religion, and against AA.

[witeken]

And you can't magically out of nothing create a Universe.

Exactly, it started with a bunch of particles in a singularity called the big bang.

If it weren't possible we wouldn't be here. Nature can do whatever it wants, maybe the laws of nature are just arbitrarily chosen. If you watched the link I gave, you would know how the universe plausibly came into existence. Still a lot more likely then going beyond (???) nature.

 

[Retro Rob]

Exactly, it started with a bunch of particles in a singularity called the big bang.

Then, that's not "nothing". Something was there. You can't highjack words and change the meaning to make an impossible idea possible.

"Nothing" doesn't mean "a bunch of particles".

Those "bunch of particles" are "something".

 

[JD50]

Why is asking "who created the creator" juvenile, but asking "who created the universe" not juvenile?

 

[alzan]

No, those type of questions are designed to push the issue so far back into the past that you'd be bound to run into an unanswerable one -- that's done on purpose, by design.

It's the equivalent of the "who created the creator, and who created that creator" ad infinitum question.

When people are incredulous, these are the exactly the type of questions used so that they can feel comfortable in not-believing.

Incredulous? No.

I can't speak for all non-theists but there are certainly some including myself for whom belief is simply a coping mechanism, much like faith and hope. They are mind games some choose to use to deal with life's questions and uncertainties. That does not make them non-useful to others.

 

[PingviN]

you heard the saying is if looks like.....if it smells like......then it must be....

Well then surely you must be an idiot.

This is the DC. In the future, please post accordingly.

Perknose
Forum Director

 

[witeken]

Then, that's not "nothing". Something was there. You can't highjack words and change the meaning to make an impossible idea possible.

"Nothing" doesn't mean "a bunch of particles".

Those "bunch of particles" are "something".

Yes, it is nothing. God, however, is certainly not nothing.

Do you know what the total energy of the universe is?

Nothing. Zero.

(to be more precise: it started with zero energy, but became non-zero (I think, correct me if I'm wrong) because of inflation)

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

As I recall, there are ways to avoid the problem of 'you can't create a universe out of nothing'.

The most basic is an infinitely old universe, though that's largely been discredited.

However, that requires a very specific geometry of time. If time isn't a simple euclidean line, but a complex geometry (as in complex number, i, not just complicated) it's possible to have a complete enclosed 'infinitely' old universe with a finite subsection that only appears important to us because we happen to live there.

The physics is extremely complicated, but it's as well explained as it can be in Hawking's "A brief history of time".

I'm not sure why this is relevant though. If you can't create a universe from nothing, you can't create a god simply because there's nowhere to put him. It's a problem no matter what side of the line you're on.

 

[Retro Rob]

As I recall, there are ways to avoid the problem of 'you can't create a universe out of nothing'.

The most basic is an infinitely old universe, though that's largely been discredited.

However, that requires a very specific geometry of time. If time isn't a simple euclidean line, but a complex geometry (as in complex number, i, not just complicated) it's possible to have a complete enclosed 'infinitely' old universe with a finite subsection that only appears important to us because we happen to live there.

The physics is extremely complicated, but it's as well explained as it can be in Hawking's "A brief history of time".

I'm not sure why this is relevant though. If you can't create a universe from nothing, you can't create a god simply because there's nowhere to put him. It's a problem no matter what side of the line you're on.

Anything to disprove God isn't off the table, I guess. From infinite universe, to multiverse, to whatever's next.

It's just sad, really...just how badly people don't want God to exists that they start making stuff to explain away the obvious beginnings and fine-tuning.

People who are actually open to being wrong don't go through these sort of gymnastics and hypothesizing to stay right.

:\

 

[alzan]

Anything to disprove God isn't off the table, I guess. From infinite universe, to multiverse, to whatever's next.

It's just sad, really...just how badly people don't want God to exists that they start making stuff to explain away the obvious beginnings and fine-tuning.

People who are actually open to being wrong don't go through these sort of gymnastics and hypothesizing to stay right.

:\

No sadder than people who want so desperately for G-d to exist that they explain away and/or disregard other possibilities. Or add G-d in when there are gaps in hypotheses.

 

[Phanuel]

Anything to disprove God isn't off the table, I guess. From infinite universe, to multiverse, to whatever's next.

It's just sad, really...just how badly people don't want God to exists that they start making stuff to explain away the obvious beginnings and fine-tuning.

People who are actually open to being wrong don't go through these sort of gymnastics and hypothesizing to stay right.

:\

What you just said applies to your camp of thinking. It definitely does not apply to the other side in any manner.

Our lack of belief is not us just throwing away your "evidence". It's us asking you for yours and to which you are unable to provide any actual hard concrete support for. You want god to exist so badly that you create elaborate stories and myths for events that could be explained in more factual manners or fabricate events that could never have happened in the manner described at all nor which any evidence of their having happened in the manner described exists.

Science is working to explain how it happened instead of just assuming that something else did it all for us and accepting that as an answer.

How about you open up to being wrong about god having all of the answers or existing in the first place. You could stop going through mental gymnastics trying to convince yourself and others that it is real when one has never actually even proven itself to be real.

 

[lotus503]

Anything to disprove God isn't off the table, I guess. From infinite universe, to multiverse, to whatever's next.

It's just sad, really...just how badly people don't want God to exists that they start making stuff to explain away the obvious beginnings and fine-tuning.

People who are actually open to being wrong don't go through these sort of gymnastics and hypothesizing to stay right.

:\

I personally don't care if God exists or doesn't exist. My main issue is most theists have two obstacles.

1. God exists
2. The God that exists is represented by their particular faith.

Even if you could prove #1, #2 is highly unlikely.

So the burden on most theists isn't just to prove the existence of God, rather to prove the existence of their God.

Is natural for humans to attach meaning to things they don't understand.
Scientific discovery very well may be able to one day provide solid data behind singularity, Multiverse theory etc, until such time I am in a data collection mode and refuse simple belief absent compelling scientific evidence.

to date there is none which is why these threads get traction.

 

[lotus503]

We already have an abundance of evidence in the sheer existence of the Universe and the human world.

We don't need to use our senses...God is a spirit. As I stated before, I'm not concerned about the existence of God as I am learning about him. The argument has been settled.

I am quite surprised that I am still talking about it.

I guess that is one way to look at at it. belief at its very core is an emotional response and doesn't require data or evidence to present itself.

Take ghosts or spirits, if you could prove the existence, then the chance of God existing would be increased I suspect, it would be huge scientific discovery, despite trying since the dawn of man no one has been able to prove spirits exists.

Take these three sentences and tell me which one has the most supportive evidence. All three based on lack on evidence require belief.

I believe intelligent life exists beyond earth.

I believe in God as outlined in the Bible

I believe in God (Higher Power)

 

[Retro Rob]

I personally don't care if God exists or doesn't exist. My main issue is most theists have two obstacles.

Understood.

1. God exists
2. The God that exists is represented by their particular faith.

Even if you could prove #1, #2 is highly unlikely.

So the burden on most theists isn't just to prove the existence of God, rather to prove the existence of their God.

You're mistaken...theists don't have to prove God's existence, as his existence isn't provable by believers. What theists have to do is give you reasons why they believe in God, or their particular religion.

You can either accept of reject those reasons.

The very definition of proof is to make the evidence pointing to a certain claim a truthful claim. God will prove his own existence. This is universally understood by believers.

Atheists keep wishing to force their standards of evidence on us.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Well then surely you must be an idiot.

Did I call you or anyone else names??
So why are you stooping to calling names in this particular forum?
This is not P&N where you can get away with calling people names.......

calling you and Atheist and calling Atheism a Religion is NOT calling you a name.
Deal with it...Atheism is more and more looking like a religion.......Atheism more and more is smelling like a religion....Atheism is morphing into a religion...just deal with it!
Calling names is not any way to deal with your feelings.....

If you can`t handle the subject matter bow out of the discussion there are others who are quite capable of representing Atheism......

 

[alzan]

Understood.

You're mistaken...theists don't have to prove God's existence, as his existence isn't provable by believers. What theists have to do is give you reasons why they believe in God, or their particular religion.

You can either accept of reject those reasons.

The very definition of proof is to make the evidence pointing to a certain claim a truthful claim. God will prove his own existence. This is universally understood by believers.

Atheists keep wishing to force their standards of evidence on us.

That's a somewhat incorrect definition of proof. Those are most peoples standards, including the religious scientists of whom you and Neil deGrasse Tyson speak. That you see it as being "forced" on theists speaks volumes.
-------------------

ev·i·dence /ˈevədəns/ noun; evidence 1. the available body of facts or information indicating whether a belief or proposition is true or valid., "the study finds little evidence of overt discrimination"

synonyms: proof, confirmation, verification, substantiation, corroboration, affirmation, attestation More
"they found evidence of his plotting"

•Law information given personally, drawn from a document, or in the form of material objects, tending or used to establish facts in a legal investigation or admissible as testimony in court., "without evidence, they can't bring a charge"

synonyms: proof, confirmation, verification, substantiation, corroboration, affirmation, attestation; "they found evidence of his plotting"

•testimony, statement, attestation, declaration, avowal, submission, claim, contention, allegation; deposition, representation, affidavit "the court accepted her evidence"

•signs; indications. plural noun: evidences "there was no obvious evidence of a break-in"

synonyms: signs, indications, pointers, marks, traces, suggestions, hints; manifestation "evidence of a struggle"

verb : evidence; 3rd person present: evidences; past tense: evidenced; past participle: evidenced; gerund or present participle: evidencing

1. be or show evidence of. "that it has been populated from prehistoric times is evidenced by the remains of Neolithic buildings"

synonyms: indicate, show, reveal, display, exhibit, manifest;
---------------------

proof /proof/noun noun: proof; plural noun: proofs

1. evidence or argument establishing or helping to establish a fact or the truth of a statement., "you will be asked to give proof of your identity"

synonyms: evidence, verification, corroboration, authentication, confirmation, certification, documentation, validation, attestation, substantiation

---------------------

faith


/fāTH/

noun

noun: faith

1. complete trust or confidence in someone or something., "this restores one's faith in politicians"

synonyms: trust, belief, confidence, conviction, optimism, hopefulness, hope; "he justified his boss's faith in him"

antonyms: mistrust

2.

strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination, (religious) persuasion, (religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine

 

[Retro Rob]

strong belief in God or in the doctrines of a religion, based on spiritual apprehension rather than proof.

synonyms: religion, church, sect, denomination, (religious) persuasion, (religious) belief, ideology, creed, teaching, doctrine

You're wrong, really. The kind of "faith" I have is defined in the Bible itself:

“Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld.” (Heb. 11:1)

So, you can arbitrarily attach whatever definition of faith you want on us to satisfy your own proclivities, but you'd be wrong when you ask me what do I mean by "I have faith".

I mean exactly what the bible says, in the verse I quoted.

 

[PhatoseAlpha]

Anything to disprove God isn't off the table, I guess. From infinite universe, to multiverse, to whatever's next.

It's just sad, really...just how badly people don't want God to exists that they start making stuff to explain away the obvious beginnings and fine-tuning.

People who are actually open to being wrong don't go through these sort of gymnastics and hypothesizing to stay right.

:\

Science has built-in error correcting machinery. Disproving a theory is not only quite possible, but lauded as revolutionary. The entire system is built from the ground up to allow anyone to disprove anyone else at any time, publicly, and to receive accolades for doing so.

If it's not being done here - if there isn't a huge bulk of undeniable evidence - then that tells you something.

Any time I've encountered arguments for fine-tuning, I've been struck but the mental gymnastics necessary to offer such an explanation. It's akin to walking into a jungle, seeing people wearing minimal clothing, and believing the jungle must've been finely tuned for people to wear minimal clothing. Alternative explanations are never considered. "A little bit less binding energy and carbon wouldn't have formed", but they never follow through to what else would've happened on a universal scale if that was the case. Without being able to claim that in no other possible universe could life in any form have existed, it's a meaningless claim.

 

[Cerpin Taxt]

You're wrong, really. The kind of "faith" I have is defined in the Bible itself:

“Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld.” (Heb. 11:1)

So, you can arbitrarily attach whatever definition of faith you want on us to satisfy your own proclivities, but you'd be wrong when you ask me what do I mean by "I have faith".

I mean exactly what the bible says, in the verse I quoted.

So your faith is incoherent. I think that surprises very few of us.

"My faith is the corner of a circle..."

 

[Dr. Zaus]

So your faith is incoherent. I think that surprises very few of us.

"My faith is the corner of a circle..."

His translation is poor; here's a much more cogent one:

" faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see."

Interestingly this definition holds together psychometrically way better than other psychological faith/hope measures and is a great predictor of positive perspectives regarding failing and entrepreneurship and an entrepreneurial orientation that includes sustainability.

Source as soon as I defend in September and the article to follow "Psychology is so rancid that even a 2k year old text in greek defines faith better"

 

[JEDIYoda]

So your faith is incoherent. I think that surprises very few of us.

"My faith is the corner of a circle..."

I found his definition of his faith to be very stable and meaningful!
I would have to say I find your Atheism to be incoherent.....

 

[Retro Rob]

His translation is poor; here's a much more cogent one:

" faith is confidence in what we hope for and assurance about what we do not see."

You're saying the same thing I said...but you're welcome to argue the merits of [insert translation here] with DixyCrat if you like.

 

[Retro Rob]

I found his definition of his faith to be very stable and meaningful!
I would have to say I find your Atheism to be incoherent.....

Thanks.

That definition is scriptural, and is reflective of the type of faith I posses as well.

 

[alzan]

You're wrong, really. The kind of "faith" I have is defined in the Bible itself:

“Faith is the assured expectation of things hoped for, the evident demonstration of realities though not beheld.” (Heb. 11:1)

So, you can arbitrarily attach whatever definition of faith you want on us to satisfy your own proclivities, but you'd be wrong when you ask me what do I mean by "I have faith".

I mean exactly what the bible says, in the verse I quoted.

I've been wrong at least once before.

Nothing arbitrary about it, it's simply what came up in Google when I typed "faith definition" and hit Return; that's where I got all the definitions. Your problem is with Google's search engines, not an "arbitrary" decision by me.

Same as with the word "expectation" - a strong belief that something will happen or be the case in the future.

An evident demonstration of a reality that's not seen or observed.

 

[JEDIYoda]

An evident demonstration of a reality that's not seen or observed.

For Christians they perceive Atheism in the same way.......

 

[alzan]

For Christians they perceive Atheism in the same way.......

Perception is a bitch; your senses might be fooling you.