Explain why you dont beileve in god if your athiest.
- Thread starter Xanikk999
- Start date
Excellent.It certainly wouldn't fit with a naturalistic worldview. Morality is contradictory to nature, transcendant. And it didn't come from random chemical processes.
Gogf said:
What caused the Big Bang? What put the universe into motion?
Gogf said:
Remember that the Bible was not all one book in the first century AD. The prophecies were made by Jews four hundred years before Jesus' life, and were fufilled precisely according to Jewish records, not Christian ones.
The principle of the First Cause argument is that there must be something independent of the laws of physical cause-effect that existed prior to the creation of the universe.
Hotpoint said:
What kind of particle would that be? There is absolutely no reason to support the claim that in this universe of continual decay, matter can explode into being without cause.
Hotpoint
Rome Treaty Legions
But which is more likely, something very complex pre-existing or something very simple? In any case you really don't need there to be something beyond the laws of physics for the universe to just happen.
Sorry but you're a bit behind in the physics here.
"Once our minds accept the mutability of matter and the new idea of the vacuum, we can speculate on the origin of the biggest thing we know - the universe. Maybe the universe itself sprang into existence out of nothingness - a gigantic vacuum fluctuation which we know today as the big bang. Remarkably, the laws of modern physics allow for this possibility"
"...the idea of a First Cause sounds somewhat fishy in light of the modern theory of quantum mechanics. According to the most commonly accepted interpretation of quantum mechanics, individual subatomic particles can behave in unpredictable ways and there are numerous random, uncaused events"
http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/mark_vuletic/vacuum.html
Underseer
King
The premise of your post (or at least the phrasing of your subject) is bad. The person making the claim is the one on whom the burden of proof falls. Since those who believe in god's existence have yet to furnish a single shred of evidence, I fail to see why they should be taken seriously at all.
But if you must have a reason, Jhuger summed it up the most eloquently (warning: mild profanity).
Xanikk999
History junkie
Gogf
Indescribable
I don't see why we should think that. There is no evidence showing that morality is contradictory to nature. In fact, species with a moral code stipulating that killing another member of the species is a sin are far more likely to survive than those that do not. Morality is an evolutionary advantage, and can therefore hardly be considered "contradictory to nature."
Hotpoint had an excellent response to this question. What created God?
Even if this is true (I must say I'm not well versed on these biblical predictions), how does that prove anything? A group claims that their own predictions came to fruition. That is not valid evidence that God exists.
Gogf
Indescribable
This is balderdash. There is no probability test in agnosticism.
Gnostic = 'knowing, knowledge' from the Greek
a- = a prefix indicating negation, the opposite of
Agnostic = Unknowable.
The Agnostic response to "Does God exist?" is some form of "I don't know."
--------------
Theism = Belief in a God (Greek again, I think, but not sure)
a- = a prefix indicating negation, the opposite of
Atheism = The belief no god exists.
The Atheistic response to "Does God exist" is some form of "Nuck fo!"
---------------------
Now you are more gnostic.
You're missing the point: I probably fall under both of the definitions. I'm not ruling out the possibility that God exists (that would be irrational), but I do not believe that he does.
Gogf
Indescribable
Even if the bible was contrived by humans, that does not mean that God does not exist. That means that the early practioners of religion made a lucky guess. I don't think that's very likely, but it's certainly possible.
De Lorimier
North American Scum
Why I don't believe in God in one word: History.
Trajan12
Deity
That had to be the most insultingly unfunny thing I have seen in a long time.
GoodEnoughForMe
n.m.s.s.
It was pretty funny I thought.
Xanikk999
History junkie
No it wasnt, it was a lame attempt at trolling.
Chandrasekhar
Determined
Yeah, I found it hillarious.
GoodEnoughForMe
n.m.s.s.
It was just a stupid little attack on a belief in god. It wasn't LOL funny, but I found it entertaining.
skadistic
Caomhanach
Funny? No. But its a great way to point out how absurd religion is.
Xanikk999
History junkie
I think religion is absurd also but the fact it was directed at me is insulting.
And it shows how childish he is when he cant win an argument.
And it shows how childish he is when he cant win an argument.
Trajan12
Deity
If that's funny then I think I know 6,000,000,000 people on this planet that can get a good job in the humor department.
In other words, that was trash.
And it is no good description of religion because I have never heard a missionary say anything about kicking anyone's ass.
In other words, that was trash.
And it is no good description of religion because I have never heard a missionary say anything about kicking anyone's ass.
GoodEnoughForMe
n.m.s.s.
Why does everybody needs to take stuff like that so seriously? Geez, it was a humorous piece. Xannik, I don't think it was directed at you as a troll, he was just trying to show how absurd he thinks religion is.
Chandrasekhar
Determined
You asked a question, you got an answer. Also, you might not want to equate childishness with losing an argument, or you might be insulting yourself somewhat.
Perhaps not in a literal sense, but I think an eternity in Hell is generally worse than getting your ass kicked.
Trajan12
Deity
All religions do not even believe in an eternity in hell.
