The origins of atheism

[Freodin]

That wasn't the question. Yes, the natural world is evidence of itself, but that only speaks of part of the "what" of the question. There is also the other [bigger] part of the "what", and then there is the "why." All of which is demon-strated in the existence of the world.

Hey, I (almost) agree with you: the "why" of the world is indeed demonstrated in the existence of the world. But it isn't the "why" that you imagine it is.

Your explanation is lacking. That would be like explaining baseball and leaving out 2nd, 3rd, and home base. But, hey, I do realize you were only addressing the part you know about.

As I didn't offer any explanation, any "lack" is inevitable. But I didn't find any 2nd, 3rd and home base in your explanation either.... so, reciprocal lack is lacking.

But the main problem might be: there is no need to mention 2nd, 3rd and home base... because what I am "explaining" is not baseball.

 

[bhsmte]

That's fine. Doesn't change what the truth is.

Don't believe I claimed it did.

 

[Freodin]

I agree with you, my point is that religion is in the heart manifest in social fruits.

Quite the opposite: social systems (can) "manifest" as "religion".

 

[AirPo]

The truth has been spoken.

Matthew 11:15
"Whoever has ears, let them hear."

This is a Bible verse, because the truth can be found in the Bible.

Are you implying that what you mean by "truth" is just Bible verses?

 

[ScottA]

Tell me specifically, why the universe points to a God?

Because it cannot be explained any other way.

It is a forgone conclusion that if you keep asking "What happened before that?" and "What is beyond that?", that the answer is either "I don't know." or "The end will never be known." In other words, there is not even any hope that you will ever know.

But, hidden within the universe are millions of hints pointing to the existence of God: Male/female is a good one. The creation story explains it...but can science?

 

[Chriliman]

Are you implying that what you mean by "truth" is just Bible verses?

Nope, Jesus is the way and the truth and the life.

 

[Freodin]

So a third party observer should believe you over me because you claimed the contradicting truth was demonstrated to you, after I had already claimed the truth was demonstrated to me? Can we please remain reasonable here?

An honestly objective third party observer would rationally believe me over you.

Why would an honestly objective third party observer do that? He is confronted with two different contradicting claims. How is he going to decide between them, when the only means to decide between them is identical? You cannot seriously (or reasonably) claim that the time-stamp on our claims show/demonstrate/reveal "truth".

I am not saying that he should believe me over you... I am saying that he doubting both of us is "reasonable".

 

[bhsmte]

Because it cannot be explained any other way.

It is a forgone conclusion that if you keep asking "What happened before that?" and "What is beyond that?", that the answer is either "I don't know." or "The end will never be known." In other words, there is not even any hope that you will ever know.

But, hidden within the universe are millions of hints pointing to the existence of God: Male/female is a good one. The creation story explains it...but can science?

God of the gaps, gotcha.

Watch out for the gaps closing, as this will likely be a bit scary for you.

 

[Freodin]

Because it cannot be explained any other way.

It can.

It is a forgone conclusion that if you keep asking "What happened before that?" and "What is beyond that?", that the answer is either "I don't know." or "The end will never be known." In other words, there is not even any hope that you will ever know.

But, hidden within the universe are millions of hints pointing to the existence of God: Male/female is a good one. The creation story explains it...but can science?

Male/female is a) not universal and b) it would need to point at a male/female deity. Which, if you follow the biblical version, it doesn't.
Rather, the biblical version is an after-the-fact explanation: there IS male and female (among humans). Why? Because God made it male and female. Why did he make it that way? No explanation given. If there were three genders amongst humans... or if we were sentient bacteria debating here, it would read "And God created them male, female and hurtz." Or "And God created them so that they reproduced by cell division, according to his image."

 

[HitchSlap]

No. If you must know, we believed that life was more than organic, and for doing so, we were given the answer of how life began...so now we know.

I don't care what you believe (with seven billion people on this planet, kind of hard to keep up with everyone's beliefs), I'm interested in what you can demonstrate.

 

[HitchSlap]

God demonstrably exist too. The world is His demon-stration.

And rainbows are evidence leprechauns exist?

 

[Chriliman]

Why would an honestly objective third party observer do that? He is confronted with two different contradicting claims. How is he going to decide between them, when the only means to decide between them is identical? You cannot seriously (or reasonably) claim that the time-stamp on our claims show/demonstrate/reveal "truth".

I am not saying that he should believe me over you... I am saying that he doubting both of us is "reasonable".

There only contradicting because you've decided that its reasonable to claim that you can have knowledge of the nonexistence of something, which is clearly an irrational thing to claim. As long as this third party can comprehend that, then the answer is clear that your being irrational and I'm not.

 

[HitchSlap]

You haven't even read the UB so your opinion is from silence.

Then you're missing the point entirely. Whether I read UB or not, in no way changes the fact it's an anonymous work of fiction.

 

[Davian]

You are misquoting Genesis.

Did I miss anything of note? How God poofed people and animals into existence, and later, in a manner contrary to the modern understanding of genetics, populated the planet with a tiny group of individuals and animals that survived a global flood in an unbuildable boat? In what way does that add to the scientific explanation of the diversity of life on this planet and its beginnings?

 

[Davian]

No, you are misinformed. Eternal means eternal, and you do not enter into it after death, but after spiritual [re-] birth.

I was not addressing its duration, but rather the veracity, of your claim.

 

[Davian]

All significance.

Rendering it meaningless.

 

[Davian]

I am not God...so, no. But that is not what I was saying. What I said, is that God has demon-strated by creating the universe. Why don't you ask Him?

Do you send letters to Santa?

 

[AirPo]

Nope, Jesus is the way and the truth and the life.

Then when you say "truth" you mean Jesus.

 

[Chriliman]

Rendering it meaningless.

The way your mind works is baffling. How can all significance be meaningless? Isn't it more likely that all significance would be all meaning as well?

 

[Chriliman]

Then when you say "truth" you Mean Jesus.

Yes