Atheism makes no sense to me?!?

[Legal_Eagle]

I am posting this thread because I would like some honest feedback as to my beliefs on this subject from an informed community. My issue, is that Atheism, by it's very nature, makes absolutely no logical sense to me. Let's assume, for a moment, that there is NO empirical proof of God, other than faith. Even if this is the case, Christians and Atheists share some basic assumptions about reality:

1) Our physical existence on this world is finite
2) The universe, as we know it, is finite

I make this point in full recognition of the works of the likes of Stephen Hawkings. Even under modern String Theory, the Big Bang may have required no actual energy from God to begin, but the mass still had to come form SOMEWHERE. That is the case even if time is relative, as you get closer to the Big Bang event.

If you look at the Christian and Atheist viewpoints, they both share one similar viewpoint. Most Christians believe some form of Aristotle's "Prime Mover" Theory. Namely, that a finite time-driven universe was created by an infinite being outside of the space-time context. That is God, however your define him/her/it/etc. Atheists, on the other hand, believe that the Universe is an infinite thing that exists outside of the space-time context. Either God or the Universe are infinite entities that do not have a logical creator, and do not conform to our finite sense of time. TO NOT believe in and infinite God or Universe is completely illogical, as it contradicts our very existence. Whether it is God or the Universe, Atheists and Christians must both have faith in the infinite nature of something they cannot comprehend, because we are finite in our thinking. Here is where the absurdity of Atheism comes into play for me. While we cannot scientifically test the existence of God, we can test our universe using the laws of physics. To my knowledge, there is no scientific unified "Theory of Everything" that can prove that the universe is infinite. While it may be great, there is a limited amount of mass in this and every other conceived dimension (ten I believe in current String Theory). The universe is also in motion. Even if time is relative, SOMETHING must have placed the universe in motion. All matter responds to cause and effect, though not always predictably.

Why then, do Atheists believe in something they cannot see, based on faith (the universe as an infinite thing), yet they KNOW there is no God. That is a presumption that CANNOT be tested in any scientific manner. Whether you follow the teaching of Descartes, Intelligent Design, Calvin, or any other philosophical evidence of God, there seems to me to be far more evidence of a God, than there is of an infinite universe. Throw in N.D.E's, the power of prayer, supernatural experiences and the like, and there seems to be a wealth of evidence the there is, at the least, more than just our consciousness in this existence. On the contrary, an Atheist claims to KNOW that there is nothing more than an infinite universe, based on what? Faith? Gut instinct? A jaded view of the world? That is where the utter absurdity of Atheism plays a me. I do want everyone to know that I do have faith that places me as a Christian, and not just an agnostic. I apologize for such a long intro. Any insights form anyone would be welcome!

 

[Blayz]

Atheists, on the other hand, believe that the Universe is an infinite thing that exists outside of the space-time context.

Do I really believe that? How interesting, I never knew until now. I'd really like to answer your question more fully, but before I do, You'll have to tell me all the other things I believe. Clearly you know more about what I believe than I do.

Even if time is relative, SOMETHING must have placed the universe in motion. All matter responds to cause and effect, though not always predictably.

"must"? Seriously?


Dr Smith, please take it away!
The Uncaused Beginning of the Universe

 

[Eudaimonist]

Even under modern String Theory, the Big Bang may have required no actual energy from God to begin, but the mass still had to come form SOMEWHERE.

God had to come from SOMEWHERE by this logic. I don't think that physical reality came from anywhere. Rather, it started to change. It has never not existed. Even if the past is finite, that doesn't mean that there was ever a "time" in which nothing existed.

If you look at the Christian and Atheist viewpoints, they both share one similar viewpoint. Most Christians believe some form of Aristotle's "Prime Mover" Theory. Namely, that a finite time-driven universe was created by an infinite being outside of the space-time context.

Notably, Aristotle didn't believe that the Prime Mover created the universe, but merely set it in motion.

Whether it is God or the Universe, Atheists and Christians must both have faith in the infinite nature of something they cannot comprehend, because we are finite in our thinking.

I don't see how that follows from the view of an uncreated universe at all. I don't believe that we finite beings are incapable of thinking about something infinite or uncreated. This strikes me as a completely arbitrary stated limit on human thought.

Here is where the absurdity of Atheism comes into play for me.

Note that we are really talking about physics here, not atheism.

Even if time is relative, SOMETHING must have placed the universe in motion.

Yes, the universe itself. This is like asking what sets gravity in motion. Nothing does. Gravity is a property of entities that have mass. Nothing "kickstarts" gravity. It is part and parcel of the current physical context.

Likewise, nothing kickstarted motion in the universe like a Prime Mover. It was the presence of whatever was around at the beginning of change that caused change simply by being what it was.

Why then, do Atheists believe in something they cannot see, based on faith (the universe as an infinite thing)

Again, belief in an uncreated universe is not an act of faith. It is an extrapolation of what we do know. It is perhaps partly a philosophical judgment. At no point is it an act of faith.

yet they KNOW there is no God.

Being an atheist does not require "knowing there is no god". It just requires being unconvinced that there is one.

That is a presumption that CANNOT be tested in any scientific manner.

We don't have to. The burden of proof is on your shoulders.

Whether you follow the teaching of Descartes, Intelligent Design, Calvin, or any other philosophical evidence of God, there seems to me to be far more evidence of a God, than there is of an infinite universe.

I see no clear or convincing evidence of a God. I see plenty of reasons to think that the universe operates according to its nature, and that there is no reason to think that it is created.

On the contrary, an Atheist claims to KNOW that there is nothing more than an infinite universe, based on what? Faith? Gut instinct? A jaded view of the world?

We don't claim to KNOW this, but we base this view on two things:

1) The utter lack of evidence for a God. (Sorry, we find your evidence rather empty.)
2) The utter lack of any need to explain a natural universe by some act of divine creation.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Exial]

You make far too many assumptions on what atheists believe.

Atheism has no doctrine, no tenets, no core beliefs.

The only criteria to be an atheist is to have no belief in any form of deity. That is all. Doesn't make you anything other than that. Why is that so hard for you to understand?

 

[Feroc]

Why then, do Atheists believe in something they cannot see, based on faith (the universe as an infinite thing), yet they KNOW there is no God. That is a presumption that CANNOT be tested in any scientific manner.

My personal point of view:

I believe, that the mass and energy of the universe is the default, it always existed in some form, there never was "nothing". That's what I believe, I believe it, because it's the theory I like best at the moment. I am ready to change my believe, as soon as I hear a better theory. Are you?

Do I know, that there is no god? Well, let's say I roll a six-sided dice and won't lift the dice cup. Without lifting the cup, I won't be able to prove you, that the dice won't show a "7". But it's sooooo implausibly, that I would say you, that I know, that there is no 7.

 

[quatona]

I wasn´t aware that being an atheist required me to hold all those positions as outlined in your OP, Jason.

 

[Legal_Eagle]

I would like to apologize if I misstated anyone's beliefs in this forum. I really am trying to understand the Atheist perspective. Several of the people that have written me back say that my presumptions are incorrect. Most notably, is the concept that Atheist believe the universe in infinite. While those that responded say that is not their belief, it is the inescapable conclusion that must be made, IF you say there is no God. If you believe that the universe created itself, set itself in motion and perpetuates itself, you ARE saying that it is an infinite and timeless entity. That IS the belief in something which shares conceptual aspects of God. As for some of the specific responses:

Blayz:

If you do not believe in an infinite God or Universe, than explain your belief. Your belief set must conform to something other than religious doctrine or all known theories of modern physics. I would be curious as to what your theory is. As to the concept that something must have set the universe in motion, that is also a presumption of Christian theories of creation AND even Stephen Hawkins. So, once again, if you have an alternative model to religion or physics, and have reasoning for your belief, I would like to hear it+ I don't mean that in a judgmental way.

Eudaimonist:

Those were some very good points. I agree that that the concept of either an infinite universe or and infinite God are illogical. They both presuppose something that existed without creation. That is my point about a finite being trying to understand the finite. I do not believe we can ever truly do that. You are correct concerning the Prime Mover Theory, but whether the Prime Mover created the universe or simply set it in motion, it establishes an immortal being outside of our explanation of the universe. As for perpetuity in the universe, how do you explain where that mass came from? Isn't that really the $64 dollar question. Fin a theory that explains how mass is created from the absence of mass, and I'll definitely be interested. Finally, as to burdens of proof, I disagree that it is placed on my shoulders as a Christian. Every human that has ever walked this Earth has been to answer the questions "Why are we here" and "What does it all mean". It is unreasonable in a discussion to simply place a burden on me to "prove" anything to you. As an Atheist, I find many of your presumptions lacking. Prove to me that you are right! Se how that causes a problem?

Feroc:

That is the perspective I was looking for. To answer your question, the answer is Yes, absolutely. I may be a Christian, but I am always in pursuit of knowledge. Incidentally, your belief is based on the concept of an infinite universe. Why is it easy to believe in an infinite universe with no actual scientific proof of this, while it is so "implausible" to believe in an infinite God? Just curious =)

Exial:

The reason I find that so hard to believe, is that simply saying "I don't believe" is a bit of a cop-out in my opinion. If that is NOT what you believe, than defend your belief as to how the universe was created and exists in perpetuity without God. If you don't want to defend your Atheistic beliefs, why are you on a Christian Forum? Simply punting the question doesn't answer it. If you don't have an answer that is fine. But this is a discussion board and having an opinion is kinda the point of posting here.

quatona:

Like I have posted to other people here, if you have another theory of origins of the universe that DOES NOT involve an infinite God or a timeless universe, I would be interested in hearing it. I am not familiar with any religious or physics theories that espouse this, so please elaborate. As I said in the outline here, I am simply looking for good explanations.

 

[Paulos23]

I don't know if the universe is infinite, it might be, it might not be. We are still discovering that. Heck, I just saw a science program on multi-verses filled with "I don't know" and "Still trying to find out".

And that is one of the things I am more conferable with, the fact that I don't know. Does that mean I have to believe in a god? No, there is no good evidence for one. And if a god did start the universe and then walk away there may be no way for us to tell, and it wouldn't matter if we believed in that god or not. It wouldn't change anything.

If there was any type of god I didn't believe in it would be the personal god. The god that personally affects peoples lives. If that was true we would be seeing way more miracles outside of random chance.

 

[jayem]

Here's my take on it. I'm a naturalist. I believe that everyting in the universe is solely a function of matter, and energy, and the natural properties thereof. I reject any supernatural forces or entities outside the realm of matter and energy. By logical extension, that makes me an atheist, at least as regards as kind of supernatural god. I think it most probable that the matter/energy comprising the substance of the universe has always existed. (If God always existed, then why can't energy have always existed? We know that a fundamental law of physics states that energy can neither be created nor destroyed.) As was noted, there are models which can explain inflation, and background radiation, and other components of the Standard Model without invoking a singularity at T0. Here's an article on Steinhardt's Cyclic Model, which postulates a universe undergoing endless phases of expansion and contraction. Of course, I can't prove a purely naturalistic universe with absolute metaphysical certainty. But I can support my argument by inductive logic. History confirms that everything once thought to be mysterious and inexplicable, but which we now understand, has been shown to be a natural phenomenon. A supernatural explanation has never been proven valid for anything. And though there are many things we still don't understand, why would we accept non-naturalistic explanations for them? Simple, a posteriori reasoning should lead us to believe that natural processes account for everything. The God-concept also violates Occam's Razor, since it invokes a new entity with all-encompassing powers, and no explanation of how these powers operate. It's always seemed illogical to me how God is said to exist outside time and space, and yet can affect matter and energy within time and space.

I realize my beliefs also require faith. My thought processes just reject supernaturalism, as a concept in which I can put my faith. Other people are different. I don't expect to convince anyone else my beliefs are correct. But I hope I've made them understandable.

 

[Blayz]

If you do not believe in an infinite God or Universe, than explain your belief. Your belief set must conform to something other than religious doctrine or all known theories of modern physics. I would be curious as to what your theory is. As to the concept that something must have set the universe in motion, that is also a presumption of Christian theories of creation AND even Stephen Hawkins. So, once again, if you have an alternative model to religion or physics, and have reasoning for your belief, I would like to hear it+ I don't mean that in a judgmental way.

Sure. I'll post it. In this thread. Again.
The Uncaused Beginning of the Universe

 

[OdwinOddball]

There is a wide difference in how Atheists view the world, and what atheism itself is.

As already stated, all atheism is is the lack of belief in dieties. The end. There are no more assumptions there. Any other belief held by an atheist falls into a different category.

What you are discussing are origins issues. And you are making a huge assumption in your own beliefs. You are assuming that the only options are an infinite universe, or god. Since time is an inherent part of our universe, speaking of the beginning of the universe is a non starter. There can be no before the universe if there was no time for it to occur in. This is granted not an easy concept to come to grips with, it is completely antithetical to our normal experience. But it is no less true because of this.

Now, positing a diety in no way removes this issue, it just sets it one level back. Now instead of an "infinite" universe, you have an "infinite" diety. Can you not grasp how this is just making things more complicated than they have to be? Can you not see how you are now ignoring the very issue you have tried to solve by positing "God"?

If the universe requires a god in order to exist, then by the same logic this god requires super-god in order for it to exist. And so on and so on, turtles all the way down.

 

[Ken-1122]

I am posting this thread because I would like some honest feedback as to my beliefs on this subject from an informed community. My issue, is that Atheism, by it's very nature, makes absolutely no logical sense to me. Let's assume, for a moment, that there is NO empirical proof of God, other than faith. Even if this is the case, Christians and Atheists share some basic assumptions about reality:

1) Our physical existence on this world is finite
2) The universe, as we know it, is finite

I make this point in full recognition of the works of the likes of Stephen Hawkings. Even under modern String Theory, the Big Bang may have required no actual energy from God to begin, but the mass still had to come form SOMEWHERE. That is the case even if time is relative, as you get closer to the Big Bang event.

If you look at the Christian and Atheist viewpoints, they both share one similar viewpoint. Most Christians believe some form of Aristotle's "Prime Mover" Theory. Namely, that a finite time-driven universe was created by an infinite being outside of the space-time context. That is God, however your define him/her/it/etc. Atheists, on the other hand, believe that the Universe is an infinite thing that exists outside of the space-time context. Either God or the Universe are infinite entities that do not have a logical creator, and do not conform to our finite sense of time. TO NOT believe in and infinite God or Universe is completely illogical, as it contradicts our very existence. Whether it is God or the Universe, Atheists and Christians must both have faith in the infinite nature of something they cannot comprehend, because we are finite in our thinking. Here is where the absurdity of Atheism comes into play for me. While we cannot scientifically test the existence of God, we can test our universe using the laws of physics. To my knowledge, there is no scientific unified "Theory of Everything" that can prove that the universe is infinite. While it may be great, there is a limited amount of mass in this and every other conceived dimension (ten I believe in current String Theory). The universe is also in motion. Even if time is relative, SOMETHING must have placed the universe in motion. All matter responds to cause and effect, though not always predictably.

Why then, do Atheists believe in something they cannot see, based on faith (the universe as an infinite thing), yet they KNOW there is no God. That is a presumption that CANNOT be tested in any scientific manner. Whether you follow the teaching of Descartes, Intelligent Design, Calvin, or any other philosophical evidence of God, there seems to me to be far more evidence of a God, than there is of an infinite universe. Throw in N.D.E's, the power of prayer, supernatural experiences and the like, and there seems to be a wealth of evidence the there is, at the least, more than just our consciousness in this existence. On the contrary, an Atheist claims to KNOW that there is nothing more than an infinite universe, based on what? Faith? Gut instinct? A jaded view of the world? That is where the utter absurdity of Atheism plays a me. I do want everyone to know that I do have faith that places me as a Christian, and not just an agnostic. I apologize for such a long intro. Any insights form anyone would be welcome!

My reason for not believing in God has nothing to do with the Universe or how things got the way they are.
My reasons for not believing in God are because of all the God concepts I’ve heard thus far, none of them sound credible.

Ken

 

[SithDoughnut]

Blind Post.

My issue, is that Atheism, by it's very nature, makes absolutely no logical sense to me.

That's because you're making assumptions about the universe that are not necessarily true.

I make this point in full recognition of the works of the likes of Stephen Hawkings. Even under modern String Theory, the Big Bang may have required no actual energy from God to begin, but the mass still had to come form SOMEWHERE.

And why would the only logical conclusion be a god?

That is God, however your define him/her/it/etc.

Except that God is not simply defined as this within Christianity. The problem that I see with a lot of atheism vs theism arguments is that the word "God" is often thrown around to fit into any situation where theists think it might be persuasive. You need to actually define God properly before you can start using the word. In Christianity God is far more complicated that merely a creator.

Atheists, on the other hand, believe that the Universe is an infinite thing that exists outside of the space-time context.

That has nothing to do with atheism, and didn't you just say that we all agree that the universe as we know it is finite? You can't claim that we believe that the universe is finite and infinite.

TO NOT believe in and infinite God or Universe is completely illogical, as it contradicts our very existence.

Just because you say so, or for an actual reason?

The rest of your post can be skipped because it continues under this false assumption that atheism is the belief in an infinite universe. It isn't. I wish people would actually look up words before they use them. Atheism is the opposite of theism, i.e. not believing in a god. If you start a sentence with "atheists believe" your sentence is automatically wrong, no matter what the rest of it might be.

Please, stop ascribing beliefs to people who don't actually have them.

 

[Eudaimonist]

I agree that that the concept of either an infinite universe or and infinite God are illogical. They both presuppose something that existed without creation.

I don't think it is illogical that something can exist without creation. I merely find the idea of an infinite past difficult to swallow.

You are correct concerning the Prime Mover Theory, but whether the Prime Mover created the universe or simply set it in motion, it establishes an immortal being outside of our explanation of the universe.

I don't believe in the existence of a Prime Mover as some entity outside of our explanation of the universe.

While I am an Aristotelian to an extent, I don't share his views on physics. I don't think that motion needs to be explained by reference to an "unmoved mover", unless you mean forces of nature such as gravity. That is an example of how entities can attract each other and move without one having to hit the other like a billiard ball. Change does not have to be "explained" as if it would never happen without chains of events, such as billiard balls striking each other endlessly.

As for perpetuity in the universe, how do you explain where that mass came from? Isn't that really the $64 dollar question.

No, it's a distraction. We don't have to explain this, because no explanation is possible or needed. There is no way to explain where existence comes from, because any explanation would have to itself exist, pushing the question one step back. The solution is to accept that there is a realm of existence that is uncreated, and go from there. It might as well be physical reality.

The intuitive power of the requirement that things be "created" is not one of creation ex nihilo. We explain the existence of things by understanding that they changed into their current form from something else, e.g., children grown into fully formed adults because they take in water and nutrients, and we build automobiles from raw materials. We do not explain their bare existence, just their current form.

Since we understand that the materials for created things pre-exist the created thing, and mass and energy do appear to be conserved in the universe, the idea of creation ex nihilo is actually this creation intuition gone haywire.

Fin a theory that explains how mass is created from the absence of mass, and I'll definitely be interested.

Find me a theory that explains how God is created from the absence of God, and I'll definitely be interested. Can such a question be answered in principle?

Finally, as to burdens of proof, I disagree that it is placed on my shoulders as a Christian.

The burden falls on people who assert the positive. It's not because you are a Christian.

As an Atheist, I find many of your presumptions lacking.

Which ones, and why?

Prove to me that you are right! Se how that causes a problem?

No, what is the problem?


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Feroc]

Feroc:

That is the perspective I was looking for. To answer your question, the answer is Yes, absolutely. I may be a Christian, but I am always in pursuit of knowledge. Incidentally, your belief is based on the concept of an infinite universe. Why is it easy to believe in an infinite universe with no actual scientific proof of this, while it is so "implausible" to believe in an infinite God? Just curious =)

I can see the universe (or parts of it). So I know, that it is here right now, it exists, I can touch it (at least one planet of it).
I don't believe, that there ever was "nothing", because for my sense of logic it's impossible to get mass and energy out of nothing. Now I can choose:

a) The universe (in some form) always existed
b) God always existed, who created the universe out of... ?

For me it makes more sense, that time and space already existed, as it is the less complexe structure. A god must be even more complexe AND intelligent, because he had to create the less complexe thing.

 

[Legal_Eagle]

To Jayez:

I understand your position. Heck , I am far form knowing all the answers myself. There are two things that personally infuriate me when it comes to fellow members of my faith; 2) A belief that religion makes you better than others, and 2) the belief that a religion gives you more knowledge about the metaphysical mysteries of life and existence than others. We may truth, but believing we know the mind and purpose of God is arrogance at it's best. There is certainly no requirement that you believe in anything. I do believe that we all increase, as human beings, by engaging in the discourse of ideas; regardless of whether we agree or not. It seems that our main difference is that I see miracles out of random chance everyday, while you probably chalk them up as scientifically explainable. So be it. I can respect than!

To Jayem:

I appreciate your candor. There is certainly an faith that comes from believing in the unknown; whether it be in God or unknown and unproven scientific models. From a purely philosophical perspective, there certainly is a choice between infinite matter (in whatever form) in the universe, or the choice of a personal God. I do believe that there are many wonders in this universe which may be given a scientific explanation, but could certainly have a supernatural one as well. I have simply experienced too may events and occurrences in my life to say that there is no explanation for them outside of science. Just my opinion. As fro Occham's Razor, that really isn't an argument of proof of any kind. Just saying, "simpler explanations are, other things being equal, generally better than more complex ones" doesn't disprove God." Sometimes, no matter what our wishes, simple solutions are based out of convenience, rather than truth. As for the illogical metaphysical existence of God, I would counter that many current theories on the existence of the universe make the sane mistake. If it is illogical for God to exist outside of time and space, how do explain the introduction of multiple dimensions into String Theory as a way to explain issues surround quantum solidarity? Aren'e they doing the same thing? Introducing dimensions outside of space and time and making presumptions about how they interact with time and energy?

To Blayz,

OK, you have to give me a day or so to absorbs that article before I get back to you. Thanks for the good read!

 

[quatona]

quatona:

Like I have posted to other people here, if you have another theory of origins of the universe that DOES NOT involve an infinite God or a timeless universe, I would be interested in hearing it. I am not familiar with any religious or physics theories that espouse this, so please elaborate. As I said in the outline here, I am simply looking for good explanations.

No sorry, I don´t have any such theory.

Which doesn´t mean that I therefore accept a theory that´s unconvincing. Concerning the God "theory": I fail to see how it is
a. an explanation of sorts (after all, it doesn´t say anything about the "how") and
b. how it does anything but taking the problem it´s meant to solve to just another level.

 

[Lord Emsworth]

If you look at the Christian and Atheist viewpoints, they both share one similar viewpoint. Most Christians believe some form of Aristotle's "Prime Mover" Theory. Namely, that a finite time-driven universe was created by an infinite being outside of the space-time context. That is God, however your define him/her/it/etc.

(Emphasis mine) Rejected. Insufficient. On several levels.


(ETA: There is probably more to disagree with in what you say, this, to me, is the most glaring wrong. OTOH, we may also agree some things.)

 

[Legal_Eagle]

Blayz,

Some of the presumptions in that article are pretty far fetched. Noe of this theory deals with causailty or acausility of absolute beginnings. On a brighter note, is is innudated with positivism! I know you have peobably read this response to that article, but I will post it for others to take a look at:

"The Caused Beginning of the Universe: A Response to Quentin Smith" by Dr. William Craig. I cannot post links at a Newbie, but it is easy to find and a good read!

 

[sandwiches]

I am posting this thread because I would like some honest feedback as to my beliefs on this subject from an informed community. My issue, is that Atheism, by it's very nature, makes absolutely no logical sense to me. Let's assume, for a moment, that there is NO empirical proof of God, other than faith. Even if this is the case, Christians and Atheists share some basic assumptions about reality:

1) Our physical existence on this world is finite
2) The universe, as we know it, is finite

I make this point in full recognition of the works of the likes of Stephen Hawkings. Even under modern String Theory, the Big Bang may have required no actual energy from God to begin, but the mass still had to come form SOMEWHERE. That is the case even if time is relative, as you get closer to the Big Bang event.

If you look at the Christian and Atheist viewpoints, they both share one similar viewpoint. Most Christians believe some form of Aristotle's "Prime Mover" Theory. Namely, that a finite time-driven universe was created by an infinite being outside of the space-time context. That is God, however your define him/her/it/etc. Atheists, on the other hand, believe that the Universe is an infinite thing that exists outside of the space-time context. Either God or the Universe are infinite entities that do not have a logical creator, and do not conform to our finite sense of time. TO NOT believe in and infinite God or Universe is completely illogical, as it contradicts our very existence. Whether it is God or the Universe, Atheists and Christians must both have faith in the infinite nature of something they cannot comprehend, because we are finite in our thinking. Here is where the absurdity of Atheism comes into play for me. While we cannot scientifically test the existence of God, we can test our universe using the laws of physics. To my knowledge, there is no scientific unified "Theory of Everything" that can prove that the universe is infinite. While it may be great, there is a limited amount of mass in this and every other conceived dimension (ten I believe in current String Theory). The universe is also in motion. Even if time is relative, SOMETHING must have placed the universe in motion. All matter responds to cause and effect, though not always predictably.

Why then, do Atheists believe in something they cannot see, based on faith (the universe as an infinite thing), yet they KNOW there is no God. That is a presumption that CANNOT be tested in any scientific manner. Whether you follow the teaching of Descartes, Intelligent Design, Calvin, or any other philosophical evidence of God, there seems to me to be far more evidence of a God, than there is of an infinite universe. Throw in N.D.E's, the power of prayer, supernatural experiences and the like, and there seems to be a wealth of evidence the there is, at the least, more than just our consciousness in this existence. On the contrary, an Atheist claims to KNOW that there is nothing more than an infinite universe, based on what? Faith? Gut instinct? A jaded view of the world? That is where the utter absurdity of Atheism plays a me. I do want everyone to know that I do have faith that places me as a Christian, and not just an agnostic. I apologize for such a long intro. Any insights form anyone would be welcome!

Most of that doesn't apply to me. I'll explain why *I* don't believe in god anymore. It's very simple: I used to believe in God. One day, I asked myself why I believed, even after I had realized that the Bible was incorrect in so many things. I couldn't answer the question as to why I believed. Inevitably, I couldn't believe. So, I don't.

That's about it. It should be pretty easy to understand, I hope.