Atheist Universe: Not Impossible

[Supernaut]

Explain the atom or the energy in the atom and not how it works. Why it exsits and where did it come from and how does it sustain its self and energy..... The basic building blocks of life and I mean basic!

Umm... God snapped His fingers and said "let there be energy in the atom". Then He looked at the energy in the atom and saw that it was good. He then said, "Let the energy in the atom be self sustaining". Afterwards, He look at the atom and its energy and saw that they were both good.

 

[ToddNotTodd]

You know what I've come to notice. When people of general acknowledgment can't socially discuss knowledge they tend to divert the conversation away from the argument to the person that holds the view. Hmmm did you just do that
Science illuminates, but things don't evolve. That was and is my point in case. It's funny how you guys can't make your case. Explain the atom or the energy in the atom and not how it works. Why it exsits and where did it come from and how does it sustain its self and energy..... The basic building blocks of life and I mean basic!

He's saying that unless you understand even the basics of science, it's pointless to discuss anything with you.

Why would we need to try and explain the energy in an atom (or anything else you're bringing up) to you anyway? Is the answer "I don't know" from an atheist some indication to you that a god exists? That really doesn't make sense. The fact that science doesn't know everything doesn't prove a god's existence in the slightest.

 

[Verv]

I do not think it really comes down a lot to science.

Most of this has always been treated a philosophical discussion for good reason... We cannot be certain of the origins of nature through science, strictly.

If the start of the universe is the beginning of nature, which it would almost by definition be, how is a discipline which is described as the observation of the natural world supposed to be able to attest to the precise origins, when doing so would cause it to try to potentially understand something that is preternatural?

And how can the discipline focusing on the observation of the natural world have any role discussing the greater concepts of morality and philosophy when it is nothing more than a reference point for material truths?

The material world is not the only thing we can base our thoughts of. To be dependent only on inductive knowledge is sentencing ourselves to ignorance.

 

[TwWhittaker]

The OP makes some broad assumptions, such as that time existed before our universe, and that it was infinite. So far as I know, there is no evidence for either.

Nonetheless, the question for atheists is not really about the creation of the universe or other metaphysical issues, because no matter how far our understanding may progress, theists may always assert "Ya, but God made it that way."

The question for atheists today is really about the credibility of the God hypothesis. Each of us must (well, should) assess the evidence we have been shown for the existence of God and evaluate its credibility.

* Could it be discovered, if it were not told to me by someone else?
* Can it be verified, without asking another person questions about it?
* Is it possible that there is another explanation for it?
* Is my answer to these questions impacted by what I would prefer to be true?

IMO, we will never solve questions about the validity of faith by looking outside our knowledge or understanding. I think the answers are right here, nearer us.

 

[tanzanos]

What is funny though the Bible has enlightened us thousand of years before we understood it or tells us how it is. Then we come to affirm it with technology over tiiiiiime and you chalk it up as no intelligence of Bible. lol Science can't be behind it all..... Science comes after the fact!

According to the bible; the earth is a flat disc. Now even some of the Greek philosophers 2,600 ago knew the earth to be a sphere and the sun to be the centre of our solar system; and they did this by simple observation and logic!

 

[Wiccan_Child]

Science can't be behind it all..... Science comes after the fact!

Science explains the facts, it explains why things are the way they are, and why they aren't the way they aren't. No more, no less.

So you can't tell me without a doubt God isn't behind it ALL (prove it)!

Indeed I can't, which is why no (sensible) person says that God categorically does not exist. What we do say is that there's no evidence for God, any more than there's evidence for the Tooth Fairy, or ghosts.

Also you haven't explained to me about where the energy of these inanimate objects molecular building blocks comes from and how it is sustained or what sustains the earth.

Yes, I did: thermonuclear fusion. Specifically, the Sun.

Which is suspended in outer space nor have you explained all the dials of life on earth that sustains life (earth distance from the sun, earth axis 23.5%, ozone, ocean salt content 3.5%, gravity etc). Where if one was removed life would exists.

I think you mean "life wouldn't exist". The so-called 'dials of life' are more variable than you might think. But the key point is that a) there are a lot of planets out there, each with a different 'combination' of variables; even if it's supremely unlikely that any one planet 'gets it right', we nonetheless expect a small number to get it right. On those planets, life will form and evolve. We must necessarily be on one of those planets, because if we weren't, life could never have formed, and we couldn't be there.
And b) life fits the parameters it's in, much as a puddle fits the shape of the hole it's in. It's not that the Earth is fine-tuned for life, but rather that life is fine-tuned for the Earth. Notice how the vast majority of species cannot survive outside their local environment, and indeed major catastrophes in the past have wiped out ~99% of species.

Even in your body, cells live independently of your though and live by their own memory, but live in community of other cells!!

So?

You have nothing. Just trails of science erected from error and laws of whatever, not knowing the whys of light, motion, speed, Quantum physics, arithmetic etc,( just the does and don't of the matter) but when it comes to the purpose of life or the cause. You can only see the effect and you speculate. For you can't get your mind around the why, so you ignore the cause. Why?

Hardly. If you want to know the scientific explanation for this or that, just ask. You don't have to go off on a rant, and then declare victory before the other person has even had time to respond. Did it ever occur to you that maybe scientists do understand these things? That we can quite easily answer these questions you have?

What in the beginning plants and bugs co-existed. How could a tree know that a bug would eat its leaves and know to produce a chemical that would kill that particular bug ,before they existed?

It couldn't, obviously. The tree evolved chemicals to kill the bug after it started eating its leaves. But bear in mind this wasn't an intelligent process: mutations in its offspring's DNA occasionally made certain proteins toxic to the bugs, and those offspring were suddenly much better off than their kin (who were still being eaten).

If you walked up to a tree and someone left their signature carved into its trunk. Would you say it evolved

I'd say the tree evolved, because I know it's a self-replicating organism whose offsprings are minor varients of itself (which is the definition of evolution).. But the signature is not.

DNA is a mathematical equation of information. That lets one know eye,skin, and hair color etc

Agreed.

On and on this goes..... You can play with the rest of your life in the science of life and ignore the cause...... Do you miss the point? You will even say that there is some sort of pattern to life, you would call it mother nature lol, but you still have missed the point and so you haven't graveled with the real substance of life......God speed, my friend before His great grace runs out.

Uhuh. If you have any other questions about evolution, or physics, or science in general, don't hesitate to ask me or one of my compdrés .

Intelligent design!!!!!!

Evolution!!!!!!!!1111

 

[Wiccan_Child]

I'm saying the nautilus puts each septa there as it grows, it's not an accident that they are patterned.

Which is my point as well. Patterns aren't accidents, they're products of well-understood natural laws. But they're not the product of a mind.

 

[tanzanos]

Explain the atom or the energy in the atom and not how it works. Why it exsits and where did it come from and how does it sustain its self and energy..... The basic building blocks of life and I mean basic!

You don't know very much about the Atomic theory do you? If you delve in the realms of science then be prepared to follow the rules lest you be ridiculed for your ignorance! I do not mean to be insulting here just to warn you that science is not faith nor faith based. It deals strictly with imperial evidences and must follow certain rules. One cannot make up things and expect to have them accepted on face value alone.
God did it is not science nor does it explain anything nor does it prove anything. Now if you were to say that "God is such and such an entity and has such and such characteristics, and used such and such a method to build the atoms etc" (you must prove that they not only exist but also how they function and must be peer reviewed) then the scientific community may take you seriously!

Also the fact that some parts are missing does not mean the science is wrong; for instance the following sequence need not be complete in order to to conclude that the number "10" can exist" there is enough evidence to prove it:

1
2
*
4
*
*
7
*
*
*
11
12

Now on the other hand this is how faith works eg: faith demands that one should accept that the following sequence as proof that the number 21 exists:

*
---
/
*
-
)
&
%

See what I mean

 

[marksman007]

According to the bible; the earth is a flat disc.

Chapter and verse please.

An atheist christian is an oxymoron. They don't exist the same as an honest politician doesn't or very rarely.

No one can prove that God doesn't exist until they die. If they are right we have lost nothing. If they are wrong, they are in for a hell of a time.

The believer has no need to prove that God exists as what makes belief is faith. An atheist exercises faith every time they sit down. They have faith that the chair will hold their weight. If they didn't they would not sit down. Their faith is rewarded when they sit down and the chair doesn't collapse.

The believer through faith believes there is a God who created heaven and earth and us. He has no reason to believe otherwise until the evidence reveals otherwise. so far, it hasn't happened.

Despite what atheists say, they cannot prove there is no God, they can only surmise as evolution is a theory, not a fact. Although atheists say that they have facts to prove evolution, there are plenty of people out there than can prove evolution is a fairy story that has been invented to remove God out of the equation.

At the end of the day, we have faith that enables us to accept that God exists, has obtained salvation for us through his son Jesus which has made it possible to have our sin forgiven and to be in a right relationship with the Father. Part of that includes our eternal salvation in the new heaven and earth which we will be resident in free from all sin, sickness and war.

The atheist on the other hand cannot compute what faith is so he is totally dependant on so called facts which he has to create for without them he has no case to argue. As a result, once you believe a lie (of Satan) you have to create more lies to cover up the embarrasment of the previous lies.

Therefore his whole life is all about scouring the universe for those details that will prop up his hypothesis. I get the distinct impression that they spend 24/7 reading books, surfing the internet and going to lectures and presentations in an attempt to find out more about what they don't know. Their social life must be a big fat zero.

If anyone wants to know a universe without God, just look at those who have tried to eliminate him. Stalin tried to produce an atheist state that made religion illegal and to achieve that he had to kill 60 million people.

Then of course there is Chairman Mao who was convinced that salvation came through him and the State. If you disagreed you died, all 77 million.

Today, we had a tsunami in Indonesia the largest islamic country population wise. John Howard gave a $1 billion to them for aid. John Howard is a Christian. Not one Islamic state gave aid to Indonesia. It seems that the one true God has a lot more compassion than atheists and muslims towards his enemies but then that should not surpise us as he told us to love our enemies.

 

[Psudopod]

No one can prove that God doesn't exist until they die. If they are right we have lost nothing. If they are wrong, they are in for a hell of a time.

No one can prove God doesn’t exist, correct, but there is also no evidence to suggest that He does either. And Pascal’s Wager only works if Christianity and atheism are the only options.

The believer has no need to prove that God exists as what makes belief is faith. An atheist exercises faith every time they sit down. They have faith that the chair will hold their weight. If they didn't they would not sit down. Their faith is rewarded when they sit down and the chair doesn't collapse.

It’s not faith, but a judgement call based on understanding and experience.

The believer through faith believes there is a God who created heaven and earth and us. He has no reason to believe otherwise until the evidence reveals otherwise. so far, it hasn't happened.

While no evidence disproves that God created, why should this be the default position?

Despite what atheists say, they cannot prove there is no God, they can only surmise as evolution is a theory, not a fact. Although atheists say that they have facts to prove evolution, there are plenty of people out there than can prove evolution is a fairy story that has been invented to remove God out of the equation.

Evolution is falsifiable, so you are correct to say it is not proven, but then no scientific theory is ever proven. However, the mountains of evidence for evolution, the successful predictions mean that it being wrong is very unlikely. So please, feel free to provide this evidence that evolution is a fairy-tale designed to remove God from the picture, especially in light of the fact that Darwin was a believer when he wrong Origins.

 

[DeathMagus]

You know what I've come to notice. When people of general acknowledgment can't socially discuss knowledge they tend to divert the conversation away from the argument to the person that holds the view. Hmmm did you just do that

It's not a diversion - I'd love to discuss scientific knowledge, but you have to have some first. I won't try to teach a 38-year-old basic biochem from scratch over an internet forum. The fact that he doesn't know it in the first place suggests he has no interest in ever learning.

Science illuminates, but things don't evolve. That was and is my point in case. It's funny how you guys can't make your case. Explain the atom or the energy in the atom and not how it works. Why it exsits and where did it come from and how does it sustain its self and energy..... The basic building blocks of life and I mean basic!

So you want me to give you the purpose of the existence of matter?

 

[IzzyPop]

The believer has no need to prove that God exists as what makes belief is faith. An atheist exercises faith every time they sit down. They have faith that the chair will hold their weight. If they didn't they would not sit down. Their faith is rewarded when they sit down and the chair doesn't collapse.

Bad example. I have sat in a multitude of chairs. I don't have faith that the chair will hold me up. I can base the belief in the chair holding me up in past performance of chairs. I know that big, comfy chairs will most likely hold my weight in a comfortable matter. I also know that small, cheap plastic chairs may not. This is not faith.

The believer through faith believes there is a God who created heaven and earth and us. He has no reason to believe otherwise until the evidence reveals otherwise. so far, it hasn't happened.

Hmmmm. Prove that I do not own a white Jeep. Until such time I own a white Jeep.

Despite what atheists say, they cannot prove there is no God, they can only surmise as evolution is a theory, not a fact. Although atheists say that they have facts to prove evolution, there are plenty of people out there than can prove evolution is a fairy story that has been invented to remove God out of the equation.

Got names? I'd love to meet these people that can prove evolution is a fairy story.

At the end of the day, we have faith that enables us to accept that God exists, has obtained salvation for us through his son Jesus which has made it possible to have our sin forgiven and to be in a right relationship with the Father. Part of that includes our eternal salvation in the new heaven and earth which we will be resident in free from all sin, sickness and war.

And plenty of people have faith that Vishnu created the world. Why should we believe you over them? The amount of evidence is the same.

The atheist on the other hand cannot compute what faith is so he is totally dependant on so called facts which he has to create for without them he has no case to argue. As a result, once you believe a lie (of Satan) you have to create more lies to cover up the embarrasment of the previous lies.

All atheists are liars? Quite a broad brush you have there.

Plus, this coming from you is quite ironic. I've seen the 'facts' you use in the homosexuality threads. So lies for Satan are bad, but lies for Jesus are okay?

Therefore his whole life is all about scouring the universe for those details that will prop up his hypothesis. I get the distinct impression that they spend 24/7 reading books, surfing the internet and going to lectures and presentations in an attempt to find out more about what they don't know. Their social life must be a big fat zero.

Mmmmm...I love a good ad hominem first thing in the morning.

If anyone wants to know a universe without God, just look at those who have tried to eliminate him. Stalin tried to produce an atheist state that made religion illegal and to achieve that he had to kill 60 million people.

Then of course there is Chairman Mao who was convinced that salvation came through him and the State. If you disagreed you died, all 77 million.

And you have proof that atheism caused these men to kill? Please present.

Today, we had a tsunami in Indonesia the largest islamic country population wise. John Howard gave a $1 billion to them for aid. John Howard is a Christian. Not one Islamic state gave aid to Indonesia. It seems that the one true God has a lot more compassion than atheists and muslims towards his enemies but then that should not surpise us as he told us to love our enemies.

Except for Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Quatar, and UAE all gave money. Is that a lie for Jesus?

 

[tanzanos]

Chapter and verse please.

You may find these interesting:
Flat Earth According to the Bible part 1
Flat Earth According to the Bible part 2
Flat Earth According to the Bible part 3

An atheist christian is an oxymoron. They don't exist the same as an honest politician doesn't or very rarely.

I did not say I was a Godlian but a Christian; as in believing the message Jesus tried to give mankind. Now as one who lived in the Bronze age and having been brought up to believe in a flat earth; Jesus could not do otherwise. This however is not a reason to discard his messages of brotherly love etc. I do not believe in the existence of any deity. Jesus was an historical figure and probably the first socialist. Good for him and I believe in his principles not his superstitions!

 

[david_x]

Which is my point as well. Patterns aren't accidents, they're products of well-understood natural laws. But they're not the product of a mind.

But this was the production of intelligence...

 

[Wiccan_Child]

But this was the production of intelligence...

What intelligence, exactly?

 

[david_x]

What intelligence, exactly?

The nautilus...

 

[Verv]

According to the bible; the earth is a flat disc. Now even some of the Greek philosophers 2,600 ago knew the earth to be a sphere and the sun to be the centre of our solar system; and they did this by simple observation and logic!

Your evidence is what?

You should probably read this.

You should also try to understand that significant portions of the Bible are written in Jewish poetic meter, and when they say things such as 'the ends of the Earth' it is not a reference to a literal endpoint, just as how people still say 'the ends of the Earth' today and do not always mean as if the Earth ends there.

In fact, there is even a place named 땅끝마을 (Ddang-keut-ma-eul) in south Korea and it has been there for quite some time, before any influence of Christianity, and the name literally means "End Of The Land Village."

I do not think that when they named this place they were thinking about making some sort of profound, gigantic statement that the Earth is flat and void...

Rather, I assume they were using it in the more poetic context.

Without fail, people read what they want to read in the Bible. For some people it means striving to understand the context and framework of the writings and knowing the verses to be what they truly are; to others, it means distorting each verse to achieve their goals whether it is to justify immoral behavior as Christians or if it is to attempt to mock Christianity.

 

[Wiccan_Child]

The nautilus...

The nautilus grew it, but not because of its intelligence. If you go back to my original discussion with andyhart, you'll see we were talking about how patterns can only arise because a mind is behind them (e.g., human writing). My counterpoint was that there are many patterns in nature that don't arise because of some mind creating them, and the nautilus shell is one such pattern. The nautilus creates the septa, but it doesn't do it to create the pattern we see. As far as it's concerned, it's just periodically inching forward as it grows, sealing the shell behind it when it moves. It doesn't intend to create the pattern, but it does.

Saying that the golden spiral seen in nautili shells is a result of an intelligent mind is hair-splitting to the extreme. For the purposes of the argument, it's a naturally occuring pattern. The thing itself is biological, but it's not conciously, intelligently, knowingly created by an mind for a specific, forethought purpose.

 

[david_x]

The nautilus grew it, but not because of its intelligence. If you go back to my original discussion with andyhart, you'll see we were talking about how patterns can only arise because a mind is behind them (e.g., human writing). My counterpoint was that there are many patterns in nature that don't arise because of some mind creating them, and the nautilus shell is one such pattern. The nautilus creates the septa, but it doesn't do it to create the pattern we see. As far as it's concerned, it's just periodically inching forward as it grows, sealing the shell behind it when it moves. It doesn't intend to create the pattern, but it does.

Saying that the golden spiral seen in nautili shells is a result of an intelligent mind is hair-splitting to the extreme. For the purposes of the argument, it's a naturally occuring pattern. The thing itself is biological, but it's not conciously, intelligently, knowingly created by an mind for a specific, forethought purpose.

Fair argument, but you could have definitely picked a better example or excluded it.

 

[marksman007]

It’s not faith, but a judgement call based on understanding and experience.

This statement proves that atheists do not understand faith. For a person who has never sat on a particular chair before, all the experience in the world will not tell him that it is safe to sit in it. He can say, "I have sat in chairs before and they have not collapsed, so I can safely say that this one will not collapse." That is not understanding or experience it is faith.

Even if they sat on the chair yesterday, that is no evidence that it will not collapse today.

That fact shows, despite protestations to the contrary, atheists have a great deal of faith. They have faith in non faith, which is no different to any other kind of faith except that their faith is a greater gamble that most others because if they are wrong, they lose everything.

Even though Pascal's statement is entirely true, they would still gamble 70 years for eternity. Now to my way of thinking that is not logic. The same as me going to a casino and although I have no proof I am going to win, I gamble my house on the roulette table. Saying that some people win is not understanding and experience, it is building your house on sand.

If I win, great. If I don't and that is more likely, I am a complete fool because I chose a course of action with the odds stacked against me. It does not surprise me that God said in his Word that the fool has said in his heart there is no God.

Faith in a roulette wheel is not exactly the stuff of intelligence.