Can Atheists win the bible?

[GodsGrace101]

That’s an interesting claim. What is the evidence for that?

What is YOUR proof that the universe and time came from nothing?

Why do you think I have to prove something and yet YOU don't?

 

[Larniavc]

Oh, I see!
You make up your own rules.

SCIENTISTS say there was nothing before the Big Bang.
And they really can't go back before that.
Interesting, isn't it?

That’s what you say. Care to provide some evidence of a journal article say there was ever a state of nothing?

 

[Larniavc]

What is YOUR proof that the universe and time came from nothing?

I don’t have any because I did not make that claim.

Now will you answer my original question?

 

[Larniavc]

Why do you think I have to prove something and yet YOU don't?

You made the claim so the burden of proof lies with the claimant i.e. you.

If you can’t support you claim I do not mind.

 

[GodsGrace101]

That’s what you say. Care to provide some evidence of a journal article say there was ever a state of nothing?

No. Really I don't.
This is a known fact.
It's like trying to prove to you that water is wet.

You could find out on your own....
Try Professor Google.

 

[GodsGrace101]

I don’t have any because I did not make that claim.

Now will you answer my original question?

I don't remember the original question.

 

[GodsGrace101]

You made the claim so the burden of proof lies with the claimant i.e. you.

If you can’t support you claim I do not mind.

Are you asking me to prove God exists?
What exactly did I claim?

 

[Larniavc]

No. Really I don't.
This is a known fact.
It's like trying to prove to you that water is wet.

You could find out on your own....
Try Professor Google.

It’s not a known fact. And your inability to support your position is embarrassing.

Good day

 

[Larniavc]

I don't remember the original question.

Indeed

 

[Larniavc]

Are you asking me to prove God exists?
What exactly did I claim?

You claimed

“God created the wind and so it can be detected.
God created all the laws of science.”

If you can’t substantiate your claim that fine.

 

[theoneandonlypencil]

@Larnievc @GodsGrace101

Well...first off, we don't have an answer to how the universe began. Whether or not it came from a state of 'nothing' or simply always existed, is hotly debated in the scientific field still. That's why we have 'models' that explain different hypotheses in which the universe could've come into existence. The Big bang model was(and still is, I think)popular, meanwhile, I believe it was Stephen Hawking and another man who recently pioneered the concept of a universe that has always existed. It is not a full proof concept, though, and there(As I said) are still very complicated debates going on right now in regards to both models. All in all, science does not make claims to any absolute 'truths' and I think it is best left(for the most part)out of these kinds of debates, except for where it is absolutely necessary.

Second, in the context of Christianity, appealing to science is one of the most pointless endeavors you can do. Whether or not you believe in God, think of it this way; the entire belief system is called 'faith'. We're warned constantly in the bible about times that will challenge our faith and people that will persecute us because of it. Has it occurred to anyone that if God exists(and I believe he does), the entire point of remaining unseen is to test the loyalty of those who follow? I mean if we had people in the biblical era rejecting God even when he was flexing on all of mankind with plagues and crap, him giving us the silent treatment now doesn't seem very far fetched. The core concept of Christianity is a personal relationship with God that is revealed to those who sincerely wish to know Him; it's not something that can be measured or tested in a laboratory.

Larnievc is also correct that(in most cases)there is not absolute 'evidence' proving the Abrahamic God over any other god/goddess. Pascal's wager is one of the most ridiculous and un-Christian concepts I can think of to date for that very reason. Our faith is not simply a 'just to be safe' protocol; whatever you're going to pledge loyalty to, you better understand it like the back of your hand and be ready to be martyred for it if need be. Belief in God is not a personality trait or something that is passed down generation to generation as a family heirloom.


//rant over.

 

[GodsGrace101]

You claimed

“God created the wind and so it can be detected.
God created all the laws of science.”

If you can’t substantiate your claim that fine.

L, It would take me too much time to go back and copy/paste.
You're getting our conversations a little mixed up with each other.

For instance, YOU said God couldn't be detected or prove.
I said, poetically, the wind blows and cannot be seen but we see its effects.

As to all laws: Yes, I DO believe God created the universe and all the laws therein. If not, math wouldn't work, apples wouldn't fall down, and there would be no physics to learn in school.

Which claim do you want me to substantiate???
I've already asked you this.
God cannot be proven...you either believe He exists or you don't.

There are two ways to come to believe in God...
But I doubt you're interested.

 

[GodsGrace101]

It’s not a known fact. And your inability to support your position is embarrassing.

Good day

What is my position?
I'm not a scientist...and I've lived through the change is opinion that they have.
God, on the other hand, has NEVER changed.

Take your pick..Guess it's not easy to click on Google...




How Did the Universe Begin? | Live Science

Why is there something rather than nothing?

Where Did The Universe Come From


There's so much more.
Intelligent Design is also starting to be accepted by some scientists.
But I'm not taking the time to prove that either.

You're allowed to be an atheist.
But don't tell me I post fairy tales.

 

[GodsGrace101]

@Larnievc @GodsGrace101

Well...first off, we don't have an answer to how the universe began. Whether or not it came from a state of 'nothing' or simply always existed, is hotly debated in the scientific field still. That's why we have 'models' that explain different hypotheses in which the universe could've come into existence. The Big bang model was(and still is, I think)popular, meanwhile, I believe it was Stephen Hawking and another man who recently pioneered the concept of a universe that has always existed. It is not a full proof concept, though, and there(As I said) are still very complicated debates going on right now in regards to both models. All in all, science does not make claims to any absolute 'truths' and I think it is best left(for the most part)out of these kinds of debates, except for where it is absolutely necessary.

Hi, very thoughtful post.
Pre 1960 scientists believed the universe always existed. Since God always was and the universe always existed (or so it was believed) the question was only -- which of the two was more acceptable logically. One had to make up their own mind.

Today, it is accepted that the universe had a beginning. Perhaps not every scientist accepts this, but this is mainstream thinking. And thus, science not is faced with a problem...HOW did everything come into existence? The Big Bang is the accepted answer. But the problem is: How did something come from nothing when any scientist will tell you that this is impossible. As I've already stated, Dr. Lawrence Krauss is putting forth the idea that something can indeed come from nothing - but he has changed the meaning of nothing. Also, Intelligent Design is being spoken of, but what or who that intelligent being is, is not known.

I enjoy science and am not leaving these debates alone. The problem with science is that it is forever changing and so it becomes difficult to put any faith into it.

As to Stephen Hawking...this is what he thought of the universes' origin:

"I think the universe was spontaneously created out of nothing, according to the laws of science," Hawking, who died in March, wrote. "If you accept, as I do, that the laws of nature are fixed, then it doesn't take long to ask: What role is there for God?"

source: Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe | Live Science

Second, in the context of Christianity, appealing to science is one of the most pointless endeavors you can do. Whether or not you believe in God, think of it this way; the entire belief system is called 'faith'. We're warned constantly in the bible about times that will challenge our faith and people that will persecute us because of it. Has it occurred to anyone that if God exists(and I believe he does), the entire point of remaining unseen is to test the loyalty of those who follow? I mean if we had people in the biblical era rejecting God even when he was flexing on all of mankind with plagues and crap, him giving us the silent treatment now doesn't seem very far fetched. The core concept of Christianity is a personal relationship with God that is revealed to those who sincerely wish to know Him; it's not something that can be measured or tested in a laboratory.

Agreed in the above,,,but when speaking to an atheist,,,THEY are appealing to science...and science knows very little, as you've stated, it's always in a state of change because of new findings.

And, yes, God cannot be tested in a lab. This is why I've told the other member that I cannot prove to Him that God exists. I can discuss this with another Christian..but not with an atheist.

Larnievc is also correct that(in most cases)there is not absolute 'evidence' proving the Abrahamic God over any other god/goddess. Pascal's wager is one of the most ridiculous and un-Christian concepts I can think of to date for that very reason. Our faith is not simply a 'just to be safe' protocol; whatever you're going to pledge loyalty to, you better understand it like the back of your hand and be ready to be martyred for it if need be. Belief in God is not a personality trait or something that is passed down generation to generation as a family heirloom.


//rant over.

Sure, our faith is not a "just to be safe" protocol...but Paschal's Wager is a top idea when speaking to a non-believer...it's outcome would be correct and gives persons something to think about.

Other gods/godesses are KNOWN to be mythical in nature....
Abraham's God has NEVER been thought to be a myth.
I don't hear atheists arguing over Zeus!

Your right about the rest of your last paragraph.

 

[theoneandonlypencil]

Hi, very thoughtful post.
Pre 1960 scientists believed the universe always existed. Since God always was and the universe always existed (or so it was believed) the question was only -- which of the two was more acceptable logically. One had to make up their own mind.

Today, it is accepted that the universe had a beginning. Perhaps not every scientist accepts this, but this is mainstream thinking. And thus, science not is faced with a problem...HOW did everything come into existence? The Big Bang is the accepted answer. But the problem is: How did something come from nothing when any scientist will tell you that this is impossible. As I've already stated, Dr. Lawrence Krauss is putting forth the idea that something can indeed come from nothing - but he has changed the meaning of nothing. Also, Intelligent Design is being spoken of, but what or who that intelligent being is, is not known.

I enjoy science and am not leaving these debates alone. The problem with science is that it is forever changing and so it becomes difficult to put any faith into it.

As to Stephen Hawking...this is what he thought of the universes' origin:

"I think the universe was spontaneously created out of nothing, according to the laws of science," Hawking, who died in March, wrote. "If you accept, as I do, that the laws of nature are fixed, then it doesn't take long to ask: What role is there for God?"

source: Stephen Hawking's Final Book Says There's 'No Possibility' of God in Our Universe | Live Science

I'd advise you to check out this link;
Physicists Debate Hawking’s Idea That the Universe Had No Beginning | Quanta Magazine

In any case, whether or not intelligent design is a valid theory would depend on how you classify intelligent design.

Agreed in the above,,,but when speaking to an atheist,,,THEY are appealing to science...and science knows very little, as you've stated, it's always in a state of change because of new findings.

And, yes, God cannot be tested in a lab. This is why I've told the other member that I cannot prove to Him that God exists. I can discuss this with another Christian..but not with an atheist.

If you acknowledge that God cannot be tested in a lab, that science does not provide ultimate truths, and that you cannot prove God exists with 'evidence'...why are you even using science in your arguments to begin with? Popular to contrary belief, the onus can be on both parties and not just one.

Similar to how in courts a case is presented by a claimant, and then is countered by a defendant. Both are required to give evidence for their side of the case.

As far as I'm aware, there is no tangible way to prove or disprove God. The argument used by 'Atheists' is actually 'absence of proof = proof of absence' which...doesn't really stand up on its own for very long. Furthermore, Atheists are simply indifferent to a God/gods. They do not claim that a higher power(for sure)does not exist; they just do not personally believe in one or care much for that matter. An Anti-theist would claim there is no God, which(As I've mentioned)requires proof in which they're not much better off than we are. The concept of a world/universe that is able to function without God doesn't count as evidence either, seeing as the Bible only makes claims to the origins of life and being; which, ironically, we still don't have an answer for either.

To sum it up, you shouldn't be using worldly means to prove God. It is inefficient and it does not make sense; apologetics is for questioning Christians, not Atheists. The best proof of Christianity will be found in powerful testimony, the rich history of Christianity & Judaism, how we live our lives, and the spiritual relationship maintained between God and His children.

Sure, our faith is not a "just to be safe" protocol...but Paschal's Wager is a top idea when speaking to a non-believer...it's outcome would be correct and gives persons something to think about.

Other gods/godesses are KNOWN to be mythical in nature....
Abraham's God has NEVER been thought to be a myth.
I don't hear atheists arguing over Zeus!

Your right about the rest of your last paragraph.

This page pretty much sums up why I think Pascal's wager is a bunch of rubbish;
What is Pascal’s Wager? | GotQuestions.org

Well, if you want to debate in worldly terms, there is the problem that we don't know which religions pre-date each other, which obviously creates problems of identifying the 'copy cats'.

You don't hear Atheists arguing over Zeus because there are no Zeus-worshipping-majority countries with polytheists trying to force their beliefs onto them.

 

[createdtoworship]

You can detect the wind with a velocimeter.

how do you know the velocimeter is accurate? After all it measures things you can't see.

 

[Larniavc]

If not, math wouldn't work, apples wouldn't fall down, and there would be no physics to learn in school.

Can you substantiate these claims?

 

[Larniavc]

But I doubt you're interested.

I would be very interested in evidence of God.

 

[Larniavc]

God, on the other hand, has NEVER changed.

Yes he has. His character in the OT is very different from his character in the NT.

 

[Larniavc]

Intelligent Design is also starting to be accepted by some scientists.

Can you substantiate this?