The origins of atheism

[Chriliman]

Like God.


eudaimonia,

Mark

Nope, because an eternal infinite God is just as valid of an explanation for the origins of the universe as an eternal infinite multiverse is.

So if you claim God is irrational then you must equally claim a multiverse is irrational, thus rendering all scientific theories about origins of the universe irrational. Is this the position you want to take?

 

[Colter]

We have been there, Coulter. Long time ago. You remained dedicated to the results of your psychic powers, no matter what I told you.

I do know for sure that they are not what you have been rambling about ("validation of hope for a Godless universe" and "undermining people´s faith").

I think that there´s no need to tell other people what their motives are as part of a discussion, to begin with. You disqualify yourself that way.

Maybe my perceptions have been all wrong, I'm just see you in the anti God camp a lot.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Nope, because an eternal infinite God is just as valid of an explanation for the origins of the universe as an eternal infinite multiverse is.

An eternal infinite multiverse can at least be extrapolated from what we already know through scientific research. A supernatural God cannot.

They are far from equally valid (that is, supported) explanations.


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Colter]

Fa

So? What's your point?

Faith is the proof of religious activities in the minds of the believers.

 

[Eudaimonist]

Faith is the proof of religious activities in the minds of the believers.

No one is disputing that. *scratches head*


eudaimonia,

Mark

 

[Colter]

No one is disputing that. *scratches head*


eudaimonia,

Mark

Arrogant Atheists just claim the religious are imagining things.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

I don't see a need to disprove something that's irrational to begin with.

When you come up with something that makes more sense than God then we'll talk.

And now you see the position of atheists when you ask them to disprove your god.

Why indeed to do I need to disprove something that is irrational to begin with?

 

[TheQuietRiot]

Arrogant Atheists just claim the religious are imagining things.

How would you respond to a muslim who claimed to have a unique religious experiance with allah?

Would you say he was simply mistaken and thought it was the wrong god, or that he was imagining things?

 

[Chriliman]

An eternal infinite multiverse can at least be extrapolated from what we already know through scientific research. A supernatural God cannot.

They are far from equally valid (that is, supported) explanations.


eudaimonia,

Mark

As humans we have two options:

We can assume the force that started the universe doesn't care if we make sense of it, therefore, we as humans can believe whatever we want and it really doesn't matter what we believe.

Or

We can assume the force that started the universe does care that we make sense of it, therefore, it does matter what we believe.

I assume you take the former position. Which is unfortunate because it means you must admit that what you believe to be true, really doesn't matter.

 

[Chriliman]

And now you see the position of atheists when you ask them to disprove your god.

Why indeed to do I need to disprove something that is irrational to begin with?

I never asked you to disprove God. I asked you to explain the universe in a way that makes more sense than God. What now?

 

[Colter]

How would you respond to a muslim who claimed to have a unique religious experiance with allah?

Would you say he was simply mistaken and thought it was the wrong god, or that he was imagining things?

I can appreciate your question due to the rivalry's of the religions of authority. My answer is to take the Muslims word for it, they know the One God to, but all religions bring quite a lot of human cultural baggage, conjecture and speculation to their beliefs. One God many paths.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

I never asked you to disprove God. I asked you to explain the universe in a way that makes more sense than God. What now?

Well this is what you originally asked.

You claim it's wrong, but you can't use logic to show that the existence of this being would be impossible. Why is that?

Which is basically akin to asking to disprove god as logically showing its existence to be impossible would disprove the concept.

So I posed to you the same question to yourself, can you disprove a supernatural super leprechaun with logic? You failed to answer claiming because you didn't consider the idea rational you would not bother.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

I don't claim to know how the universe started. But invoking a supernatural god as the creator or the first cause only begs the question as to what created the creator? It brings more questions than answers.

 

[quatona]

Maybe my perceptions have been all wrong, I'm just see you in the anti God camp a lot.

Yes, your perception is fooling you.

 

[Chriliman]

I don't claim to know how the universe started. But invoking a supernatural god as the creator or the first cause only begs the question as to what created the creator? It brings more questions than answers.

Not if the creator has no beginning and no end. How many times have I said that God is eternal and infinite?

 

[Colter]

I don't claim to know how the universe started. But invoking a supernatural god as the creator or the first cause only begs the question as to what created the creator? It brings more questions than answers.

The creator is infinite and eternal, without beginning or end.

 

[Chriliman]

Well this is what you originally asked.

You claim it's wrong, but you can't use logic to show that the existence of this being would be impossible. Why is that?

Which is basically akin to asking to disprove god as logically showing its existence to be impossible would disprove the concept.

So I posed to you the same question to yourself, can you disprove a supernatural super leprechaun with logic? You failed to answer claiming because you didn't consider the idea rational you would not bother.

This particular person was saying they know God does not exist. Which is a flat out irrational statement, thus my response to him was necessary.

You're not claiming to know that God does not exist, so I don't need to remind you that you can't actually prove that God does not exist because it's logically impossible to prove.

In your case, I'm asking you to explain the origins of the universe in a way that makes more sense than an eternal infinite God.

Which you can't do, so what basis does your argument against God actually have?

 

[TheQuietRiot]

Not if the creator has no beginning and no end. How many times have I said that God is eternal and infinite?

That's a very big, and unsubstantiated if.

 

[TheQuietRiot]

You're not claiming to know that God does not exist, so I don't need to remind you that you can't actually prove that God does not exist because it's logically impossible to prove.

So it it logically impossible to prove a super leprechaun to not exist?

In your case, I'm asking you to explain the origins of the universe in a way that makes more sense than an eternal infinite God.

Which you can't do, so what basis does your argument against God actually have?

My basis is simple.

I see no evidence for the existence of a god(s).

So I don't believe a god exists.

 

[Chriliman]

That's a very big, and unsubstantiated if.

Yes, but its a necessary if to honestly consider if you really want to figure all this out. If you honestly don't want to figure all this out then neither God nor I can help you. You'll be left in the dark, literally.