Atheism; An Intellectual Dead End

[ding]

The universe we are in right now... had a beginning. Yes, time literally began when space and time came into existence. That's why they say space AND time. It is represented as four dimensions. There was no such thing as time or space before that. That's what we know.

If I can't get you to accept that, how in the hell do you believe it is possible that I could convince you of God?

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

Now you are just being silly.

That's your answer? Those were serious questions. If you can't answer them that's cognitive dissonance

No. They weren't serious questions.

Yes they were. You can't imagine time before our universe. I can even though it's unknowable I believe that time existed and so must you if you believe God is eternal.

I just think time and space is eternal. No God necessary

Not possible. Time has no meaning outside of this universe. In fact, it is not even clear if time exists, it's called the trouble with time. Anyway, none of that makes a hill of beans difference when it comes to our observable universe. We know that the universe started in an extremely hot and dense state and has expanded and cooled since that time. What happened before that point, science cannot know.

 

[sealybobo]

So, your solution to the illogic of your position is special pleading. Every effect must have a cause...except your mythical God. He's "special". That's what is known as a logical fallacy, my friend.

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Time and space are eternal no God necessary. What happened before our universe and what happens after are unknowable but it's funny God gets to be eternal but time and space can't.

In every argument you make you always leave something out. I believe you are willfully ignorantly lying for the lord

 

[ding]

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause.

Yes, the first cause which is outside of this universe is not bound by the natural laws of our universe.

 

[MaryL]

Are Atheists able to use rational thought, deductive reasoning, and scrupulous logic to substantiate and legitimize their perceptions? Or are they simply lacking a perception that most people experience without the need for rationalization? Are they spiritually dumb?

Are theists able to use rational thought, use deductive reasoning, and yadda yadda? Ban The teaching of Evolution to condemning Galileo's teachings as heretical? So are we going somewhere here? Religion burns people to death and crashes planes into buildings, so if there IS a more rational way of thought and behavior, it isn't religious. And religion isn't in any way in a position to point out who's who among the irrational given what they have done and are doing now.

 

[ding]

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Time and space are eternal no God necessary. What happened before our universe and what happens after are unknowable but it's funny God gets to be eternal but time and space can't.

In every argument you make you always leave something out. I believe you are willfully ignorantly lying for the lord

I am sorry to burst your bubble, but time and space are an artifact of this universe. They do not exist outside of it.

 

[Czernobog]

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause.

Yes, the first cause which is outside of this universe is not bound by the natural laws of our universe.

Back to special pleading. Your cause is "special". It's "eternal", and not subject to physics. This is the problem with insisting on your imaginary God; ultimately you an only support your position by relying on logigcal fallacy, and irrational arguments.

 

[sealybobo]

Because you're leaving out before our time and space. Was God born 14 billion years ago too? You think this is his first or last universe?

Why do you put God in a box?

Now you are just being silly.

That's your answer? Those were serious questions. If you can't answer them that's cognitive dissonance

No. They weren't serious questions.

Yes they were. You can't imagine time before our universe. I can even though it's unknowable I believe that time existed and so must you if you believe God is eternal.

I just think time and space is eternal. No God necessary

Not possible. Time has no meaning outside of this universe. In fact, it is not even clear if time exists, it's called the trouble with time. Anyway, none of that has a hill of beans when it comes to our observable universe. We know that the universe started in an extremely hot and dense state and has expanded and cooled since that time. What happened before that point, science cannot know.

Yes possible.

It has no meaning for you!

And yes, it isn't clear. Finally we are agreeing.

What happened before the universe is unknowable so why are you claiming to know a God existed before our universe?

 

[sealybobo]

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Time and space are eternal no God necessary. What happened before our universe and what happens after are unknowable but it's funny God gets to be eternal but time and space can't.

In every argument you make you always leave something out. I believe you are willfully ignorantly lying for the lord

I am sorry to burst your bubble, but time and space are an artifact of this universe. They do not exist outside of it.

Free your mind and the rest will follow.

In order to learn the truth you may have to think outside the box(universe)

 

[ding]

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause.

Yes, the first cause which is outside of this universe is not bound by the natural laws of our universe.

Back to special pleading. Your cause is "special". It's "eternal", and not subject to physics. This is the problem with insisting on your imaginary God; ultimately you an only support your position by relying on logigcal fallacy, and irrational arguments.

Nothing outside of space and time is subject to physics.

 

[ding]

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Time and space are eternal no God necessary. What happened before our universe and what happens after are unknowable but it's funny God gets to be eternal but time and space can't.

In every argument you make you always leave something out. I believe you are willfully ignorantly lying for the lord

I am sorry to burst your bubble, but time and space are an artifact of this universe. They do not exist outside of it.

Free your mind and the rest will follow.

In order to learn the truth you may have to think outside the box(universe)

I agree with that and that is exactly what I did too. The Truth will set you free.

 

[ding]

Now you are just being silly.

That's your answer? Those were serious questions. If you can't answer them that's cognitive dissonance

No. They weren't serious questions.

Yes they were. You can't imagine time before our universe. I can even though it's unknowable I believe that time existed and so must you if you believe God is eternal.

I just think time and space is eternal. No God necessary

Not possible. Time has no meaning outside of this universe. In fact, it is not even clear if time exists, it's called the trouble with time. Anyway, none of that has a hill of beans when it comes to our observable universe. We know that the universe started in an extremely hot and dense state and has expanded and cooled since that time. What happened before that point, science cannot know.

Yes possible.

It has no meaning for you!

And yes, it isn't clear. Finally we are agreeing.

What happened before the universe is unknowable so why are you claiming to know a God existed before our universe?

Because He is the first cause. He is existence.

“In my life as scientist I have come upon two major problems which, though rooted in science, though they would occur in this form only to a scientist, project beyond science, and are I think ultimately insoluble as science. That is hardly to be wondered at, since one involves consciousness and the other, cosmology.

The consciousness problem was hardly avoidable by one who has spent most of his life studying mechanisms of vision. We have learned a lot, we hope to learn much more; but none of it touches or even points, however tentatively, in the direction of what it means to see. Our observations in human eyes and nervous systems and in those of frogs are basically much alike. I know that I see; but does a frog see? It reacts to light; so do cameras, garage doors, any number of photoelectric devices. But does it see? Is it aware that it is reacting? There is nothing I can do as a scientist to answer that question, no way that I can identify either the presence or absence of consciousness. I believe consciousness to be a permanent condition that involves all sensation and perception. Consciousness seems to me to be wholly impervious to science.

The second problem involves the special properties of our universe. Life seems increasingly to be part of the order of nature. We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds life?

It has occurred to me lately - I must confess with some shock at first to my scientific sensibilities - that both questions might be brought into some degree of congruence. This is with the assumption that Mind, rather than emerging as a late outgrowth in the evolution of life, has existed always as the matrix, the source and condition of physical reality - that the stuff of which physical reality is composed is mind-stuff. It is Mind that has composed a physical universe that breeds life, and so eventually evolves creatures that know and create.”

George Wald, 1984, “Life and Mind in the Universe”, International Journal of Quantum Chemistry: Quantum Biology Symposium 11, 1984: 1-15.

 

[ding]

Good Lord, must you continually misstate my positions? Oh, yeah... you do. Actually if you notice I didn't state God, lol. I defined the solution and you made the connection to God. On a side note, our equations breakdown at the singularity and yield infinities. It seems that even our equations know the answer to the first cause.

And your solution is a logical fallacy. the "first cause' is speciual. It's different. I don't care what you label that difference ("eternal"), it is still a texbook case of special pleading. As to your not mentioning God in that particular post, it is irrelevant. Your entire argument has been to "prove" the existence of God. So what, now, suddenly, that "first cause" isn't God? What is it? Fred?

Logically.... there is no other solution except something that is eternal.

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Time and space are eternal no God necessary. What happened before our universe and what happens after are unknowable but it's funny God gets to be eternal but time and space can't.

In every argument you make you always leave something out. I believe you are willfully ignorantly lying for the lord

I have not left anything out, that is you making an excuse for your performance. See external locus of control for more information.

 

[ding]

In order to learn the truth you may have to think outside the box(universe)

Was the irony of this lost on you?

 

[sartre play]

Is that the end all, that if you doubt or don't believe then God will not except you, and your going to hell?

 

[ding]

Is that the end all, that if you doubt or don't believe then God will not except you, and your going to hell?

Don't know. Don't even know what heaven and hell is other than being with or separated from God.

 

[Czernobog]

Actually, there is. That you are wrong about the existence of a "First Cause". Then there is no need tfor a special pleading, now is there?

Logically... there is a first cause.

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause.

Yes, the first cause which is outside of this universe is not bound by the natural laws of our universe.

Back to special pleading. Your cause is "special". It's "eternal", and not subject to physics. This is the problem with insisting on your imaginary God; ultimately you an only support your position by relying on logigcal fallacy, and irrational arguments.

Nothing outside of space and time is subject to physics.

You're absolutely right. Nothing is subject to the laws of physics, because nothing is all that exists outside of time and space.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

 

[ding]

Logically... there is a first cause.

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause.

Yes, the first cause which is outside of this universe is not bound by the natural laws of our universe.

Back to special pleading. Your cause is "special". It's "eternal", and not subject to physics. This is the problem with insisting on your imaginary God; ultimately you an only support your position by relying on logigcal fallacy, and irrational arguments.

Nothing outside of space and time is subject to physics.

You're absolutely right. Nothing is subject to the laws of physics, because nothing is all that exists outside of time and space.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Nothing that we can directly observe. Yes. That's where faith comes in.

 

[ding]

my point is science does not answer the question 'what is the original cause?'

Ok. and until just over 100 years ago science couldn't answer the question "how does the sun work?"

Science isn't an object or a source...it's a process and method of discovery and knowledge.

No...we don't know how the universe came about or the details. Maybe we never will. But "Goddidit" isn't an answer. It doesn't mean anything more than "We don't know."
If God created the universe...how? and where was God's existence before the universe was created, and can that even be explained in a way that would make sense?

"Goddidit" is an answer.....if there is a first cause/supreme being then why not call it God? 'nothing' sure doesn't cut it....

also who or what do you think made the universe so orderly?....who or what created all the scientific laws that govern our physical world? scientists sure don't have the answer to that one...

You get that the universe isn't orderly, right?

It looks pretty darn orderly to me.

If you say so..

Thanks. Yes, I do.

 

[Muhammed]

I am an athiest. I simply do not believe in supernatural entities, gods, angels, demons supernatural events or anything of that sort. My attitude is that science can explain everything, eventually.

And our attitude is that God created science.

What is God, in your opinion?

 

[Czernobog]

Logically there can't be a First Cause. Unless you are suggesting that the laws of physics are wrong, and that every effect doesn't require a cause.

Yes, the first cause which is outside of this universe is not bound by the natural laws of our universe.

Back to special pleading. Your cause is "special". It's "eternal", and not subject to physics. This is the problem with insisting on your imaginary God; ultimately you an only support your position by relying on logigcal fallacy, and irrational arguments.

Nothing outside of space and time is subject to physics.

You're absolutely right. Nothing is subject to the laws of physics, because nothing is all that exists outside of time and space.

Sent from my 5054N using Tapatalk

Nothing that we can directly observe. Yes. That's where faith comes in.

Which is a polite way of saying believing in fantasies. Sorry. There is nothing outside of Time and Space, and wishing it so does not make it so.