Who here is an atheist?

[BULLDOG]

So. Big Bang.

What caused the "Big Bang"?

Did the Big Bang bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

What caused "God"?

Did God bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which is eternal and unchanging.

Whatever it is... it has those attributes. I can think of several things that meet this description but they are more like verbs than nouns. Which is another clue to the puzzle.

You could be right, but I don't think so. I see no reason why it has to be eternal. It, whether that it is a natural occurrence or a God, only has to predate the creation of the universe. It could have changed or gone away since that time. The Christian God has drastically changed from the vengeful God of the Old Testament to the loving and forgiving God that Jesus describes.

I don't see any other way to stop the what came before that do loop.

That is one of the major differences between me and hard core bible thumpers. I'm content to say "this is as much as we have evidence to indicate for now, but we are constantly looking for more answers" but religious nuts say I demand a complete answer now, and since I don't know, it has to be a magic fairy with a beard. You could be right. There could be an all powerful God, but there just isn't much evidence to indicate that, and there is no reason to believe that is the only possibility.

 

[Tuatara]

Who here is an atheist? It seems to me my belief in god is unfounded and without proof. I know that the universe was created by the big bang and the processes of science. Why on earth do I cling to 2,000 year old sheep herders writing?

This writing promotes hatred, idiocy and backwardness. I am so very close to just saying fuck it and becoming a atheist!!!

What I've read in the bible should never be read to a child as it is fucking savage stoneaged crap. And you fuckers bitch about sex ed??? really? The bible encourages rape, murder of babies and rape of women. On and on. Incest is in the bible with lott fucking his daughters, murder of ones brother and genocide of millions of people.

Just so you know, militant atheists like yourself are the new new nazis. Seriously, you are out there on the extreme edge of the spectrum and you make atheists all over look bad.

FLAG ON THE PLAY:

​

The truth hurts.

Militant atheists like yourself condemn respect for people who believe in God. You're real dicks.

Oh the irony.

 

[ding]

So. Big Bang.

What caused the "Big Bang"?

Did the Big Bang bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

What caused "God"?

Did God bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which is eternal and unchanging.

Whatever it is... it has those attributes. I can think of several things that meet this description but they are more like verbs than nouns. Which is another clue to the puzzle.

You could be right, but I don't think so. I see no reason why it has to be eternal. It, whether that it is a natural occurrence or a God, only has to predate the creation of the universe. It could have changed or gone away since that time. The Christian God has drastically changed from the vengeful God of the Old Testament to the loving and forgiving God that Jesus describes.

I don't see any other way to stop the what came before that do loop.

That is one of the major differences between me and hard core bible thumpers. I'm content to say "this is as much as we have evidence to indicate for now, but we are constantly looking for more answers" but religious nuts say I demand a complete answer now, and since I don't know, it has to be a magic fairy with a beard. You could be right. There could be an all powerful God, but there just isn't much evidence to indicate that, and there is no reason to believe that is the only possibility.

I didn't think that was what I was doing. I've spent quite few years working through all this. It's more like a journey. If it makes you feel any better I don't believe in a magic fairy with a beard. My picture is more like pure consciousness or intelligence whichever you prefer.

But let's be honest here, ok? Every person here is here to validate their beliefs.

 

[Tuatara]

So the whole Zeuss argument is BS.

Except to his/its believers. The same situation all sky fairy believers encounter.

Where is the church of Zeus again?

One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me.

 

[ding]

Who here is an atheist? It seems to me my belief in god is unfounded and without proof. I know that the universe was created by the big bang and the processes of science. Why on earth do I cling to 2,000 year old sheep herders writing?

This writing promotes hatred, idiocy and backwardness. I am so very close to just saying fuck it and becoming a atheist!!!

What I've read in the bible should never be read to a child as it is fucking savage stoneaged crap. And you fuckers bitch about sex ed??? really? The bible encourages rape, murder of babies and rape of women. On and on. Incest is in the bible with lott fucking his daughters, murder of ones brother and genocide of millions of people.

Just so you know, militant atheists like yourself are the new new nazis. Seriously, you are out there on the extreme edge of the spectrum and you make atheists all over look bad.

FLAG ON THE PLAY:

​

The truth hurts.

Militant atheists like yourself condemn respect for people who believe in God. You're real dicks.

Oh the irony.

That might be true if I wasn't such a nice guy.

 

[ding]

So the whole Zeuss argument is BS.

Except to his/its believers. The same situation all sky fairy believers encounter.

Where is the church of Zeus again?

One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me.

I'm not up for parsing words, bro.

The point was made and stands.

 

[BULLDOG]

What caused "God"?

Did God bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which is eternal and unchanging.

Whatever it is... it has those attributes. I can think of several things that meet this description but they are more like verbs than nouns. Which is another clue to the puzzle.

You could be right, but I don't think so. I see no reason why it has to be eternal. It, whether that it is a natural occurrence or a God, only has to predate the creation of the universe. It could have changed or gone away since that time. The Christian God has drastically changed from the vengeful God of the Old Testament to the loving and forgiving God that Jesus describes.

I don't see any other way to stop the what came before that do loop.

That is one of the major differences between me and hard core bible thumpers. I'm content to say "this is as much as we have evidence to indicate for now, but we are constantly looking for more answers" but religious nuts say I demand a complete answer now, and since I don't know, it has to be a magic fairy with a beard. You could be right. There could be an all powerful God, but there just isn't much evidence to indicate that, and there is no reason to believe that is the only possibility.

I didn't think that was what I was doing. I've spent quite few years working through all this. It's more like a journey. If it makes you feel any better I don't believe in a magic fairy with a beard. My picture is more like pure consciousness or intelligence whichever you prefer.

But let's be honest here, ok? Every person here is here to validate their beliefs.

Yes. The claim that a God is the only answer to the existence of the universe has not been validated. You are free to believe what you want, but don't expect someone less gullible to agree with you.

 

[BradVesp]

So. Big Bang.

What caused the "Big Bang"?

Did the Big Bang bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

What caused "God"?

Did God bring existence into existence? Or did something exist before that?

If so, how?

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which is eternal and unchanging.

Whatever it is... it has those attributes. I can think of several things that meet this description but they are more like verbs than nouns. Which is another clue to the puzzle.

You could be right, but I don't think so. I see no reason why it has to be eternal. It, whether that it is a natural occurrence or a God, only has to predate the creation of the universe. It could have changed or gone away since that time. The Christian God has drastically changed from the vengeful God of the Old Testament to the loving and forgiving God that Jesus describes.

I don't see any other way to stop the what came before that do loop.

That is one of the major differences between me and hard core bible thumpers. I'm content to say "this is as much as we have evidence to indicate for now, but we are constantly looking for more answers" but religious nuts say I demand a complete answer now, and since I don't know, it has to be a magic fairy with a beard. You could be right. There could be an all powerful God, but there just isn't much evidence to indicate that, and there is no reason to believe that is the only possibility.

Obviously people should stop getting overhyped about who's guy's up in the sky. If we do more about being attentive to the time we have here it would create a better place for us to spend our lives. IT's our current manners minute to minute that make the world what it is (that and the trees and water and stuff). That's the way I see it. Sadly I do a poor job with those manners lately.
Either way I'll find out about the invisible sky creatures when my senses leave me if I get new ones.

 

[ding]

The only solution to the first cause conundrum is something which is eternal and unchanging.

Whatever it is... it has those attributes. I can think of several things that meet this description but they are more like verbs than nouns. Which is another clue to the puzzle.

You could be right, but I don't think so. I see no reason why it has to be eternal. It, whether that it is a natural occurrence or a God, only has to predate the creation of the universe. It could have changed or gone away since that time. The Christian God has drastically changed from the vengeful God of the Old Testament to the loving and forgiving God that Jesus describes.

I don't see any other way to stop the what came before that do loop.

That is one of the major differences between me and hard core bible thumpers. I'm content to say "this is as much as we have evidence to indicate for now, but we are constantly looking for more answers" but religious nuts say I demand a complete answer now, and since I don't know, it has to be a magic fairy with a beard. You could be right. There could be an all powerful God, but there just isn't much evidence to indicate that, and there is no reason to believe that is the only possibility.

I didn't think that was what I was doing. I've spent quite few years working through all this. It's more like a journey. If it makes you feel any better I don't believe in a magic fairy with a beard. My picture is more like pure consciousness or intelligence whichever you prefer.

But let's be honest here, ok? Every person here is here to validate their beliefs.

Yes. The claim that a God is the only answer to the existence of the universe has not been validated. You are free to believe what you want, but don't expect someone less gullible to agree with you.

You think I am more gullible than you because I believe there is a higher power than man?

Is that your only measure?

Atheists are the worst ones about validating their religion.

 

[BULLDOG]

You could be right, but I don't think so. I see no reason why it has to be eternal. It, whether that it is a natural occurrence or a God, only has to predate the creation of the universe. It could have changed or gone away since that time. The Christian God has drastically changed from the vengeful God of the Old Testament to the loving and forgiving God that Jesus describes.

I don't see any other way to stop the what came before that do loop.

That is one of the major differences between me and hard core bible thumpers. I'm content to say "this is as much as we have evidence to indicate for now, but we are constantly looking for more answers" but religious nuts say I demand a complete answer now, and since I don't know, it has to be a magic fairy with a beard. You could be right. There could be an all powerful God, but there just isn't much evidence to indicate that, and there is no reason to believe that is the only possibility.

I didn't think that was what I was doing. I've spent quite few years working through all this. It's more like a journey. If it makes you feel any better I don't believe in a magic fairy with a beard. My picture is more like pure consciousness or intelligence whichever you prefer.

But let's be honest here, ok? Every person here is here to validate their beliefs.

Yes. The claim that a God is the only answer to the existence of the universe has not been validated. You are free to believe what you want, but don't expect someone less gullible to agree with you.

You think I am more gullible than you because I believe there is a higher power than man?

Is that your only measure?

Atheists are the worst ones about validating their religion.

You don't even know what an atheist is. An atheist does not believe in any god. He doesn't hate god any more than he hates unicorns. An atheist has no religion. Until you figure that out, you will never be able to engage in a reasonable discussion about the subject.

 

[BradVesp]

You can't have a reasonable discussion because there is no actual/ real topic to the discussion and, so, no logical path to focus a discussion.

 

[Czernobog]

Not true at all. While yes, it was small, people do refute that it was a singularity.
Then you arent oayong attention. I absolutely believe our observable universe had a beginning. But "all there is" may or may not have had a beginning. People are rightfully objecting to your authoritative declaration that it did have a beginning. You're doing so is not scientific, so you are incorrect to say that anyone is disputing anything scientific to refute your authoritative declaration.

You must not be reading all the posts then.

The best scientific explanation we have today is the universe had a beginning.

Which leads us to the philosophical discussion of what started it.

Which leads us to the first cause conundrum.

Which is what we are discussing. Except some people don't want to have that discussion so they shit all over science.

No. It's. Not! One theory about the origin of the universe says this. There are other theories that do not. The only thing we can say about the formation of the universe,. and what did, or did not, come before is We. Don't. Know. Why does the phrase, "We don't know" bother you so much?!?! Why is ti so anathema to you to suply admit that there are things about our universe that we just don't know, yet?

We do know the universe had a beginning. The 2nd Law of Thermo requires it.

There is an important proviso included with the Laws of Thermodynamics that you are ignoring. We distinguish between the universe as a whole, and that finite part of it over which light has had time to travel to us since the beginning. When we say that we want to explain the form of "the universe", what we mean is the visible universe. There is a vast, unknown expanse of the universe that may well hold answers, and new mysteries that completely destroy evrything we presume to know about the universe. In short, you are presenting the universe as a "closed system". There is absolutely no evidence to support that presumption.

A cyclic universe runs into the second law of thermodynamics, which says that any system left to itself eventually reaches the state of maximum disorder, called thermal equilibrium. So if the universe were cyclic, then in every cycle, the disorder in the universe would increase. Eventually the universe would reach this thermal equilibrium state, which is a totally featureless mixture of everything—this is not what we see around us.

In the Beginning Was the Beginning

"A cyclic universe runs into the second law of thermodynamics, which says that any system left to itself eventually reaches the state of maximum disorder,"

The problem is that this is a misrepresentation of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. The second law of Thermodynamics demands that any closed system left to itself eventually reaches the state of maximum disorder. See, that omitted word closed, entirely changes the dynamics. That is why you keep leaving that important word out.

 

[BradVesp]

Maybe a discussion about the sun's existence wound be more ...um...enlightening. ((rim shot))

 

[Meriweather]

You don't even know what an atheist is. An atheist does not believe in any god. He doesn't hate god any more than he hates unicorns. An atheist has no religion. Until you figure that out, you will never be able to engage in a reasonable discussion about the subject.

I know what an atheist is. I am married to one, and growing up, there were atheists in my family. None of these people visit an internet forum about religion any more than they visit internet forums about unicorns. I will not broad-brush all atheists who frequent religion forums as more bitter and resentful than atheistic, but frequently they are. True atheists do not ridicule God as a Magic Sky Fairy, nor are they resentful or bitter towards those who believe. True atheists know why they do not believe in God, and they understand why others do. Plus their understanding rises far above the atheist internet pablum of, "People believe in God because they are scared of death."

Again, there are a few Internet atheists here I greatly respect because they are much like the atheists in my life--and I am thankful for them. Mostly, "Internet Atheists on Religion Forums" give atheists a bad name and reinforce stereotypes of atheists, which is too bad and unfair to so many atheists.

 

[Tuatara]

So the whole Zeuss argument is BS.

Except to his/its believers. The same situation all sky fairy believers encounter.

Where is the church of Zeus again?

One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me.

I'm not up for parsing words, bro.

The point was made and stands.

In which post?

 

[ding]

So the whole Zeuss argument is BS.

Except to his/its believers. The same situation all sky fairy believers encounter.

Where is the church of Zeus again?

One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me.

I'm not up for parsing words, bro.

The point was made and stands.

In which post?

Post #81

 

[Tuatara]

Except to his/its believers. The same situation all sky fairy believers encounter.

Where is the church of Zeus again?

One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me.

I'm not up for parsing words, bro.

The point was made and stands.

In which post?

Post #81

That is the post I quoted you in where I responded with "One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me."

How is that making a point? You need to get the simple things explained before you can move on any further.

 

[ding]

Where is the church of Zeus again?

One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me.

I'm not up for parsing words, bro.

The point was made and stands.

In which post?

Post #81

That is the post I quoted you in where I responded with "One needs a church to have a religion? This is news to me."

How is that making a point? You need to get the simple things explained before you can move on any further.

Because there is no religion based on Zeus.

I thought that was self evident.

 

[Czernobog]

See, this is why it is so easy to overcome Ding's arguments. Because all of them are founded in basic unprovable presumptions. Once you remove those presumptions, his arguments fall apart.

The leading cosmological model for how the universe began has been disproved by you?

I don't think so.

What you think is irrelevant. The Laws of Thermodynamics is very specific that they only apply to a closed system. There is no evidence that the universe is a closed system. In fact, because its expansion is assumed to be infinite, this would be evidence that it is not a closed system. As it interacts with whatever is outside of the universe, as it continues to expand, it is possible that it is an open system. We really don't know. Since your entire argument hinges on a presumption that, once again, you cannot prove, your argument lacks a logical foundation.

You do that a lot.

 

[Czernobog]

See, this is why it is so easy to overcome Ding's arguments. Because all of them are founded in basic unprovable presumptions. Once you remove those presumptions, his arguments fall apart.

You didn't overcome anything.

You are just stalling because you don't want to have the philosophical discussion.

You are afraid of what the evolution of matter has to say about the laws of nature.

Of course I did. Your refusal to accept that your presumption is flawed in no way alters the fact that it is flawed.

And no. I don't want to have a philosophical discussion. Study of the universe is a scientific study. You want to argue philosophy, feel free to start a discussion, and see who wants to join you. If you are going to discuss the nature of the universe, we'll stick to what we can scientifically prove. Thank you very much.