It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by 547000
What if God is the primary cause of all things? No causes before God since God is the root of the event tree, by definition. "I am the Alpha and the Omega."
How can time ever begin? Only measurements of time relative to a reference event can be measured. How can we absolutely measure time and not relatively to material singularity?
Do you think the universe is a closed system and is only material in nature?
The demographics of atheism are difficult to quantify. Different people interpret "atheist" and related terms differently, and it can be hard to draw boundaries between atheism, non-religious beliefs, and non-theistic religious and spiritual beliefs. Furthermore, atheists may not report themselves as such, to prevent suffering from social stigma, discrimination, and persecution in some countries, or, in cases where the situation is reversed, religious people may keep their beliefs secret in pro-atheist societies. Despite these problems, one study classified 2.5% of the world's population as atheists, and a separate 12.7% as non-religious.
Originally posted by Furbs
The thread was summed up for me when the OP compared God, Santa Claus, Tinkerbell, and the Tooth Fairy.
Originally posted by Watts
To accept that something as infinitely complex as the universe can suddenly appear for no reason, means that its equally possible for a 3 eyed unicorn with diamond for skin to suddenly appear in a field since that would be vastly inferior. Why don't we observe things randomly popping into existence now since by what is being implied, its totally possible? Was there a time limit for spontaneous appearance of matter?
As I see it, 0+0 ≠ 1 and I see no way around that. An infinitely empty nothing should have remained that way.
How can you establish that though? Is that not like saying there's a limit to how high a number you can count? Maybe the "before" is completely beyond our comprehension but when presented with two choices:
1. Some form of entity gave way, by some means, to everything that exists.
2. Nothing upon nothing upon nothing, suddenly, randomly, and unexplainably materialized into something tangible out of nowhere that could then be "exploded" by some unknown, equally mysterious catalyst, into everything.
I have to go with the one that makes the most sense, to me anyways, of the two.
To even say, there was no "before the Big Bang" isn't that the establishment of a rule? And how can there be a rule in a total nothing? Would that not be like saying, "There was no party at the club lastnight, but the dress code for this non-party required a collar'ed shirt and slacks"?
I'm not a physicist or science wiz by any means so if I have fallen short in my explanation please forgive me, I'm just giving my view and beliefs on existence. Maybe I should have stated that. I don't mean to pass anything that I say off as fact, I wouldn't dare be that arrogant, these are strictly my beliefs and reasons for believing what I do.
...but what I'm asking is, how could the greatest explosion to have ever happened cause everything that exists to perfectly(down to the sub-sub-atomic level) organize from what could have only been the equally greatest, most mind-exploding chaos ever. If a nuclear explosion, which doesn't even qualify as a fraction of the Big Bang's blast is only capable of destruction, how can an explosion that was a "bajillion" times greater in force have the finesse to allow for the formation of all that there is and result in creation? And would that mean that if I could search back far enough along humanity's "family tree", I'd see that our great great to the bajillionth power grandfather was some atom spewing solar flare somewhere in space?
I'm sorry but I don't buy this. To my understanding, when Einstein did the calculations that demonstrated the possibility of black holes, the related equation ended with an "infinity", which is total nonsense in physics. If there have been new findings, forgive my ignorance but as far as I know at the moment, black holes go completely against the established and accepted rules.
Behavior changes, ok Ill accept that. A spinal connection suddenly repairing only AFTER prayer after extended paralysis without any sort of recent rehab work, I have to give that up to a higher power. I will try to track down examples of miracles because I do understand that I need to show tangible evidence of what I'm saying.
"Actually it's because it's irrational to believe in the existence of something which has no evidence whatsoever to establish its existence."
That is an opinion which you are entitled to.
"There is no logic to believe that atheists actually secretly believe in a posthumous justice deity, but they just pretend not to believe in it so they can sin."
That was my opinion, based on conversations I've had with atheists while attending VCU.
I was trying to convey in simplest terms the logic behind why I said what I said about atheists non-belief. No one wants to believe that they are in the wrong, think about how often you've tried to justify to yourself something wrong that you've done. Its usually only in the face of inescapable justice or evidence that we were in fact the wrong ones that we will fully accept blame for something we've done. The wife-beater blames the wife because she did a, b, c, d which provoked him. The thief steals because they feel their desire for the item is more important than the law. We break the speed limit because we think we're good drivers and are in a hurry.
Belief in God doesn't leave room for those self-imposed exceptions that we are ALL guilty of, thats what I was trying to say... but that too is my opinion.
Originally posted by 547000
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx
No, he is not pulling a strawmen nor is he begging the question. There is sufficient evidence that many atheists claim lack of belief rather than disbelief when backed into a corner. There is sufficient evidence for this and I don't think his premise is based on insufficient evidence. You can peruse google and find that many people define atheism as a lack of belief in God. You can get involved in many debates on the nature of atheism and see for yourself the premise is not so far-fetched. Perhaps you should do that and get back to me. I presumed nothing about you, but you falsely accused me of that. Obviously he doesn't mean all atheists but you are treating it like that is what he meant. Who is playing word games now?
Nice strawman, but that is not what I meant about google, and you know it, but you are misrepresenting my argument.
Originally posted by traditionaldrummer
Well, I didn't establish it - it's the work of physicists. Time and space both began with the expansion event of the Big Bang. I am with you in that it's difficult to ponder, though the presumably easier explanation of a deity zapping it into existence seems implausible, untestable and unsatisfying (to me).
Originally posted by JAGx1981
You speak of big bang with such authority, regardless of what we think we know for SURE happened, it still is just a theory.