Atheism

[This_person]

Where do you think God came from?

Something outside of the universe. Something beyond space as we understand it, beyond time as we understand it.

But, those are questions and answers for one of the threads on Christianity. This is a thread on atheism. Where do YOU think time, space, and matter came from?

 

[This_person]

You've reduced my point from a "channeling a lifetime of experience and searching", to:

*walks outside*
*doesn't see God*
"Welp - there's no God."
*walks back inside*.


I know there is snow, because I've seen it. I know there are electrons because electricity can be measured.

Today, February 27, 2017, we don't KNOW electrons exist. We see the effects of electrons and thus we assume they exist. But, there is a huge school of thought that electrons only exist when we interact with them - that the testing to see if they exist in essence creates them, but they are something different when we're not mucking around to see what they are.

Yes, I know the whole "that was as believable as firing a gun into tissue paper and the paper reflecting the bullet" thing. Testing. Are they there? Are they in the Bohr model or a different one? We don't know, we assume, based on the observable evidence.

Nobody has seen a quark, and by their nature, we never will, but quarks are still quantifiable. They can be measured. There is evidence of their existence. There is no faith that quarks exist. It's simple math... Well, it's actually extremely complex math - but still just math. I don't have faith that they exist. I know they exist because there is objective, tested, reliable evidence of their existence. There is snow somewhere on earth at all times.

There are assumptions they exist to make the math work. We have no idea really what a quark is any more than we know what an electron is. We know the math works - the observable evidence fits the assumptions.

We know hydrogen in the right concentrations is highly explosive, and that it takes oxygen to make a fire. We then throw hydrogen and oxygen at virtually all fires to put them out.

I haven't seen the wind, but the hundreds of trees that decorated the streets of Waldorf and La Plata this weekend are proof that wind is.

But, can you dance with all the colors of the wind?

Seriously, though, we can quantify air. I know it is like sex - no one really knows it's there until it's not.

Say what now?

Poorly worded. Read the soda-can example. It makes more sense.

Which requires no faith, beyond trusting that your brain has the capacity to reason things out.

The premise of your argument, as I understand it, is that atheism requires faith - indeed, it requires as much faith as believing in a God does.
My argument is that it does not.

This is really the discussion we're having - what is faith and what is not. I say, if you can't prove your assumptions through anything more than "the observations fit the evidence, and the math works" then you don't have facts, you have faith. When I turn on my light switch, the LED gets brighter and I can see. I know that's because I applied voltage across it, and that voltage causes something to happen that I can measure with an ammeter. Based on time, experience, and some assumptions I can predictably and with repeatability make the light appear over and over again. I can chop that light up very quickly and send it down some fiber, and you can see the results on your screen. But, I can only prove to you the repeatability and math to show it is electrons flowing that make the light. Because, I only know electrons exist when I test for them, and when I test for them they act differently than when I don't. There is testing interference to even "see" the electrons. I simply have faith that the observations, repeatability, and predictability means our reasoning is accurate, and use it as a working model to go forward. That doesn't mean it is accurate, it is faith that it is accurate because of the repeatability of it.

That's faith. We have faith there are black holes. We have faith there is dark matter. We have faith there is anti-matter. We have faith there is Californium, but we've only made it for like a gazziliionth of a gazzilionth of a second. It's not like there's a Californium mine out in Tulsa. We have a lot of strong faith, but that's really all it is.

Scientifically and logically, If there is no evidence that God exists, there is no reason to believe that He does. Scientific method, Occam's Razor, and all the other little theorems that apply. No faith. Show me evidence (beyond the fact that sunsets are pretty, and spiritual enlightenment found in our children's eyes, and the observation that there's no effing way life could have evolved as quickly as it has without some form of divine intervention) of God's existence, and then you'll have some scientific weight to add to the mix, then - and only then - we can say deniers are clutching to their faith.

What I read you to say is that your faith has scientific observations, and a religious or spiritual person's faith has emotional and intuitional observations. I do not deny any of that. If I am reading you incorrectly, let me know. I am merely saying that that distinction doesn't make one any more accurate than the other. Until someone can provide that reproducible, peer-reviewable experiment that can generate life from the conditions that existed on Earth the instant before life was generated (when we create a time machine to know what those conditions were), and life is generated, and that life is able to one day think, and to mutate to at least as many species of animal, insect, plant, etc., life has existed on this planet, then I'll believe it is somewhat provable. Until then, it is faith based on observation of events. Just like my faith in a higher power is.

An atheists faith is a vacuum. There is nothing in a vacuum, even though a vacuum can take up space.

To me, that is the difference between saying "I don't think there is a higher power" and "there is no higher power." A definitive statement against a theory, a hypothesis, a position. There can be no definitive statement that there is no higher power any more than there can be a definitive statement that there is. Both of those are faith.

 

[vraiblonde]

Where do YOU think time, space, and matter came from?

Same place you think God came from.

As in, it's always been there, it's infinite, and I really have no idea of its origination. But let's separate time and space from matter. Time and space are abstracts and the jury is still out as to whether or not they are merely constructs of the mind. Matter, on the other hand, is concrete. It has mass and takes up what we call "space".

 

[This_person]

Same place you think God came from.

As in, it's always been there, it's infinite, and I really have no idea of its origination. But let's separate time and space from matter. Time and space are abstracts and the jury is still out as to whether or not they are merely constructs of the mind. Matter, on the other hand, is concrete. It has mass and takes up what we call "space".

Matter is just a different form of energy. Energy can become matter and vice versa.

The problem with the infinite-time universe is the second law of thermodynamics. Assuming it really is a law like the name suggests, it would have meant the entropy of all would have been raised to the point we'd have no ability for thermodynamic process to occur any more.

From a scientific point of view, I tend to think of the yo-yo theory. That is to say the universe expands to its limits (whatever limits us) and then shrinks back to an infinitesimal size, which "big bangs" and the whole thing starts over again. In this process, the entropy issue is fixed. From a Christian point of view, I see this as the way God designed it.

 

[PsyOps]

It was a joke, snowflake.

"Insult." Good grief.

But you hurt my feeling. I only have one left, and you hurt it.

 

[PsyOps]

Same place you think God came from.

As in, it's always been there, it's infinite, and I really have no idea of its origination. But let's separate time and space from matter. Time and space are abstracts and the jury is still out as to whether or not they are merely constructs of the mind. Matter, on the other hand, is concrete. It has mass and takes up what we call "space".

But where I get lost in all of that is... From a theoretical standpoint, I can accept that time,space, matter always existed. Matter in-and-of-itself is dead. In light of things like the big bang and evolution, the universe was dead; no life existed. The beginning of the universe was chaos. Things randomly banging around. I mean, devoid of a creator, it had to be random and chaotic because there was no intelligence behind it's formation. I can understand, based on principles of physics, how objects formed. Mass has gravity, and this results in objects forming in space. Of course, no one can really explain WHY mass has gravity. We just accept that it does, because we experience it first hand.

So, out of all of this random, chaotic stuff going on, somehow a planet happens to be in just the right spot in our solar system, and all the elements formed just right for life to be born. And there is an order to this life. Order out of chaos; very violent chaos. How is this possible? In order for there to be order, there must be some form of intelligence behind it. Or no?

 

[Toxick]

We see the effects of electrons and thus we assume they exist.

You keep using that word. I do no think it means what you think it means.

To me, that is the difference between saying "I don't think there is a higher power" and "there is no higher power." A definitive statement against a theory, a hypothesis, a position. There can be no definitive statement that there is no higher power any more than there can be a definitive statement that there is. Both of those are faith.

Splitting such fine hairs is beyond the scope of my interest. As is repeating the same argument using different words. We've successfully reach the point of spinning wheels.


You clearly do not use the word faith in the same way that I do.

 

[vraiblonde]

But you hurt my feeling. I only have one left, and you hurt it.

Let me kiss the boo boo

 

[Larry Gude]

Or no?

No.


Here's the ID, intelligent design, argument; "See all the infinite randomness out there, the incredible happenstance that, somehow, amidst ALL of that nothing-ness, somehow, here WE are, this tiny little needle in a haystack that is itself a needle in a larger haystack and so on! How could that be any other way but from ID or a god?!"

Now, setting aside science, what we've learned and continue to learn about biology, astronomy, physics and geology that has displaced religious text and beliefs, time and time again, as better, more plausible explanations, absent all of that, if one goes into the ID argument as THE explanation one is left with dealing with this one, little tiny success, just for little 'ol us, amidst the vastness of space and time of, what, failures?

Set that aside and concentrate just on our planet and the same argument comes into play; man has been around for somewhere around 200,000 years and virtually all of it was the most basis of existence, dying by age 20 or so of rotten teeth, mostly, or injury or what have you and then, suddenly, about 2,000 years ago, the heavens gets up off the bar stool and decides the design could use some divine inspiration, sitting idly and watching the brutish, very animal existence for 198,000 years, dispassionately and NOW, it cares about it's creation? Further, since day 1 of our design, over 98% of every creature the ID created is extinct.

Now, does that, setting aside learning in geology, astronomy, biology and physics, sound like intentional, intelligent design or evolution of some pretty basic and very faulty stuff over time?

Matter is only dead in our limited understanding. The universe was and is only dead in our very limited context and understanding. That we don't know now why mass has gravity is either because the creator made it or we simply haven't learned that yet. Man seeks understanding and when we don't know we tend to make #### up. Then, we learn better and add that to our knowledge and either humble our selves, we simply have no clue at this time or we flatter ourselves and say some interested party cares for us and has made it all happen just with us in mind.

 

[PsyOps]

No.


Here's the ID, intelligent design, argument; "See all the infinite randomness out there, the incredible happenstance that, somehow, amidst ALL of that nothing-ness, somehow, here WE are, this tiny little needle in a haystack that is itself a needle in a larger haystack and so on! How could that be any other way but from ID or a god?!"

Now, setting aside science, what we've learned and continue to learn about biology, astronomy, physics and geology that has displaced religious text and beliefs, time and time again, as better, more plausible explanations, absent all of that, if one goes into the ID argument as THE explanation one is left with dealing with this one, little tiny success, just for little 'ol us, amidst the vastness of space and time of, what, failures?

Set that aside and concentrate just on our planet and the same argument comes into play; man has been around for somewhere around 200,000 years and virtually all of it was the most basis of existence, dying by age 20 or so of rotten teeth, mostly, or injury or what have you and then, suddenly, about 2,000 years ago, the heavens gets up off the bar stool and decides the design could use some divine inspiration, sitting idly and watching the brutish, very animal existence for 198,000 years, dispassionately and NOW, it cares about it's creation? Further, since day 1 of our design, over 98% of every creature the ID created is extinct.

Now, does that, setting aside learning in geology, astronomy, biology and physics, sound like intentional, intelligent design or evolution of some pretty basic and very faulty stuff over time?

Matter is only dead in our limited understanding. The universe was and is only dead in our very limited context and understanding. That we don't know now why mass has gravity is either because the creator made it or we simply haven't learned that yet. Man seeks understanding and when we don't know we tend to make #### up. Then, we learn better and add that to our knowledge and either humble our selves, we simply have no clue at this time or we flatter ourselves and say some interested party cares for us and has made it all happen just with us in mind.

I have never dismissed the possibility of evolution. In fact, given what we can observe here and now, I am convinced of it. This, in my opinion, doesn’t dismiss that intelligence might have been involved in setting it all up.

We have no clue if, for those 198,000 years, our ancestors weren’t aware of some sort of higher being, a god. They just hadn’t established a means to communicate in an intelligent way yet. Perhaps they were even more in tune with this god than we are today. It wasn’t until civilizations were established, and writing was invented that man could communicate these things to future generation. This thinking plays into my belief that God allowed things to evolve naturally, and not in some instantaneous manner, as depicted in the bible. God has all the time in the world and would have no reason to rush things.

Another point I’d like to address about your post is, in my studies as a Christian, the question would come up about live in other places of our universe, and the best answer I got was ‘God probably has a similar plan for them, like He does for us’.

 

[PsyOps]

Let me kiss the boo boo

All better

 

[vraiblonde]

So, out of all of this random, chaotic stuff going on, somehow a planet happens to be in just the right spot in our solar system, and all the elements formed just right for life to be born. And there is an order to this life. Order out of chaos; very violent chaos. How is this possible? In order for there to be order, there must be some form of intelligence behind it. Or no?

So you believe that everything could come together to serendipitously create God, an almighty omnipotent being, but couldn't create us?

I'm not sure what you believe as a Christian, how fundamental you are or how "to the letter" you hold the Bible, but I believe that this...world, solar system, universe, everything...was created over billions of years. Science indicates that rather firmly. I think they say the universe is 13by or some such. Think about that: 13 BILLION years. Your lifespan is 100 years, now imagine 130 million times that. It's inconceivable (in the correct sense of the word) and leaves time for a LOT of evolution.

There is physical evidence of our caveman ancestors, so we know that they aren't the intelligent creatures depicted in the Old Testament. There is physical evidence that dinosaurs once roamed the earth. There is physical evidence that this planet has changed dramatically over the eons.

 

[Larry Gude]

I have never dismissed the possibility of evolution. In fact, given what we can observe here and now, I am convinced of it. This, in my opinion, doesn’t dismiss that intelligence might have been involved in setting it all up.

We have no clue if, for those 198,000 years, our ancestors weren’t aware of some sort of higher being, a god. They just hadn’t established a means to communicate in an intelligent way yet. Perhaps they were even more in tune with this god than we are today. It wasn’t until civilizations were established, and writing was invented that man could communicate these things to future generation. This thinking plays into my belief that God allowed things to evolve naturally, and not in some instantaneous manner, as depicted in the bible. God has all the time in the world and would have no reason to rush things.

Another point I’d like to address about your post is, in my studies as a Christian, the question would come up about live in other places of our universe, and the best answer I got was ‘God probably has a similar plan for them, like He does for us’.

We have LOTS of clues, and evidence, that man has LONG believed in gods. 1,000's, maybe countless religions have come and gone. You say they couldn't communicate it intelligently. I'd agree that the ability to write it down mattered but China could write 2,000 years before Christ. Why did an ID skip them with the Abrahamic god? Seems obvious to me.

If you say god was in no hurry, in my view, it completely wipes out the argument that he has a plan for us. Why are we so special and our ancestors, his creations, not so much? That doesn't disprove gods or a god. It does blow a pretty enormous hole in the loving god narrative. You suggest maybe they were more in tune than us. Could be. Maybe we just thing they lived like animals and are all very happy in the eternal after life.

And to say god has a plan for all time and space and places continues the atheist argument of a god of varying affections if we're supposed to be his loving children. It becomes, quickly, the answer when we have no; gods will!

So, with god, all things are possible to which a sound atheist would say 'that's for sure!'.

One other thought; man of, say, 5,000 or 50,000 or 150,000 years ago, if he could write to us in a way we understood, he wouldn't be speaking of an Abrahamic god. He couldn't do so any more than the Chinese would or could if they'd made this stuff up. They'd pass on the myths and superstitions they came up with to explain the unexplainable. Another way to put that is if a child born today could be isolated from ALL religious material yet free to learn biology, astronomy, geology and physics, would they come up with anything resembling an Abrahamic or Buddha based faith? Let's turn that around; if we could send our knowledge back to man of 5,000 or 50,000 or 150,000 years ago in his way of understanding, what's more likely, that he'd reject it as heresy, lies, deception or would he sit back and say "Huh, well, that makes a whole lot more sense. Honey, stop the sacrifice. That's not how it works it seems..."

 

[vraiblonde]

I have never dismissed the possibility of evolution. In fact, given what we can observe here and now, I am convinced of it. This, in my opinion, doesn’t dismiss that intelligence might have been involved in setting it all up.

But why evolve? Why not get it right the first time?

That, to me, is the biggest argument for evolution over creationism. God is this all-powerful all-knowing being, yet he too had a large number of beta versions and continues to tinker?

I also don't believe that we, you and I, this earth, these animals, these plants, are the end of the line. We will evolve into something else, and perhaps be unrecognizable in another millennia. That's why "climate change" doesn't disturb me: I don't believe that we, humans, are all that important in the grand scheme of things. We're just another part of the universe and whatever is beyond that. We will either evolve or die and something else will take our place.

 

[Larry Gude]

We will either evolve or die and something else will take our place.

And THAT is 'why religion' in the first place. We do NOT like that idea!


"But, I'm special!" That goes for traditional religions, old dead ones and all the new ones including the disciples of Climate Change. We DO cling to our bibles, be what they may. Human nature. Very strong impulse and desire.

 

[PsyOps]

But why evolve? Why not get it right the first time?

How do you know things didn't play exactly the way God wanted it to? Just because things did go as you think it should, doesn't mean it didn't go as God planned it.

 

[Larry Gude]

How do you know things didn't play exactly the way God wanted it to? Just because things did go as you think it should, doesn't mean it didn't go as God planned it.

And that's the ID fall back; "See how wonderful and thoughtful god is to have made everything work out for us so elegantly? Far more thoughtful than we could ever hope to comprehend!"

Atheism has no answer for that. :shrug:

 

[vraiblonde]

How do you know things didn't play exactly the way God wanted it to? Just because things did go as you think it should, doesn't mean it didn't go as God planned it.

You can believe what you want. :shrug: You're the one who is touting "intelligent design", not me.

 

[PsyOps]

And that's the ID fall back; "See how wonderful and thoughtful god is to have made everything work out for us so elegantly? Far more thoughtful than we could ever hope to comprehend!"

Atheism has no answer for that. :shrug:

The interesting thing about that is the 'getting here' part was pretty messy. Compare it to child birth. Procreating is a pretty messy ordeal (depending on your point of view I guess). Gestation is pretty messy. Giving birth is really messy. All to result in something beautiful. This seems to be pretty consistent across nature.//FO

 

[Larry Gude]

The interesting thing about that is the 'getting here' part was pretty messy. Compare it to child birth. Procreating is a pretty messy ordeal (depending on your point of view I guess). Gestation is pretty messy. Giving birth is really messy. All to result in something beautiful. This seems to be pretty consistent across nature.//FO

Again, rather interesting if that's the intelligent design, wouldn't you say?