Wait, what?




So, everything had to have a beginning, except for god?

This just undermines everything you said, because your statement "everything had a beginning" has now been shown to be false. So instead of coming to the conclusion that the universe itself is infinite, you come to the conclusion that it's not, but some being that is infinite created the non-infinite universe through magic powers. Occam's razor says that the simpler solution of the universe being infinite is more preferable. By admitting that not everything has a beginning, you just admitted that god is not necessary to your logical reasoning.




I make no claim of knowledge, you do. Lack of knowledge in an area does not necessitate that we "inject a story" to try to explain it away. I have no problem admitting I don't know these things, as we lack the means to study them. I don't need to know where this singularity "came from" or even believe that a singularity existed to realize that "god did it" is an unsatisfactory answer.

Would you use this same argument against me, if it were thousands of years ago and we were arguing where lightning comes from?

AFA: "I do not believe that Thor exists."

DCYPL: "Where does lightning come from then?"

AFA: "I don't know."

DCYPL: "I don't know, but I know it wasn't Thor...

Oxymoron anyone?"

This post has been edited by afriendlyatheist: Nov 5 2009, 05:51 PM

Take a few more upper-level physics classes and you'll feel better.

Whoa, whoa, whoa.

Whoa.

You can't just go invoking Thor for something as petty as a hypothetical example. You're going to get Mjöllnir-ed in the face, dude. Pick another god.

Better yet, pick another pantheon.

Well exactly. So why did you use that as an argument to deter yourself from atheism?



It's not. The only problem I have with it is that you've used it as an argument for theism in itself, not for whatever else you follow (Catholicism?). So please explain to me how "nothing comes from nothing" = God, and then God = your god and everything that comes with it.

Give me a couple years and I'll write some books, alright?

My bad, I was meant to say "is it illogical"....

I thought you would have picked up on that one dewd.


Thats what Im saying. You are not injecting a story BUT you are forbidding an explanantion. I simply stated why I believe, then SOMEONE has to come along and try to pick it appart.



Um..no I wouldnt. The fact still remains, you don't know, so you can't rule out God. Why? Because you dont know. Heck, I dont 'know' but I believe. I have faith that what I believe is the truth, and in the end we will all find out. If we are concious to care or not? Who 'knows'

Dang it AFA! Stop making me post!


Sorry, almost missed this part.

You can take my statement "Everything has a beginning" and add "accept God" to it. There ya go, fixed. Occam's Razor is pretty much saying "Dont add what you dont need to"...

So in the end you are still left with something that came from nowhere. Scientifically, the universe could not have existed infinitely. (Considering time was always a factor)

But time wasn't always a factor; and things can come from nothing. It's called vacuum energy.

I forbid no explanation that is found using the scientific method.



I haven't "ruled out" anything, we lack the means to study it. There is no reason to even consider god until leading evidence.




So you admit that it's possible for something to not have a beginning, then?

wow, wow, wow. sorry I had to get that out.
So from the looks of it, the main atheists on this board believe what they believe, because there's nothing else that they'll believe in. Hence the wow, wow, wow, wow. OK, well I've studied this subject a lot, and for those wishing to know why, evolution just doesn't work you can look into some stuff done by a guy named: Kent Hovind. In his stuff he explains why, you don't need to look at the oldest stuff to figure out the age of the earth, but the youngest. like the earth's rotation is slowing down(doesn't that mean it used to be going faster?), our magnetic field is getting weaker(doesn't that mean that it used to be stronger?), the sun is decreasing in mass... etc blah, blah, blah.
However the common atheist, doesn't care about all that, because they don't care if it goes against common sense, they just don't want to believe it.

but don't you see, that someone standing on the edge of a 10,000 story building, about to jump, could claim the same thing? All he has to do is close his eyes and think of something happy.
God gave me a parable about this one time (that ^ was a quotation) see what you think of it:

"There's a man standing in the middle of the road, and there's a truck coming at him, a big old semi-truck coming at 50MPH, and there's a person on the sidewalk, and the person on the sidewalk yells out: "DUDE! GET OUT OF THE ROAD THERE'S A TRUCK COMING AT YOU!", and the person turns to him peacefully enough, and points to the truck and says: "I do not believe that, that truck exists". "

What's going to happen? Is the truck going to magically disappear? No despite variables, the truck is going to hit him and he is going to die. Because it doesn't matter what you believe, it doesn't change what's really there.

So you still need a reason, here's your reason for believing in God:
Have you ever seen a building, that didn't have a builder?
Have you ever seen a painting, that didn't have a painter?
have you ever seen a factory, that didn't have a designer?
and yet when you look at Photosynthesis, (Which is a factory well beyond, the complexity of any factor we have today) you don't see a designer? *unsure*

when you see, the words: "I love Mark" written in the sand, you don't think twice that it had a maker. Now could the wind and water have carver that in the sand? well, yes technically, but why in the world would you ever think that was how it was made? Who told you no one wrote that in the sand? because common sense points to god, so someone had to tell you there wasn't a God.

Here's my theory, who told you? who told them? who told them...ect. my theory is that, there someone out there, someone that really hates this God guy, and he knows that God loves you and me, so instead of trying to hurt God he's going to try and hurt us, and in so doing hurt God.
God wants you to come to Him, and no matter how easy He makes it, this someone still hates Him. and this someone is going to try any, and everything he can think of to bring us down, He's the one who originally said: "no one wrote that in the sand".

Now, I've waited a long time for this, lets quote some scripture! (Keep in mind that these things have been written down for almost 2,000 years!)



WOW! the world today, predicted about 2,000 years ago. You know what's also in this book? The Romans road, if you get a chance look it up some time, That's all I have to say.

p.s. I don't know how the PMing works, but if you want to feel free to.

o ok

So many assumptions.
"He couldn't create a universe not governed by the laws of logic..."
Whose logic? Your logic or God's logic?

"a universe where God didn't exist"
Sounds like Schroedinger's cat.

"a universe that existed without existence, etc"
Maybe quantum physics or some sort of higher science that's currently beyond our understanding or logic will discover such universe.

Quantity of study does not imply quality of study, unfortunately. Kent Hovind is a liar, a fraud, and an idiot; your example is only applicable to someone who believes in your God but refuses to be saved; the old and tired "builder, painter, creator" analogy has been shown wrong a thousand times because there is no known natural method of creating buildings and paintings, but a very natural one that is known to create life (and what about "if there is a creator, then there must be a creator-creator"?)

No one has ever seen anything written in the sand like that, and your "prophecy" is just as applicable to 21st century civilization as it is to... almost every other point in history, including the time period in which it was written?

Not gonna happen. I find most science to be very boring to tell you the truth... guess that's why I'm an art major.

I always stay out of the science debates partly because I suck at science and I really don't care about it one way or the other, partly because there's this smart-aleck "I'm superior" attitude among a lot of the people who strongly believe in the theory of evolution, and partly because I don't care whether God created the earth in literal 6 days or a million years or whatever other theories there are and don't have an opinion one way or the other.

Man, the atheists are pwning here.

What Deists have you been talking to?

Who told you God doesn't care? Interfering =/= Caring.



Well there's your problem, you're claiming that a non-personal god would remain interested and always be interested. Why? Why would God always remain interested? For all we know, God's creating new Universes this very moment. Or sitting back, and watching. Feeling no need to continue messing with it's creation.

I find it bizarre that God would feel the need to continue tinkering with it's creation. Seems very petty and human.



There you go again. You keep confusing the Deistic God with your own god, and keep trying to place your gods own attributes onto the Deistic God.

It clearly is possible for God to create something and not continue tinkering with it. There's nothing contradicting about that.



What's that got to do with the Deistic God? And who's logic are you referring to? Your own or Gods?



I don't know of any universe where there isn't God, do you?



Again, what does that have to do with God being non-personal (not interfering with it's creations)



And you're doing it again. For all we know, God created because it just felt like it. Or that God is interested, but also does not see any reason to keep tinkering with it's creation. As God's creation, we are possibly what God may consider "perfect" and if that is the case (I'm merely speculating here) then why would God keep messing with it's already perfect creation?

If God does keep interfering, then it's creation is not perfect, and seeing as the Deistic God is non-personal, would mean we would no longer be referring to the Deistic God, but a different god that is personal.

I also find it bizarre that God would make something non-perfect to begin with. (About to speculate here again) Perhaps we already are what God would consider "perfect" (Though I'm sure many will say we're not, but that is for God to decide) and so, does not see the need to interfere with it's already perfect creation.

Hence, the Deistic God is non-personal because it doesn't have/want too interfere. We (God's creation) are already what it may consider "perfect" and thus no longer need anymore tinkering.

If I make a painting, and once finished consider it to be perfect, I don't continue changing it. That would be mean it isn't perfect and is not finished. Thus I would be personal (such as the Christian god) and not non-personal (Deistic God)

I may stick a frame around it and hang it up, and glance at it once an awhile, but that's it. I no longer interfere with my painting because it's already done and no longer needs to be tinkered with. (Deistic God) Others may say it isn't done, that it isn't perfect, but my opinion is the only one that matters as I am the creator of that painting.

Why mess with something that no longer needs to be messed with? Why would the Deistic God do such a thing? If a god interferes with it's creation, it is not the Deistic God, but a different personal god.

Seems to me you keep trying to shove God into a a square with boundaries that can not be crossed, and who's attributes must be similar to the Christian god's.

Deism on Wiki Deism website Deism in the Religious Tolerance website

Edit: Sorry for debating Deism in this thread folks.

This post has been edited by FlyingNun: Nov 7 2009, 01:04 AM

It's pretty sad that this thread remained active for so long.

It's not even a "Poll," and I'm sure you're all well aware that debating Christianity is not allowed, not to mention that advertisement of non-christian beliefs are not allowed either.