Why there almost certainly is No God!!

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Desibaba, Oct 26, 2006.

  1. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    Incorrect. Since God created time itself he is outside of time, which does not apply to him. Therefore, nothing is required to come before him.

    I am not using a god of the gaps argument for anything. Science says we have a universe that started a finite time ago. The naturalist has to explain how the universe came into existence out of nothing, which in itself cannot be done. Steven Hawking had to resort to “the universe created itself”. We all know logically that something cannot create itself.

    As for you third paragraph I would point to the debate I posted above for further answers to many arguments you have, and probably will make.
     
    Villain likes this.
  2. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    This is on the historicity of Jesus:
     
  3. Villain

    Villain Member

    Lol, why change handles? You forget your password?
     
  4. martino

    martino Member


    Well if something can't just exist, then how can a god just exist. That's magical thinking.

    The problem is from what we can detect from red shifted light 14 billion years into the past. We live in this time period that we can detect just a small sliver of the universe. We assume that they are mirror images of an expanding universe that had a beginning. These are models that fit the data. However do we have all the data. I don't think so. There's scientists that question the big bang, some are laughed at, but they have their own theories and should be reviewed to see what is possible.

    Those humans that might be around billions of years into the future will live in a cold dark universe where stars have burned out, where bodies are further separated, where the red shifted light will be much harder to detect. We really have a limited window to get an infrared telescope into space to see what is left and even then it will be of limited use.

    We may never know the answer and I'm perfectly fine with that, I accept the "I don't know" in life. I have no clue why the religious are so full of shit that they can't bring themselves to admit they don't know, they're just asserting that they know from whatever religion they happened to be born into.

    The concept that God invented time and space is a presupposition that has no data to support it. It's just what we hear Christians yack on about, these amateur philosophers that are trying to pretend they know something based on the collected writings of goat herders, as they use word salad to try to explain something into existence.
     
    Eman likes this.
  5. Villain

    Villain Member

    Uh, that’s what makes God God. Why is that so hard to grasp?
     
    4Figgy likes this.
  6. martino

    martino Member

    Because it's incoherent. A single cell organism can't just exist according to the bible brainwashed, but suddenly an all powerful all knowing god can just exist without being created before space and time existed and can will a Universe into existence by just thinking it, a Universe with trillions of Galaxies.

    From amino acids, lipids to form a cell wall I could see how the building blocks of a single celled organism could evolve in an environment rich in organics given millions of years of evolution.

    A GOD that just exists, a complicated supernatural being. Especially a God named Yahweh that happens to be apart of the Canaanite pantheon of gods starting with EL. Looks like a man made God to me. Not sure why this is so hard to understand.
     
    Eman likes this.
  7. Villain

    Villain Member

    And yet we’re the brainwashed ones to believe God exists with no beginning or end but you’re sane to believe the Big Bang just happened and formed everything? Gotcha.
     
    4Figgy likes this.
  8. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    There is plenty I don’t know as a Christian. I argue from a Christian worldview which to me is logically explained through Jesus and the Bible. If God exists, then it is perfectly sound to say he created time, space, matter, and energy. There is absolutely nothing illogical about that argument.

    Dr Craig is anything but an amateur philosopher. “Word salad” has been used again! And again, just because you don’t understand the words of the arguments, doesn’t mean they are invalid. An advanced vocabulary is a sign of high intelligence, not the lack of it.
     
    Villain likes this.
  9. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    It is the opposite of incoherent. It is the simplest coherent explanation there could possibly be. Wow......
     
    Villain likes this.
  10. Villain

    Villain Member

    Lol, incoherent but the Big Bang is coherent. Lol, I’m afraid to admit this guy has more faith than I do!
     
  11. martino

    martino Member

    If you are in the employment of bible believers, if you depend on their charity to your service, if your income depends on making sure you follow their mission statement and declare your unwavering faith. How can you expect someone like this to be unbiased in the information they put forth?

    Science allows for others to contradict your findings. It not only does that, it demands that you come along and try to prove others wrong, in some cases destroying careers.

    If someone like Craig came along and said, you know I think this God stuff is really bullshit after all. He'd be kicked of his teaching gig, he'd find himself in a situation where that money isn't rolling in.

    Some can make the same argument about scientists, but eventually if someone is putting forth a theory that is wrong, there will be others that come along and destroy it. Some people hung onto every theory Einstein ever put forth, but several of his theories have been proven wrong, it's not that he wan't brilliant, but wrong is wrong no matter if you're a genius or not.
     
  12. martino

    martino Member

    Actually Big Bang theory was first proposed by a Catholic Priest Georges Lamaitre Physicist, Astronomer, Mathematician that proved it with mathematics. At that time the most popular model was a static unchanging universe, however the math lined up with an expanding universe that started with a singularity based on the velocity at which the galaxies are moving away from each other at ever increasing velocity, if we reverse the process we find that they come together at a single point. Just like if I exploded a grenade, I could figure out the point at which the explosion took place, but in this case in all directions coming back together.
     
  13. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    You are completely missing his point. The Big Bang is the start of the universe from nothing, which is a larger leap of faith than believing in God creating the universe with the Big Bang.
     
    Villain likes this.
  14. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    I don’t expect Craig to be unbiased, lol. EVERYONE who is familiar with him knows he is a Christian. His debates are all online, and in my opinion he hasn’t lost a single one. His arguments are very well thought out, and not once have I seen anyone disprove them or show any inconsistencies in them. It is what I also expect from atheists. They will argue from their worldview.

    Just because someone is biased doesn’t mean they are wrong.
     
  15. Villain

    Villain Member

    Martino/Zepp: doesn’t believe in God or the concept that something eternal has existed with no beginning but embraces what a catholic priest says about everything coming from absolutely nothing via a random explosion. Nothing plus nothing equals nothing. Who or what created the universe? Out of what did it get created from? Yet believes science has it all figured out :rolleyes:
     
    4Figgy likes this.
  16. martino

    martino Member

    So you guys believe something immaterial wills material into existence by a little shaazzamm!!

    It's entirely possible life could have been seeded to this planet from another area of our galaxy or even another universe. Just like everything that makes this planet up was once hurling through space crashing into a ball of fire, eventually a planet covered with water. There's no reason to think that single and even multi-cell organisms couldn't have hitched a ride to this planet.

    As for the big bang starting from nothing. Why does it have to be nothing, why couldn't it be part of a multiverse an infinite number of universes branching off each other.

    As for Craig never being proven wrong. Sean Carroll, who is one of the more brilliant theoretical physicists bent Craig over and spanked his ass in this debate, it was a like a cat batting a mouse around before eating him.
     
  17. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    Definitely Zepp! “Planted” life on Earth. Sounds like a movie from a while back :rolleyes:

    I love how you cherry picked one thing from the debate. This shows how confident you are about the whole thing. Here’s the whole debate, and a response later on from Craig about the debate with Carroll. The second video pretty much sums up the actual debate.


     
    Villain likes this.
  18. martino

    martino Member

    We should also consider that there was no beginning to the universe, that it was eternal and has always existed. Not in its present order, but existed in a form that is beyond our ability to collect data.

    Always falling back on God cuts you off from possibilities, it allows the religious to scam, rob and retard our societies to the point they are so helpless they can't do anything but pray while they piss their pants wailing and crying wallowing in their ignorance like our primitive ancestors incapable of solving the most basic of problems.
     
  19. 4Figgy

    4Figgy Member

    If you believe in eternity as a possibility inside the universe then that’s a conundrum in itself. And current science points to a beginning of the universe. Thats why there is an actual age on it. The only thing science can’t explains is how it came into existence out of nothing. This is the reason for things such as a multiverse. I would argue it is scientists grasping at anything that isn’t what the science currently points to.
     
    Villain likes this.
  20. martino

    martino Member

    I've already watched the second video. He misrepresented the debate and I'm sure he wouldn't have said the things he said if Carroll had been there to argue with him face to face.

    The problem with Craig is that he could just as easily apply his arguments to the existence of Santa or the Lucky Leprechaun that lives in my back yard.