Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

To theists: Why should we believe in gods?

god atheism history evolution psychology

  • Please log in to reply
69 replies to this topic

#61    Mr Walker

Mr Walker

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 19,349 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Australia

  • Sometimes the Phantom leaves the jungle, and walks the streets of the city like an ordinary man.

Posted 03 October 2012 - 11:13 PM

View PostAlienated Being, on 03 October 2012 - 10:36 PM, said:

[/sub][/size]
That is simply impossible. Something can not spontaneously generate from nothing.


I don't think you read my entire post. If you did, you would realize that you've done nothing more than regurgitate what I had already said.
Science is beginning to suspect and indicate/demonstrate., that something CAN spontaneously generate from nothing Not only so, but that this is probably inevitable and natural.  Your statement is one of belief logically predicated on present understandings. New knolwedge must inform reality knowledge and belief. If something is demonstrated to be the case, then it can no longer be considered impossible.
To your second point. I wasnt setting out to disagree with you on this, merely adding some comments. I agreed with all  your post except the bolded paragraph. There, i dont know any more than you, except what i have read in recent times . That opens my mind to doubt, and to other potentialities

Given that you do not believe in god, how do you logicaly reconcile the  present nature of the universe with its beginnings. I am an evolutionist who suspects that god is a natural evolutionary product of the universe, as we are. But that leaves open the natural processes by which the universe began, or whether, in fact, it ever had a true beginning in our terms, or will ever have an end.

You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world..

Be cheerful.

Strive to be happy.

#62    Alienated Being

Alienated Being

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 4,163 posts
  • Joined:03 Sep 2006

  • "The best way to predict the future is by inventing it."

    "Record

Posted 03 October 2012 - 11:15 PM

View PostMr Walker, on 03 October 2012 - 11:13 PM, said:

Science is beginning to suspect and indicate/demonstrate., that something CAN spontaneously generate from nothing Not only so, but that this is probably inevitable and natural.  Your statement is one of belief logically predicated on present understandings. New knolwedge must inform reality knowledge and belief. If something is demonstrated to be the case, then it can no longer be considered impossible.
To your second point. I wasnt setting out to disagree with you on this, merely adding some comments. I agreed with all  your post except the bolded paragraph. There, i dont know any more than you, except what i have read in recent times . That opens my mind to doubt, and to other potentialities

Given that you do not believe in god, how do you logicaly reconcile the  present nature of the universe with its beginnings. I am an evolutionist who suspects that god is a natural evolutionary product of the universe, as we are. But that leaves open the natural processes by which the universe began, or whether, in fact, it ever had a true beginning in our terms, or will ever have an end.
Give me the sources to reinforce your claims that science is accepting the possibility of something coming from nothing, Mr. Walker.

EDIT: And don't provide me with any pseudo-scientific metaphysical, philosophical mumbo jumbo, either. I want numbers. I want evidence. I have conducted a search on Google, but to no avail. I am very curious as to how science postulates that something can spontaneously generate from absolutely nothing.

That is probably the most ridiculous thing that I have ever heard.

Edited by Alienated Being, 03 October 2012 - 11:18 PM.


#63    Mr Walker

Mr Walker

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 19,349 posts
  • Joined:09 Nov 2005
  • Gender:Not Selected
  • Location:Australia

  • Sometimes the Phantom leaves the jungle, and walks the streets of the city like an ordinary man.

Posted 04 October 2012 - 12:38 AM

View PostAlienated Being, on 03 October 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:

Give me the sources to reinforce your claims that science is accepting the possibility of something coming from nothing, Mr. Walker.

EDIT: And don't provide me with any pseudo-scientific metaphysical, philosophical mumbo jumbo, either. I want numbers. I want evidence. I have conducted a search on Google, but to no avail. I am very curious as to how science postulates that something can spontaneously generate from absolutely nothing.

That is probably the most ridiculous thing that I have ever heard.
I read the new scientist magazine that puts many modern scientific researchers and understandings into terms which an educated layman can understand.There was one whole edition on the nature of the universe time etc.

This subject was discussed in depth. The top scientists in the field are finding (through mathematical modelling, observation and exerimentation) that a state of nothingness is unsustainable. It is inherenlty non sustainable because of its nature. It defaults within a relatively short time to a state of something.

Now definitions of nothing and something are arguable, but this is NOT the classic argument that the universe existed in a tiny compressed 'ball" of matter which exploded in the big bang, and  rapidly changed its own nature as it did so, creating the  present universe and our current physical state/laws.

It demonstrrates that the universe can physicaly translate from nothing to something, by natural physical means, and will do so because of the comparative nature of nothingess and of something ness. Some physical property of nothing ness "drives it" to become something. The scientists expounded on the scientific  nature of that property or properties, but I cant rememember exactly what it/they were.

it is, if you will, the scientific response to 'first cause". Ther is no first cause other than a natural spontaneous and self contained process. To science and scientists of course this is a natural and expected finding. I suspect it is at least in part true. If the universe has not existed forever, it must have come into being at some time. Given that god did not create it, it must have an explanation. the big bang only takes us back so far How did tha t compressed energy/material, in whatever form it existed as a singularity, come into existence.?

To me, natural physics- driven evolution of process, such as this, is the most likely way our unverse began, prior to the big bang. It is just hard for our minds, conditioned as they are, to accept. That is why you find the concept ridiculous and impossible. Explain to me, in scientific terms, why it is impossible for something to come from nothing, without using belief driven/ prejudiced  concepts.

Remember that  current laws of physics are a product of the way matter and energy "worked out" during the big bang,  and hence how our universe is NOW,  and are not absolutes.

2 minutes on google

http://www.bbc.co.uk...rammes/b01gf5w7

http://arstechnica.c...e-from-nothing/

http://whywontgodhea...p?topic=18660.0

http://blogs.discove...e-from-nothing/

Plenty more by just googling "nothingness inherently unstable" this does not include the new scientist articles which discussed these matters and talked to/ quoted, some of the scientists involved.
It is perhaps ironic that as a non believer you havent heard of a concept expounded in a book referred to by the Richard Dawkins as,   "Potentially the most important scientific book with implications for atheism since Darwin".

Edited by Mr Walker, 04 October 2012 - 01:08 AM.

You are a child of the universe, no less than the trees and the stars; you have a right to be here. And whether or not it is clear to you, no doubt the universe is unfolding as it should.

Therefore be at peace with God, whatever you conceive Him to be, and whatever your labors and aspirations, in the noisy confusion of life keep peace with your soul.

With all its sham, drudgery and broken dreams, it is still a beautiful world..

Be cheerful.

Strive to be happy.

#64    Vatic

Vatic

    Ectoplasmic Residue

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 227 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:North American Continent

Posted 04 October 2012 - 01:20 AM

Science is not relevant to this kind of discussion. I could say meat inspectors can't prove God, and then turn around and say meat inspectors can't disprove God. Either way it isn't relevant. Science just isn't relevant since those who refer to it are largely relics of the materialist enlightment era anyhow, and that kind of science doesn't address spiritual existence. It's just as meaningless to the question of God as reliance upon meat inspectors to decide on God.


#65    The Silver Thong

The Silver Thong

    Forum Divinity

  • Member
  • 30,508 posts
  • Joined:02 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Calgary Alberta Canada

Posted 06 October 2012 - 07:54 AM

View PostVatic, on 04 October 2012 - 01:20 AM, said:

Science is not relevant to this kind of discussion. I could say meat inspectors can't prove God, and then turn around and say meat inspectors can't disprove God. Either way it isn't relevant. Science just isn't relevant since those who refer to it are largely relics of the materialist enlightment era anyhow, and that kind of science doesn't address spiritual existence. It's just as meaningless to the question of God as reliance upon meat inspectors to decide on God.


and yet you post your gods belief-needs  useing science to explain your god.  If god was a real thing would it need mans science to prove it as you are attempting.

Edited by The Silver Thong, 06 October 2012 - 07:56 AM.

Sittin back drinkin beer watchin the world take it's course.


The only thing god can't do is prove he exists ?

#66    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Seeker79

  • Member
  • 12,999 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:24 AM

View PostTheDarkEnergy, on 30 September 2012 - 11:22 AM, said:

The whole process of formation of life and religion can be described in the below

Number 9 in your description is a complete assumption, no one knows how the first life started on earth. Currently we are not able to reproduce it.

Your entire description of the formation of religion is built upon a premise that is not accurate. The latter part of it looks fine.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#67    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Seeker79

  • Member
  • 12,999 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:32 AM

View PostAlienated Being, on 03 October 2012 - 11:15 PM, said:


Give me the sources to reinforce your claims that science is accepting the possibility of something coming from nothing, Mr. Walker.

EDIT: And don't provide me with any pseudo-scientific metaphysical, philosophical mumbo jumbo, either. I want numbers. I want evidence. I have conducted a search on Google, but to no avail. I am very curious as to how science postulates that something can spontaneously generate from absolutely nothing.

That is probably the most ridiculous thing that I have ever heard.
Happens all the time. Virtual particles & quantum fluctuations. If hawking radiation is true, then a virtual particle literally pops in existence exactly on the event horizon of a singularity. It's twin falls in and it escapes. It's considered to have been created from nothing.

I do have reservations about that the laws of thermo dynamics were created studying steam engines, they are not quite the same in a quantum universe.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#68    lizzieboo

lizzieboo

    Remote Viewer

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 521 posts
  • Joined:28 May 2011
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:2nd star on the right, straight on til morning

  • He was more like a succession of extraordinary events than a person. (Douglas Adams)

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:33 AM

This is a circular debate that will never be fully answered by either science or religion. No matter what anyone, skeptic or religiously inclined, says, folk of the opposing camp will always refute it.

I will say this, although I have no intention of "defending" my position because I don't believe anyone can--or should--have to explain their belief system (unless you are asked out of a desire to learn about your point of view rather than to tear your beliefs to shreds and make you feel like a fool): I believe there is room for both faith and science in the human mind. I believe that many (probably most) things can be explained by science, but I also believe that there are some things that are just too huge for human comprehension. And that's fine, as far as I'm concerned. I don't spend my time asking "Why" (although I spent much of my life doing so) about things that just...well, just happen. I want to learn as much as I can absorb but I'm content in knowing that I am not capable of knowing everything.

I leave "knowing it all" to wiser heads than my own.

All right, I see what's going on. This is the opening salvo in what will be an escalating series of juvenile tit for tat exchanges. Well titted! Stand by for my upcoming tat. --Dr. Sheldon Cooper


#69    White Crane Feather

White Crane Feather

    Seeker79

  • Member
  • 12,999 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:California

  • Potter: " is this real or is this in my mind?"

    Dumbledore: " Of course it's in your mind....., but that dosn't mean it's not real."

Posted 06 October 2012 - 11:35 AM

View PostThe Silver Thong, on 03 October 2012 - 03:59 AM, said:



Can you post something that science has not touched on that could possibly leed to a god figure.
Whatch "transcendent man". If there is no god, there will be, if there will be and existence is infinite, then there already is. Can't really escape it.

"I wish neither to possess, Nor to be possessed. I no longer covet paradise, more important, I no longer fear hell. The medicine for my suffering I had within me from the very beginning, but I did not take it. My ailment came from within myself, But I did not observe it until this moment. Now I see that I will never find the light.  Unless, like the candle, I am my own fuel, Consuming myself. "
Bruce Lee-

#70    wanderer_

wanderer_

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 50 posts
  • Joined:14 Jul 2012

Posted 07 October 2012 - 05:16 PM

The reason you posted this is so that you can look at our theological and/or philosophical answers and bolster your own opinion. You want to prove yourself right. You clearly already have your opinion, why post it other than to force it upon us and/or strengthen your own opinion? You haven't started a debate, you declared yourself the winner before you even posted what you'd written--nay, before you'd even written it I'd bargain.






Also tagged with god, atheism, history, evolution, psychology

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users