Questions For Atheists...& Non Atheists

November 14, 2006 | Laissez-Faire Capitalist

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

If I am not mistaken, atheists do not believe that God exists, whereas agnostics state that God may exist, but that they simply do not know if God does exists.

Questions:

1.) Where did all the matter in the universe come from?

2.) Was this matter created by a Supreme Being (God)?

3.) If all the matter in the universe was not created by God, then where did it come from?

4.) Has this matter always existed?

5.) or did this matter bring itself into existence?

6.) If this matter has always existed, then why isn't it equally possible that God has always existed?

7.) If this matter brought itself into existence, then why isn't it equally possible that God brought Himself into existnce or brought this matter into existence?

8.) Since it would seem equally possible that a.) God and matter could both have always existed and since it would also seem equally possible that b.) God and matter could have brought themeslves into existence or that God could have brought the matter in the universe into existence, why don't atheists say that a and b are both equally possible?

9.) Based upon the aforementioned that both a and b are equally possible (a 50/50 situation), atheists should rather be agnostics and say that a Supreme Being (God) may exist and that they just don't know if he does.

What say you?

[America_Right]

I love science, I really do, but I have to wonder, how do we know? Someone invent a time machine?

No, we do not have time machines, but we do have radio telescopes. The further we see into the Universe, the farther back in time we are looking. Background radiation, radio signals, and even some light waves tell the story. Don't ask me how. As I said, I am not a physicist, but I am a thinker.

...there was in fact a Monotheist pharoh several years before Moses led the Israelite nation.

Ok, widespread monotheism. Sheesh... :)

...what does age have to do with any sort of religion or truth whatsoever? A heilocentric universe is a pretty modern thing (especially by your standard), but does that mean we should prefer the Earth-centric universe then? Age means nothing on whether a fact is T-R-U-E.

I was just saying the religions change a lot, and aren't based on any sort of observable facts. Science changes based on observation of facts, or at least what we think are facts at the time.

Just because we can't (at this moment) directly observe God doesn't mean He does or does not exist. For years humankind were not able to observe or see neptune, did that mean the planet did not exist? I'm not answering, just saying that you seem to be making an absolute statement that is beyond the ability of your knowledge or senses to completely validate.

I make absolute statements based on observable evidence. That's all.

Explain this paradox to me. Animals, by nature, are not religious. Therefore, if humans evolved from a common animal ancestor, originally we should have all been atheist from the start no? Logically therefore, religion was something we evolved later which therefore (by the laws of natural selection) means that religion gave a survival advantage to those humans that possessed it over those that did not. Therefore it would seem that we're actually evolving into more and more religiousity than out-growing it.

Animals don't have self-awareness and intelligence, at least not in the same way that humans do. Humans evolved the need for religion for the reasons I explained earlier: justification for their existence, and perhaps a way to explain away things that are (were) unexplainable scientifically, and (in the case of Christianity) a way to deal with mortality. You make a good point for survival, though. I would have to say that religion is a good way to create a hive-mind. Get a bunch of people together with the same strong religeous beliefs, and you have an unbreakable will within a hive-mind (Islam). In the case of organized religion (Catholics come to mind), POWER!!! They ruled Europe for a very long time. And look at the Muslims. Talk about consolodating some serious power. Their mullahs have the power of life and death over the Islamic world. As far as evolving into MORE religiosity, the evidence says otherwise. I just saw a report on Fox News that Atheism is growing like crazy here in America, and in Europe it has already taken over. Churches are being used as flop houses for homeless and being converted into nightclubs.

Thank you for your time and politeness, I hope I have returned the favor.

Sure. I always stay calm during debates. It drives liberals crazy.

[America_Right]

We could go on like this forever. I guess we will have to agree to disagree. It gives me a headache trying to argue against faith. As you said, I deal in absolutes, even if they aren't fully, completely proven to be true in my debate opponent's opinion. I need evidence. I need hard science. Without those, I am lost. I can't bring myself to have faith in anything that isn't provable in some way.

The only point you may have brought up that swayed me in any way was the theory that religion could possibly be a survival trait. I like that one. It deserves further research. I may have to put it in my book. :) Bah, maybe I will just put it up as a vanity and get some opinions from Freepers.

I had a huge reply written, but decided against it. I will let you have the last word.

Cheers,

A_R

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

You were making such progress. You were admitting that you don't have the answers to any of the questions that I posed.

And then you went off on a diatribe.

Sad.

Since it is apparent that that matter in the universe preceded man, is there something which preceded matter?

Man is a finite being. Is matter finite, or has it always existed?

How could it have always existed? If it could have always existed, then it is also possible that a Supreme Being has always existed too.

Matter either hasn't always existed, or it has always existed. If it hasn't always existed, then it seems possible that a Supreme Being brought it into existence.

Please show me how science has proved that God doesn't exist.

Please show me how science has proved that God does exist.

Science has done neither. Atheism and creationism both then are NOT founded upon science. They are both belief systems where both sides have taken a leap of faith and unequivocally declared that God absolutely, positively does or does not exist.

One can be an agnostic and say "I don't know.", or believe by faith that God does or does not exist.

But, be aware, that when you slam religion, you also slam atheism, since both belief systems cannot prove that God does or does not exist.

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

Actually, we have more than two things to consider.

The third thing to consider is that science cannot prove where matter came from. Period. It can say that all matter was contained at some point in a near-infinitely dense singularity and that this singularity, when it exploded, was what some call the "Big bang", but, in the end, science cannot prove that God does exist or that God does not exist.

Science cannot prove that atheists are correct. One either believes that God does exist, or he/she does not.

Atheism and religion are like a quarter. One occupies one side and one occupies the other. Both are belief systems where one either chooses to believe that all the matter contained in the singularity (if one believes in the Big bang) was not created by God, or that God created all the matter in the universe.

[DungeonMaster]

My answer to all nine is: The Bible is true.

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

How do you know that he isn't around?

If you think that God must reveal Himself to exist, then anything that which hasn't been revealed yet, does it also not exist?

So, I guess then that the distant reaches of the universe that haven't been observable until recently, did not exist until man discovered them?

An atheist has no idea where all the matter in the universe came from in the first place. Why then would they say that it is impossible that a Supreme Being created this matter, if they don't even know where all this matter even came from in the first place?

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

Why do atheists say that God absolutely does not exist, when they have no idea where all the matter in the universe came from?

Since science cannot prove that God does not exist, why then do they say that He does not exist?

Ah, some here have said that He would have revealed Himself by now if He truly existed.

If atheists cannot prove that matter was not created by a Supreme Being, and since atheists cannot prove where all the matter in the universe came from in the first place, why then do they unequivocally declare that God does not exist?

Could it be that God has chosen to not reveal Himself?

As I have shown before, atheism is a belief system, where atheists, who cannot prove where all the matter in the universe came from, have decided to unilaterally declare that a Supreme Being did not create it.

[Laissez-faire capitalist]

If atheism is truly based upon science, show me where science has proved:

A.) Where all the matter in the universe came from.

B.) That God did not create this matter.

C.) That God does not exist.

Since science has not proved any of the three, why then do atheists claim that their belief system is based upon science?

Atheism is a belief system that is based upon OPINION.

Atheists believe that the all matter in the universe (the universe itself) was not created by God, yet they declare this when they even don't know where all the matter in the universe came from in the first place.!

Atheists, Christians, Hindus, etc, etc...they all believe in what they believe by FAITH.

[2ndClassCitizen]

Agreed.

[Wormwood]

You are guilty of a logical fallacy (that of Negative Proof).

The burden of proof is not on science to prove that God/Zeus/Xenu DOES NOT exist.

The burden of proof is on YOU to prove that God/Zeus/Xenu DOES exist.

[DungeonMaster]

I read a book by Eric Lerner called "The Big Bang did not Happen". He declares in his book that matter has always existed and goes on to try to prove that. He is a "Plasma Physicist". I remember that when I was an athiest I didn't care how matter came into being, I just knew that there was no God. That is mans fallen, dead state. Proof and reason don't enter into it. It's almost like a spiritual tantrum where one insists on God showing Himself otherwise that one defies God. I was in that state right up until I got saved at the age of about 21.

[Triple]

Please rent the movie "The Exorcism of Emily Rose", or otherwise research that specific course of events.

I would really like to know if it changes your thinking at all.

Regards,

[Wormwood]

Please rent the movie "The Exorcism of Emily Rose", or otherwise research that specific course of events.

Both the priests and parents of Anneliese Michel (the "real" Emily Rose) were convicted of manslaughter after they failed to provide her with proper medical attention. The poor girl starved to death.

Truly a sad case, and a stark reminder why bone rattles and prayers are unless in the face of Temporal Lobe Epilepsy.

Google is your friend.

[Hoplite]

The burden of proof is on YOU to prove that God/Zeus/Xenu DOES exist.

God is love.
Love is never having to say you're sorry.
The world is growing more uncivil by the day.

Ergo, proof of God's existence is growing daily.

---

Logic - ha!

[Wormwood]

I apologize for the snotty tone of my reply. It's been a long day and a long thread.

And to answer your question: the film and the case it inspired did little to change my views on religion. If anything, my opinions were reinforced.

I hope that answers your question. Thanks.

[Triple]

Did you see the movie or just a google blurb?

[Wormwood]

Saw the movie, then looked up the facts of the case.

[spunkets]

" Since science has not proved any of the three"

Science doesn't prove anything. It is simply a rational methodology that provides theories that are supported by observational evidence.

[spunkets]

The burden of proof is not on science to prove that God/Zeus/Xenu DOES NOT exist.

The burden of proof is on YOU to prove that God/Zeus/Xenu DOES exist.

Ditto.