Questions For Atheists...& Non Atheists

You can't argue with a negative. The onus of prove is on he who asserts the positive. The religionists have conceded the argument long ago by admitting that religion must be accepted on faith, not on reason. Case closed.

I have been an atheist for over 30 years after a complete religious education and 10 years in religious school. It was in my confirmation year that I had an excellent teacher who argued the existence of God with me. And because he was an honest man, he allowed that I could question my faith. I ended up choosing not to believe in God. My dad said it was a stage I was going through and didn't get too upset. Fortunately, the family is accepting of differences. I still attend religious holidays with them from time to time. Some of the rituals are pleasant.

Would the religionists everywhere be as tolerant as my family. And by the way, we are all moral people. My morality is based on a philosophy rather than a religion. And I do not proselytize for atheism anymore than most people I know proselytize for their particular faith. The beauty of the melting pot is that we accept the differences as long as we all respect the rights of others.

Hello, I'm not here to prove that God exists. I'm here on this thread to show that atheists state that God does not exist, and that they base their reasoning on science, yet science has not even proved one of the unknowns. The primary unknowns are these: 1.) Where did all the matter in the universe come from? Atheists have no idea. 2.) Did a Supreme Being create this matter? Atheists really have no idea, yet say anyway that He didn't. 3.) If a Supreme Being did not create this matter, how then did it come into being? Yet again, atheists have no idea. Atheists have no idea about these three, yet they unilaterally declare that God does not exist. Why would an atheist choose one unknown and yet dismiss another unknown? It is unknown if atheism is true or if creationism is true, so why would atheists take a position that creationism is not true?

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

Don't know.

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

Probably not.

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

Don't know

4.) Has this matter always existed?

Probably

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

Don't know.

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

No. I can see and touch matter, and note it's effects and properties in a scientific manner. Matter is quantifiable.

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

Too metaphysical for my taste. You're supposing an awful lot about matter and the properties of "God".

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 themselves 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?

I don't accept your givens.

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.

Flawed, but not a bad attempt.

Try reading Anselm's Ontological Argument for the Existence of God.

"Where did all the matter in the universe come from? Atheists have no idea."

That's not correct. They can claim what I posted above, which is true. The energy always existed.

"Did a Supreme Being create this matter?"

No. It always existed.

"If a Supreme Being did not create this matter, how then did it come into being?"

The energy always existed. Any change observed is due to natural forces. There's no way to distinguish scientifically, anything other than that.

"It is unknown if atheism is true or if creationism is true"

Both are false. It is impossible to prove a negative, which atheism is. They are simply relying on Occam's razor, the KISS principle which says anything invented beyond the simplest explanation is irrelevant and meaningless. The word creationism means belief in a Biblically literal creation. The term was coined ~1875. That is false on physical evidence.

The difference between what Occam's razor eliminates as irrelevant and meaningless, and Christianty, is that the person of God showed up and told us who He is and explained Himself. That is observable evidence. There is no other religion where the diety showed up in person. That includes the real possibility, that the appearence of this universe and all in it was His doing. That is His claim and He pointed out the dual. The dual is that one can't uncover from physical science, the presence of a prime mover. The cause for "creation" can not be distinguished simply by looking at the physical world.

One either believes what Jesus said, or they don't. It's that simple. All a Christian can say, is that they believe what He said. All an atheist can claim, is that they don't believe him, Occam's razor applies, and it is the same meaningless, irrelevant story equal in real value to all the other stories.

The end point is this:

You, and no one else, can prove that matter has always existed, so why then do you claim that it has always existed? You can believe all you want that matter has always existed, but that doesn't make it so.

It is an unknown, as it is an unknown whether or not God created the universe. It is ridiculous to scientifically claim one unknown and discount the other unknown.

And neither can someone prove that matter was created by God and that He has always existed.

Both are just OPINIONS and a PHILOSOPHICAL belief system. (emphasis only).

If one cannot prove either, then what we have are creationists saying "We're right, and God does exist", and atheists saying "No, we're right, and God did not create the universe. There is no Supreme Being"

He said/she said, yada, yada, yada.

In the end, atheists act so enlightened and all, but they really don't know how we got here any more than creationists do.

It all comes down to faith.

Atheists believe by faith that God does not exist, and creationists believe by faith that God does exist...so...both groups are both in the 'faith camp,' so to speak.

That is the unvarnished truth, and atheists can recoil at that thought all they want, but that truth will continue to stare them in the face, whether they want it to or not.

" You, and no one else, can prove that matter has always existed,"

Conservation of energy, there's very strong evidence for it. BTW, the word proof only has meaning in logic and mathematical constructions. It has no other use in science, only evidence does.

" It is an unknown, as it is an unknown whether or not God created the universe."

It's a known with real evidence. It's also illogical to think something could come from nothing. As I said previously, there's only one person that showed up and claimed to be God. His words are all there is to go on.

" And neither can someone prove that matter was created by God and that He has always existed."

If God exists, then He alsways existed. It's in the logic.

" Both are just OPINIONS and a PHILOSOPHICAL belief system. (emphasis only)."

They are judgements based on the evidence and logical perfection in the claims. They are not necessarily simple opinion. Their measure of truth lies in the inherent perfection of the logic and evidence that supports it. Simple opinion does not.

"If one cannot prove either, then what we have are creationists saying "We're right, and God does exist", and atheists saying "No, we're right, and God did not create the universe. There is no Supreme Being" "

No. The question of whether, or not there's a SBeing can only be answered by the being presenting himself and others judging. It's that simple.

" It all comes down to faith. Atheists believe by faith that God does not exist, and creationists believe by faith that God does exist...so...both groups are both in the 'faith camp,' so to speak. "

The only faith involved regards believing what someone tells you. No one can claim God doesn't exist per Occam's razor, as above.

"It all boils down to faith - for the believer and the atheist as well. "

Faith applies to believe what someone says on trust. The reasons one has for having and holding that trust can and do vary. Faith is a judgement call, based on an evaluation of some of what someone says, that the rest of what they say is true also.

An atheist doesn't believe anyone's stories. There's no faith involved there. None whatsoever. His only justificaiton for claiming that no god exists, is Occam's razor and pointing out faulty logic in the stories. That means he is justified in saying the stories are meaningless, irrelevant to the reality of nature and that there is almost no chance whatsoever that a god exists.

"The Bible says "that without faith it is impossible to please God, for they that come to God must BELIEVE that He is, and that He is a rewarder of them that deligently seek Him.""

What's the relevance of this? The Samaritan pleased God. This comes from Hebrews 11. Here's the relevant passages: Hebrews 11:5-6 By faith Enoch was taken away so that he did not see death, “and was not found, because God had taken him”;[Gen 5:24] for before he was taken he had this testimony, that he pleased God. But without faith it is impossible to please Him, for he who comes to God must believe that He is, and that He is a rewarder of those who diligently seek Him.

Paul's talking about Enoch here. That means He's talking about those that know Him. The pleasing is that they have found what God says, and the things that God values, are the same things they value. These passages do not say that only those who believe in Him please Him. One does not even have to know Him to please Him. As long as one values what God holds as valued, He is pleased. That is what is contained in God's statement of salvation, Matt 12:32
Anyone who speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven, but anyone who speaks against the Holy Spirit will not be forgiven, either in this age or in the age to come.

It is the things the Holy Spirit values that are important and as long as one holds them of value, God holds that person's judgement to be as if it was His own. That's because hte judgement is the same. The Samaritan didn't believe in God, yet he was separated out by God as a sheep from the goats. See Matt 25. As long as an anyone values the same things God does, God is pleased and they will live with Him in heaven. That includes atheists.

Faith, when it comes to issues like the beginning of time, matter and space, means believing in something without having any tangible proof to back up what believes. There is no scientific proof as to how matter originated or came into being.

Occam's Razor is a philospohical principle, devised by the English philosopher William of Occam which states that entities must not be multiplied beyond what is necessary.

In a scientific context, according to one dictionary I looked at, Occam's Razor "is the choice of the simplest theory from among the theories which fit the facts we know."

"In logic, Occam's Razor is the statement of an argument in its essential and simplest terms.

Since atheists do not know how matter originated, how can they use Occam's Razor to frame the simplest theory from among the theories which fit the facts they know? They can't. Why? Because theories require three things: testing, observation and confirmation.

How can one test, observe and confirm an unknown?

BTW, I notice that you conveniently left out the scriptures spoken by Jesus Christ Himself, namely these:

"...He that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed on the only begotten Son of God..."

Jesus Christ also said, "Ye must be born again."

He that is not born again, "cannot see the kingdom of God."

Jesus Christ said all of these things.

Read John chapter 3 to see all of these words of His.

In short, if an atheist does not believe in God, how can that atheist believe in the only begotten Son of God, who is God incarnate? They can't.

Jesus Christ said that if one does not even believe in Him, they are "...condemned already." Condemned to where?

Hell.

Sorry to burst your bubble. I don't know who is teraching you your doctrine, but it is time to get your doctrine elsewhere - like from the Bible.

/smiling.

"Faith, when it comes to issues like the beginning of time, matter and space, means believing in something without having any tangible proof to back up what believes. There is no scientific proof as to how matter originated or came into being."

There isno such thing as proof in science, only in logic and mathematics. Science relise on evidence. Regarding beginning of htis universe and the appearance of energy, the law of conservation of energy applies. The evidence for that law is overwhelming. That means the energy always existed.

"Since atheists do not know how matter originated, how can they use Occam's Razor to frame the simplest theory from among the theories which fit the facts they know? They can't. Why? Because theories require three things: testing, observation and confirmation."

Again, conservation of energy says it always existed. Also logic says it always existed. The observational evidence is overwhelming. There is no other hypothesis that withstands the observations.

Belief in God requires that one examine and have faith in what someone says. It is impossible to find evidence of God in the physics of the world(universe).

"BTW, I notice that you conveniently left out the scriptures spoken by Jesus Christ Himself,"

I gave His fundamental statement, to which all other statements are to be referenced to. Notice that the condition given in Matt 12:32 requires a judgement, a judgement of the Holy Spirit. a spirit is not some supernatural thing. It refers to all those htings which make up the self, or person. In particular here, it regards those elemnets of the person which are values, or things which are valued.

Notice that those quotes from John 3 that you gave are all contained and summarized within the following verse, John 3:6
"Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the spirit gives birth to spirit."

One is not born with a spirit. That has to be developed making judgements. Those are always the individual judgements one makes that determines ones values. The flesh is simply a machine that supports the functions of mind and personhood. Until the judgemnets are made, the person, or self doesn't exist. The spirit must be born of one's mind, which is one's spirit.

"In short, if an atheist does not believe in God, how can that atheist believe in the only begotten Son of God, who is God incarnate? They can't. "

The only important judgements to be made regard the Holy Spirit as a reference. In particular, those things that make up the spirit that are values, and things valued. Those are aquired by an individual by making judgements and decisions. The reference for the judgement spoken of in Matt 12:32 are the values and things valued by the Holy Spirit. It is a simple comparison and only through that comparison can one know God. There is no other way.

"Jesus Christ said that if one does not even believe in Him, they are "...condemned already." Condemned to where? Hell.

As above, Matt 12:32 is His fundamental statemnet. Taking your claim as the fundamental statemnt would result in God contradicting Himself, which He does not do. It says right there in Matt 12:32 that, "anyone that speaks a word against the Son of Man will be forgiven". that's fundamental and covers all those who don't and simply don't believe He is God. It is enough for one to develop a spirit that resemble's God's in values and things valued. That is what He cares about.

"I don't know who is teraching you your doctrine, but it is time to get your doctrine elsewhere - like from the Bible. "

I don't believe in doctrine. Doctrine is the axiomatic claims of men. God is rational and came here to teach. I'll learn from him and use what He says as a reference to evalute anything anyone else says. That is the only way non-aximatic knowledge and understanding of His person, the Holy Spirit can be had. He teaches no axiomatic doctrine.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.