Well, since I studied this a lot, I'd like to chime in. For starters, I'm a de facto atheist. I believe in the non-existence of god, but can't be 100% sure because proving a negative is almost impossible. I grew up in a Christian household in case you're wondering. I will not try to refute a specific god, but gods in general. But first, I want to clear some misconceptions.
1. There was no explosion in the Big Bang Theory. The theory only states that the universe was a hot dense matter which expanded and eventually cooled down. This theory coincides with many observations of our universe and is widely accepted in the scientific community. Also, this theory is not necessarily the antithesis to creation. The man who made this theory was extremely devout and attributed the start of the Big Bang to his god.
2. Evolutionist =/= Atheist. There are many Christians nowadays who believe in evolution. One man, I can't recall his name, stated that evolution is God's masterpiece. Evolution neither accepts nor denies a creator. Evolution does not explain how life started, but rather, how life diversified into the various species we now know. If you are interested in how scientists believe life started, Google "Abiogenesis."
I will try to dissect arguments for god
1. The Teleological Argument
"The world's intricacy must have a designer behind it."
Not really, no. The center of our galaxy is extremely unstable, our stars have limited fuel, many other planets are uninhabitable, etc. Also, not everything requires a designer. If they do, then a being like god so intricate must have a designer. And a designer who designed such a being must have a designer, and so forth and so on. Assuming his argument is correct, it still poses many questions like, "Who was the designer?" "How many were there?" "Were they omnipotent?" "Why are there so many flaws?" etc
2. "Science can't explain how we came here."
It can't fully explain it, I agree, but the invocation of some supernatural being is a claim not based on evidence. Argumentum ad ignorantiam
3. "Lots of people believe there is a god, so it must be true."
Argumentum ad populum
I'll post more whenever
1. There was no explosion in the Big Bang Theory. The theory only states that the universe was a hot dense matter which expanded and eventually cooled down. This theory coincides with many observations of our universe and is widely accepted in the scientific community. Also, this theory is not necessarily the antithesis to creation. The man who made this theory was extremely devout and attributed the start of the Big Bang to his god.
2. Evolutionist =/= Atheist. There are many Christians nowadays who believe in evolution. One man, I can't recall his name, stated that evolution is God's masterpiece. Evolution neither accepts nor denies a creator. Evolution does not explain how life started, but rather, how life diversified into the various species we now know. If you are interested in how scientists believe life started, Google "Abiogenesis."
I will try to dissect arguments for god
1. The Teleological Argument
"The world's intricacy must have a designer behind it."
Not really, no. The center of our galaxy is extremely unstable, our stars have limited fuel, many other planets are uninhabitable, etc. Also, not everything requires a designer. If they do, then a being like god so intricate must have a designer. And a designer who designed such a being must have a designer, and so forth and so on. Assuming his argument is correct, it still poses many questions like, "Who was the designer?" "How many were there?" "Were they omnipotent?" "Why are there so many flaws?" etc
2. "Science can't explain how we came here."
It can't fully explain it, I agree, but the invocation of some supernatural being is a claim not based on evidence. Argumentum ad ignorantiam
3. "Lots of people believe there is a god, so it must be true."
Argumentum ad populum
I'll post more whenever
Last edited by JorreI14; Jan 8, 2014 at 02:39 PM.
Originally Posted by JorreI14
1. There was no explosion in the Big Bang Theory. The theory only states that the universe was a hot dense matter which expanded and eventually cooled down. This theory coincides with many observations of our universe and is widely accepted in the scientific community. Also, this theory is not necessarily the antithesis to creation. The man who made this theory was extremely devout and attributed the start of the Big Bang to his god.
another analogy is that the universe is acting like a gas, showing how insignificant we are.
btw, the point of this thread was to see if people can write from the standpoint opposite to your own belief. not to one up eachother
No ones beliefs in this thread will change, people don't come here to debate, they come here to win an unwinnable argument with strangers on the internet.
I would die if i jumped from my ego to my IQ.
Originally Posted by ImmortalPig
Science explains everything and disproves God. I can't post any citations to back it up, but trust me it's pretty complex but well proven.
Science could be used to give a reasonable explanation(s) to most things / everything depending on how far you take it.
However there is no way to exclude the idea of gods existence, neither does it seem that what we can confirm through practice any evidence strong enough to leave no doubt of his in-/existence.
The problem here comes with believing in absolutes and that there can only be one truth // and/or (depending on how you define and see it) they this truth can be confirmed and as such all other possibilities can be taken out of the equation.
Thus it's a never-ending circle, most fundamental abstract concepts WILL be redefined in the future as we come to discover new connections and what we call facts, however saying that what we believe is true* today is simply false due to history telling us that we will most likely face paradigm shifts is simply another case of not applying logics and reasonable thinking.
Ignorance is bliss for the ignorant.
* True here means that we take it as an correct in every possible way and that this could be "confirmed" through practice, or as a deduction from results of another fundamental "beginning" of a reasoning, often referred to as axiom, or postulate.
Last edited by Smogard49; Jan 8, 2014 at 08:34 PM.
Reason: Before someone refutes this; I do not believe in god, I'm an agnostic or de facto atheist, or lavey(ish)-satanist.
Now doing recoloring for people not in the clan as-well, PM for more info!
PROUD OWNER OF THORN'S GOOD ENOUGH WRITER AWARD!
PROUD OWNER OF THORN'S GOOD ENOUGH WRITER AWARD!
Originally Posted by Smogard49
Science could be used to give a reasonable explanation(s) to most things / everything depending on how far you take it.
However there is no way to exclude the idea of gods existence, neither does it seem that what we can confirm through practice any evidence strong enough to leave no doubt of his in-/existence.
The problem here comes with believing in absolutes and that there can only be one truth // and/or (depending on how you define and see it) they this truth can be confirmed and as such all other possibilities can be taken out of the equation.
Thus it's a never-ending circle, most fundamental abstract concepts WILL be redefined in the future as we come to discover new connections and what we call facts, however saying that what we believe is true* today is simply false due to history telling us that we will most likely face paradigm shifts is simply another case of not applying logics and reasonable thinking.
Ignorance is bliss for the ignorant.
* True here means that we take it as an correct in every possible way and that this could be "confirmed" through practice, or as a deduction from results of another fundamental "beginning" of a reasoning, often referred to as axiom, or postulate.
though abstracts are/will be redefined, the amount of people who believe themselves to be fundamentalist Christians are still rising, ignoring all evidence that would result in the contrary to their belief.
Faith is a resilient old thing.
I would die if i jumped from my ego to my IQ.
Hmmm, I'm sorry I'm not gonna play the op game, simply because I can't. From my point of view science and faith aren't necessarily seperate.
I think someone entirely religious (creationists, lets say it) sadly lacks critical thinking, while someone who rejects any idea of something that could be called "god" lacks a great deal of spirituality. And both are necessary to accomplish a regretless life.
Sciences answer the "how ?", while faith & spirituality answer the "why ?".
For instance, I base my "faith" on logic and factual observations, just like science, and came to my own perception of "god". According to myself, god isn't a conscious being or some religious crap (sorry) ; it's something primal, it's the order out of chaos (what we call time, space, matter and interactions etc...), it's the fact anything that lives inherently knows its own purpose is to keep on living, it's the evolution of all the things depending on each others and influencing each others. It's really hard to put words on it ;p
But concretely, once you've came to accept and understand there's something beautiful and elusive in everything, no real purpose to life but living, and grasp the entirety of the universe, it gives you a satisfying and calming faith... and convictions about your own life.
Then you know, there's something greater to do than living a selfish material life, that's a warm feeling you want to share with everyone. That's what having faith is, that's not blindly following some books from another time without even questioning them, that's just being stupid.
I think someone entirely religious (creationists, lets say it) sadly lacks critical thinking, while someone who rejects any idea of something that could be called "god" lacks a great deal of spirituality. And both are necessary to accomplish a regretless life.
Sciences answer the "how ?", while faith & spirituality answer the "why ?".
For instance, I base my "faith" on logic and factual observations, just like science, and came to my own perception of "god". According to myself, god isn't a conscious being or some religious crap (sorry) ; it's something primal, it's the order out of chaos (what we call time, space, matter and interactions etc...), it's the fact anything that lives inherently knows its own purpose is to keep on living, it's the evolution of all the things depending on each others and influencing each others. It's really hard to put words on it ;p
But concretely, once you've came to accept and understand there's something beautiful and elusive in everything, no real purpose to life but living, and grasp the entirety of the universe, it gives you a satisfying and calming faith... and convictions about your own life.
Then you know, there's something greater to do than living a selfish material life, that's a warm feeling you want to share with everyone. That's what having faith is, that's not blindly following some books from another time without even questioning them, that's just being stupid.
Last edited by deprav; Jan 9, 2014 at 03:53 AM.
