Checkmate Atheists!

[QUOTE=K Xerxes]Why do I need to provide a rudimentary understanding of any God? If I was to do so for Yahweh or Allah, then it would only make sense that I need to acquire an understanding of Brahman, Ahura Mazda, Xolotl, Zeus, and however many Gods that have been posited to exist. Just because some of these belief systems are no longer in fashion does not necessarily [B]make them any less 'true' considering the God of Abraham and Muhammad [U]does not provide verifiable evidence for His existence[/U]. [/B]

The onus is on the side asserting the positive claim: that X God exists. [I]Provide me convincing evidence that your God exists and I will evaluate it, and come to a conclusion.[/I] Ideally something that is less subjective than faith, or even morality.

As it stands, I[B] was born and raised as Muslim before I realised it was a pile of shit, so I have a [U]good understanding[/U] of Islam and Christianity.[/B] Unfortunately I didn't really look that far into Judaism as I didn't want to invest any more of my life in these fantasies, but I assume I have the general gist from its successors.



No, I assure you most atheists do not follow God because there is a lack of convincing evidence for its existence. If you need an imaginary being to help you differentiate between moral and immoral actions, then fair enough, but to assume that humans don't have that capacity in themselves is ignorance.[/QUOTE]


The bolded do not add up, in the slightest. The underline are very incorrect.

You have not comprehended the Qu'ran.

[QUOTE=K Xerxes]If you need to suggest an alternative reality to explain the existence of your higher power, you may as well cut out the superfluous higher power all together,. Why can't the universe come from such an alternate reality without the need for divine mediator, for which there exists absolutely no empirical evidence for?

The problem with theists is that none of their commonly used onto/cosmo/teleo -logical arguments are convincing for [I]their[/I] god. At their best, they support a deistic or pantheistic model, which can deal with the god of gaps far better than a God who cares when you have sex and who with... That is unless we go in the completely arbitrary field of faith and, even worse, claims of divine scripture.[/QUOTE]
An alternate reality/other dimensions/etc has to exist to explain God...A God can not exist in this reality, this universe...The laws of science here won't allow for it.

I agree the most religions here are not convincing and are probably false...that doesn't mean the big bang happened out of no where. To me it is far more probable that it was designed. How lucky are we that this reality just happened to come equipped with gravity and light and time.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]I nevery said that humans don't have the capacity to be be moral. And besides, you alluded to sex. Not overall morals. [/QUOTE]

Sex is an example. Other examples include what we eat or drink and what clothes we wear.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]But as far as morals and atheism, here's my ultimate rebuttal that atheists have no response for, who makes the decision on what's moral? And whoever does, wouldn't that be imposing their will on others? It's hypocritical. But then again, since atheists have no morals, maybe that's ok.[/QUOTE]

It's your 'ultimate rebuttal' because you think that we require objective morality to govern us, hence it's fine to fabricate and worship an imaginary moral arbiter.

The bottom line is that there is no objective morality, and [B]that's fine[/B]. We implement laws and customs in societies that are designed (or meant to be) for the common good, whether it be for a small tribe or globally. Incidentally, these values change as we progress or develop from other societies. For example, it was morally acceptable, and even convention, to marry young girls when the Abrahamic religions took off, regardless of their ability to provide mature consent. That has changed in many places. Because [I]we[/I] - humans - realised it was wrong. It doesn't mean it is objectively wrong

Also I am not denying that religion has made a large and incredibly important contribution to our morals. One of the main reasons I believe religion has been so successful is the somewhat innate desire for an objective moral compass to live by. But that does not make it any more true. What does morality have to do with the veracity of God's existence? Nothing. It can be explained as a primitive man-made concept to cope with the solitude our ancestors struggled with in a world they did not understand.

[QUOTE=JEFFERSON MONEY]The bolded do not add up, in the slightest. The underline are very incorrect.

You have not comprehended the Qu'ran.[/QUOTE]

Of course you will say that. Muslims such as yourself cannot comprehend an objective account of the Qur'an that leads to the conclusion that it is most likely nonsense.

I've read the arguments. The scientific miracle (the egg shaped earth, the big bang, the clot fetus, mountain movements and whatever else) which I was inundated with when I was a young and dumb Zakir Naik stan. The literary miracle that nothing can be produced in the poetry and prose of the Qur'an. I admit it is a gorgeous piece of arabic, but that does not make it true.

Sorry to say there's no convincing evidence.

On a more scientific level, there is 'evidence' (not proof) that our consciousness is separate from our brain/body.

-The phenom of children that can recall past lives is very real, there are literally hundreds of examples of them, which is very strong evidence for reincarnation IMO. [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnXxC-nVsJY"]HERE is one of the more famed examples[/URL]

-There are enough out of body experiences for many doctors to come to the conclusion that we can in fact leave our bodies. Many documented cases of people in hospitals being able to tell others what they were doing in other rooms or areas that their body was not located. [URL="http://www.ebenalexander.com/books/proof-of-heaven/"]HERE is a book written by a neurosurgeon who used to be atheist on the subject, all proceeds from the book are donated to research on it, he makes nothing.[/URL]

-Several documented cases of the blind having NDEs and being able to see for the first time ever. Without eyes. There are also several NDE cases where there are no recorded brain waves, meaning it could not have been a 'brain trip'. [URL="http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/people-have-ndes-while-brain-dead.html"]Pam Reynolds had an NDE while brain dead[/URL]

[I]Chalk up another hit thread for Im Still Ballin. Leave my check at the door Jeff.[/I]

[QUOTE=K Xerxes]Why do I need to provide a rudimentary understanding of any God? If I was to do so for Yahweh or Allah, then it would only make sense that I need to acquire an understanding of Brahman, Ahura Mazda, Xolotl, Zeus, and however many Gods that have been posited to exist. Just because some of these belief systems are no longer in fashion does not necessarily make them any less 'true' considering the God of Abraham and Muhammad does not provide verifiable evidence for His existence.

The onus is on the side asserting the positive claim: that X God exists. [I]Provide me convincing evidence that your God exists and I will evaluate it, and come to a conclusion.[/I] Ideally something that is less subjective than faith, or even morality.

As it stands, I was born and raised as Muslim before I realised it was a pile of shit, so I have a good understanding of Islam and Christianity. Unfortunately I didn't really look that far into Judaism as I didn't want to invest any more of my life in these fantasies, but I assume I have the general gist from its successors.



No, I assure you most atheists do not follow God because there is a lack of convincing evidence for its existence. [B]If you need an imaginary being to help you differentiate between moral and immoral actions, then fair enough, but to assume that humans don't have that capacity in themselves is ignorance.[/B][/QUOTE]You aren't even attempting to give the religious argument a fair hearing, a sure sign of a closed mind; I really don't have time for people who are so scathing when it comes to religion, yet they don't even know or understand what the religious argument is. It doesn't exactly take a genius to recognise that "because I feel that way" is not an objective basis for morality.

Morality (i.e. [I]what[/I] we consider good and bad) is a product of culture and thus fundamentally, of religion; our moral-sense (i.e. [I]that[/I] we intrinsically discriminate between good and bad) is innate, a part of being a member of the human species. You have provided no reason as to why you have the moral beliefs you do, nor on what foundation they rest--nor have you explained why what is good and what is bad differs from culture to culture, civilisation to civilisation, all throughout human history.

[QUOTE=~primetime~]On a more scientific level, there is 'evidence' (not proof) that our consciousness is separate from our brain/body.

-The phenom of children that can recall past lives is very real, there are literally hundreds of examples of them, which is very strong evidence for reincarnation IMO. [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VnXxC-nVsJY"]HERE is one of the more famed examples[/URL]

-There are enough out of body experiences for many doctors to come to the conclusion that we can in fact leave our bodies. Many documented cases of people in hospitals being able to tell others what they were doing in other rooms or areas that their body was not located. [URL="http://www.ebenalexander.com/books/proof-of-heaven/"]HERE is a book written by a neurosurgeon who used to be atheist on the subject, all proceeds from the book are donated to research on it, he makes nothing.[/URL]

-Several documented cases of the blind having NDEs and being able to see for the first time ever. Without eyes. There are also several NDE cases where there are no recorded brain waves, meaning it could not have been a 'brain trip'. [URL="http://www.near-death.com/science/evidence/people-have-ndes-while-brain-dead.html"]Pam Reynolds had an NDE while brain dead[/URL][/QUOTE]
You're better off bringing up quantum mechanics here. There is no way someone with a scientistic habit of mind would even consider the slightest possibility that those things have any merit or possible truth to them. But physicists have increasingly found the need to reintroduce the notion of "consciousness" as separate from matter, into their equations. Some of this stuff is very counter-intuitive and even calls the concept of causality into question (which would support the religious thesis).

Hume had already proven how causality cannot be validated by experience or logic 250+ years ago:

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tZ6L7QNFws[/url]

Perhaps it is our brains that need causality and not the universe? A mechanistic interpretation is not the only interpretation of the universe, and it certainly has its own internal inconsistencies.

[QUOTE=Dresta]You're better off bringing up quantum mechanics here. There is no way someone with a scientistic habit of mind would even consider the slightest possibility that those things have any merit or possible truth to them. But physicists have increasingly found the need to reintroduce the notion of "consciousness" as separate from matter, into their equations. Some of this stuff is very counter-intuitive and even calls the concept of causality into question (which would support the religious thesis).

Hume had already proven how causality cannot be validated by experience or logic 250+ years ago:

[url]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-tZ6L7QNFws[/url]

Perhaps it is our brains that need causality and not the universe? A mechanistic interpretation is not the only interpretation of the universe, and it certainly has its own internal inconsistencies.[/QUOTE]
You're right, I tried to make it clear it wasn't actual scientific proof...I'm just saying that there is in fact -evidence- out there for those (like myself) that need more than just blind faith.

[QUOTE=Dresta]Morality (i.e. [I]what[/I] we consider good and bad) is a product of culture and thus fundamentally, of religion[/QUOTE]

See:

[QUOTE]Also I am not denying that religion has made a large and incredibly important contribution to our morals.[/QUOTE]

The contribution of religion to morality does not make it any more or less true. Whether it was devoted to a higher being or not, it's still very likely man made. I care far more about the veracity of the claims, of which the most reliable way to ascertain the truth is through empirical evidence.

[QUOTE]our moral-sense (i.e. [I]that[/I] we intrinsically discriminate between good and bad) is innate, a part of being a member of the human species.[/QUOTE]

Innate =/= objective. It is innate as far as it is evolutionary, such as not to kill your kin who harbour most of your genome. Whether evolutionary instincts are right or wrong is a completely different matter, and, of course, humans have evolved to instill customs that are clearly counterproductive to the evolutionary goal of propagating our genome. Why that is the case is both extremely interesting and unknown. See The Selfish Gene.

Unfortunately, it is not [B]objectively[/B] immoral to rape someone. We perceive it as wrong because we have developed moral notions such as consent and non-maleficence, which we deem to be conducive to our existence in a society. It is thus immoral, but subjectively so. There's nothing wrong with that. It's how it is, and people need to accept that, so we can cut out the unnecessary moral arbiter.

[QUOTE=Dresta]You have provided no reason as to why you have the moral beliefs you do, nor on what foundation they rest--nor have you explained why what is good and what is bad differs from culture to culture, civilisation to civilisation, all throughout human history.[/QUOTE]

The is incredibly difficult, and bordering on impossible. At most I can say it is a combination of an innate sense formed and reformed by evolution, combined with conditioning from the society I live in.

My justification is irrelevant to the topic of whether to [I]believe[/I] in a divine being though, which is what I'm far more interested in.

[QUOTE=Im Still Ballin]Checkmate Atheists!

[IMG]http://1.bp.blogspot.com/--yUk6sRYfKs/UCRQtj3gakI/AAAAAAAAIww/l0HmuRDTRBA/s1600/atheism%2Bmakes%2Bno%2Bsense.jpg[/IMG][/QUOTE]
i guess it's 'checkmate' in the sense that you defeated a straw man.

last i checked, there is not a lot of glory involved in defeating a cartoon opponent.

[QUOTE][/QUOTE][QUOTE][/QUOTE][QUOTE=K Xerxes]Of course you will say that. Muslims such as yourself cannot comprehend an objective account of the Qur'an that leads to the conclusion that it is most likely nonsense.

I've read the arguments. The scientific miracle (the egg shaped earth, the big bang, the clot fetus, mountain movements and whatever else) which I was inundated with when I was a young and dumb Zakir Naik stan. The literary miracle that nothing can be produced in the poetry and prose of the Qur'an. I admit it is a gorgeous piece of arabic, but that does not make it true.

Sorry to say there's no convincing evidence.[/QUOTE]


So while you were typing I did a few errands and read this Ayat. (I have never read the Quran in its entirety and this was the first)

[QUOTE]Indeed, We sent down the Torah, in which was guidance and light. The prophets who submitted [to Allah ] judged by it for the Jews, as did the rabbis and scholars by that with which they were entrusted of the Scripture of Allah , and they were witnesses thereto. So do not fear the people but fear Me, and do not exchange My verses for a small price. And whoever does not judge by what Allah has revealed - then it is those who are the disbelievers

O you who have believed, whoever of you should revert from his religion - Allah will bring forth [in place of them] a people He will love and who will love Him [who are] humble toward the believers, powerful against the disbelievers; they strive in the cause of Allah and do not fear the blame of a critic. That is the favor of Allah ; He bestows it upon whom He wills. And Allah is all-Encompassing and Knowing.

Then is it the judgement of [the time of] ignorance they desire? But who is better than Allah in judgement for a people who are certain [in faith].[/QUOTE]

Moral relativism was once what people called justice a long time ago (in days of ignorance)..

You are invited to do a rereading of the book to understand the nature of God.

Do not use the word "objective" for future reference. A person with skin in the game, ego, and arrogance is going to see things very differently than the humble, sincere and faithful. Their sense of self, which Hume accurately also stated was not much else than a "collection of senses etc" did not over blow to the proportion where they think themselves independent from the Creator etc.. we can do back and forth but that's ultimately the main flaw in your thinking xerxes



And women are allowed to say no to their husbands propositions FYI.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]Hold on. Religious people that are stupid? Or are all religious people stupid?[/QUOTE]
The latter.

[QUOTE=fiddy]The latter.[/QUOTE]
Charles Darwin and Isaac Newton were stupid. Leo Tolstoy and Thomas Hobbes were stupid.

[QUOTE=Nick Young]Charles Darwin and Isaac Newton were stupid. Leo Tolstoy and Thomas Hobbes were stupid.[/QUOTE]
To some extend.

[QUOTE=fiddy]The latter.[/QUOTE]
So if someone disagrees with you and wants to kill you over that, why would anyone have the moral authority to come up against them?

[QUOTE=Nick Young]Charles Darwin and Isaac Newton were stupid. Leo Tolstoy and Thomas Hobbes were stupid.[/QUOTE]
Yes, Max Planck too! (as well as many other high-profile physicists)

[QUOTE]As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]"Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the religious element in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance and harmony. And, indeed, it was not by any accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were also deeply religious souls, even though they made no public show of their religious feeling."[/QUOTE]


Bunch of morons!

You know, fiddy, did once rebuke Jeff for making money off such a crappy forum.....

[QUOTE=JEFFERSON MONEY]So while you were typing I did a few errands and read this Ayat. (I have never read the Quran in its entirety and this was the first)
[/QUOTE]

If you haven't read the whole thing and critically analysed it yourself, then you're not a Muslim. You're a sheep.

But I'm not surprised. It is an excrutiatingly dull book, only rivalled by the Bible in its sleep induction quality.

[QUOTE=JEFFERSON MONEY]Moral relativism was once what people called justice a long time ago (in days of ignorance)..

You are invited to do a rereading of the book to understand the nature of God.

Do not use the word "objective" for future reference. A person with skin in the game, ego, and arrogance is going to see things very differently than the humble, sincere and faithful. Their sense of self, which Hume accurately also stated was not much else than a "collection of senses etc" did not over blow to the proportion where they think themselves independent from the Creator etc.. we can do back and forth but that's ultimately the main flaw in your thinking xerxes[/QUOTE]

I really have no clue what your argument is. It seems like you're just stringing words together at this point.

[QUOTE=fiddy]To some extend.[/QUOTE]
To some extend. Yes. You are a fitting judge of stupidity indeed.

[QUOTE=K Xerxes]If you haven't read the whole thing and critically analysed it yourself, then you're not a Muslim. You're a sheep.

But I'm not surprised. It is an excrutiatingly dull book, only rivalled by the Bible in its sleep induction quality.[/QUOTE]
so you're saying a muslim is either false or a zombie?

i'm so confused.

[QUOTE=K Xerxes]If you haven't read the whole thing and critically analysed it yourself, then you're not a Muslim. You're a sheep.


But I'm not surprised. It is an excrutiatingly dull book, only rivalled by the Bible in its sleep induction quality.

No need to criticize. The problem is not the books it's your attention span.



I really have no clue what your argument is. It seems like you're just stringing words together at this point.[/QUOTE]


- Surah Alaq 5:6 (Man transgresses because he thinks himself independent)
That ayat alone describes your behavior and worldview and life in a nutshell. Look at your posts beginning with the earliest of the thread. "Why can't we admit the universe came in and of itself?" Are you seriously implying that each atom in and of its own has a perfect intelligence where it can foresee and arrange itself in accordance to where it belongs to compose the heavens and earth. That's ridiculous.

Religious people believe that there is One God who is creating nourishing maintaining every atom of the universe.

it's no surprise that just like your inner psychologically perceives your ego as not needing God projects the same to the Universes origins.


- Objective is defined as being fair minded. It is impossible for you to be fair minded to people of a religious orientation because a) you choose your judgment over Divine Command and thus will by the very flawed nature of your psychology wield excess dislike for practices in disharmony with your worldview b) you can't even see what people with faith see because forgetting God while contemplating over the universe will render many many things as insignificant and disorderly. When people receive light and guidance they see meaning beauty, order and harmony where there is chaos. Their very consciousness and eyes are directed, by Allah's command, just as how all the creatures of the world have a method to their migrations.
They are not in rebellion against God.


While you play the role of critic and speak to an already irreligious audience the merits of cultural relativism, you sacrifice moments of your precious time and others. When you and I die, God forbid, were going to regret not having done more good for humanity.


The solution to the a) is self mortification, purification of the heartand ego dissolution. That is gained through spiritual practices. When one attains legitimate detachment from the world and loses all notion of "I" AND understands history, politics, religion, law, then they can maybe be closer to "Objective". That and repeatedly understanding ones limitations and sharpening the mind to be sounder and sounder of judgment. The Quran also states Moses and Joseph were given wisdom.and judgment because they themselves consistently did good deeds.

. The solution to the second issue is remembering God and knowing that through knowing God is the very key to unlocking the mysteries of the creation of the universe.

[SIZE="7"][URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yJXN5VPkyH8"]RIP Atheism[/URL][/SIZE]

[QUOTE=JEFFERSON MONEY]You know, fiddy, did once rebuke Jeff for making money off such a crappy forum.....[/QUOTE]
Poor attempt to have some things changed around here. "A new design has been in the works, expect changes in the next 2 weeks". Also he allegedly is paying for the site out of his pocket, rather than making money of ISH constantly.

[QUOTE=97 bulls]So if someone disagrees with you and wants to kill you over that, why would anyone have the moral authority to come up against them?[/QUOTE]
Religion and morality? Lol

[QUOTE=gigantes]so you're saying a muslim is either false or a zombie?

i'm so confused.[/QUOTE]

Sheep come in two forms. They either know little about their religion and follow it simply because they were indoctrinated to believe in it. Or they have researched their religion, but under some confirmation bias-tinted glasses, and accrue a lot of knowledge all under the assumption that it's true anyway.

The only way to truly be a believer, in my opinion, is to step back and assume a position of extreme doubt. Critically analyse a belief system and if you still conclude it to be true, then fair enough. It is impossible to be completely objective, but the more distance you place between the religion and yourself initially, the stronger and more convincing your belief will be. It just so happens that I analysed Islam (and christianity) as a teen and found it to be nonsense.

[QUOTE=K Xerxes]Sheep come in two forms. They either know little about their religion and follow it simply because they were indoctrinated to believe in it. Or they have researched their religion, but under some confirmation bias-tinted glasses, and accrue a lot of knowledge all under the assumption that it's true anyway.

The only way to truly be a believer, in my opinion, is to step back and assume a position of extreme doubt. Critically analyse a belief system and if you still conclude it to be true, then fair enough. It is impossible to be completely objective, but the more distance you place between the religion and yourself initially, the stronger and more convincing your belief will be. It just so happens that [b]I analysed Islam (and christianity) as a teen and found it to be nonsense.[/b][/QUOTE]
fair points; i understand.

although i would generally not recommend having one's teenage self make life-long decisions on one's behalf. they're not exactly the most well-rounded of individuals, after all.

[I][I]Whatever P Tiddy believes, I believe the opposite.

Can somebody tell me what tiddy's arguing so I can know what my beli[/I]efs are?[/I]

[QUOTE=KiiiiNG][I][I]Whatever P Tiddy believes, I believe the opposite.

Can somebody tell me what tiddy's arguing so I can know what my beli[/I]efs are?[/I][/QUOTE]
I'm arguing that atheism and agnosticism are two different things.

Which means you believe they are the same.

You're wrong

[QUOTE=KiiiiNG][I][I]Whatever P Tiddy believes, I believe the opposite.

Can somebody tell me what tiddy's arguing so I can know what my beli[/I]efs are?[/I][/QUOTE]
[I]Welcome to my award winning hit new thread, grab yourself a beverage from the snackbar and enjoy the show![/I]

[QUOTE=~primetime~]If you don't know, you're an agnostic, not an atheist

Atheists claim there is no creator, that space, time, light, matter, etc just came to exist from nothing.[/QUOTE]

That's not true. Atheist believes there is no god. That's that. That has nothing to do with cosmology.

You can say that you don't believe in any gods, and at the same time say that you don't know how the universe came into being. But if you were say that nothing breeds nothing. So, it has to be something to create it. Then who created the creator? The creator could be external, but you'll end up with a endless loop of a philosophical question that we either could never understand or yet to.

You could even say that there is literally no such thing as nothing. There's always something. Even in space, where there is a vaccum, there are photons, electromagnetic radiation, cosmic background radiation, dark matter, energy, dark energy, higgs boson, antiparticles, virtual particles that pop out every now and then. Everything is constantly moving down to the quarks that make up the sub atomic particles that would make up elements that we need to survive.

We still have a lot to learn about the universe. No one has the complete answers, but explanation. A while back, it appeared that virtual particles appear out of nothing. They appear and disappear out of existence all the time. But in actuality they don't...not really. It depends on the value of energy and the field. With the uncertainty principle, a mass of a 9.11x10^^-31 Kg can appear in existence for about 3.22x10^^-22 secs or less.

We don't know if there is literally nothing. We don't know there is a creator. We do have evidence that the universe wasn't always like this and it's constantly expanding. But expanding into what? You'll get answers that the universe is all there is, and it doesn't need anything to expand into. It's just expanding. If there is something out there to expand into, it would part of the universe. It's a unsatisfying answer, but it could be the truth. Who knows.

There shouldn't be any shame in saying "I don't know" to something as complicated as cosmology. It's being honest and humble. But you can say that you don't believe in any gods. There are some gods who don't even deal with cosmology. Those two are mutually exclusive.

[QUOTE=Micku]That's not true. Atheist believes there is no god. That's that. That has nothing to do with cosmology.

You can say that you don't believe in any gods, and at the same time say that you don't know how the universe came into being. But if you were say that nothing breeds nothing. So, it has to be something to create it. Then who created the creator? The creator could be external, but you'll end up with a endless loop of a philosophical question that we either could never understand or yet to.

You could even say that there is literally no such thing as nothing. There's always something. Even in space, where there is a vaccum, there are photons, electromagnetic radiation, cosmic background radiation, dark matter, energy, dark energy, higgs boson, antiparticles, virtual particles that pop out every now and then. Everything is constantly moving down to the quarks that make up the sub atomic particles that would make up elements that we need to survive.

We still have a lot to learn about the universe. No one has the complete answers, but explanation. A while back, it appeared that virtual particles appear out of nothing. They appear and disappear out of existence all the time. But in actuality they don't...not really. It depends on the value of energy and the field. With the uncertainty principle, a mass of a 9.11x10^^-31 Kg can appear in existence for about 3.22x10^^-22 secs or less.

We don't know if there is literally nothing. We don't know there is a creator. We do have evidence that the universe wasn't always like this and it's constantly expanding. But expanding into what? You'll get answers that the universe is all there is, and it doesn't need anything to expand into. It's just expanding. If there is something out there to expand into, it would part of the universe. It's a unsatisfying answer, but it could be the truth. Who knows.

There shouldn't be any shame in saying "I don't know" to something as complicated as cosmology. It's being honest and humble. But you can say that you don't believe in any gods. Those two are mutually exclusive.[/QUOTE]

I like this post and agree with the bulk of it, but I am not a fan of the "but who created the creator" line. If the higher power is found in some alternate dimension where the rules of science are nothing like our own, then explaining how that power came to be could be simple...in that reality, it's beyond our imagination.

I think absolutely everything in this universe, including life, can be explained with science EXCEPT for it start, the Big Bang.

I don't think a higher power has to be some perfect all knowing force that treats everyone as equal and fairly.

If we humans created self aware AI within a virtual 3D world, then that AI would think of us as "God". We are not perfect, and we wouldn't care to treat our AI creation fairly.

Our God(s) may be no different...maybe they created this 3D reality and separated the galaxies to study us in different environments. They may not care to treat us as equals and they may be flawed greatly .

@primetime,
is your argument about all that influenced by the recent science theory that our universe is a computer simulation?

either way, that theory is apparently gaining a good bit of traction in the academic world and has a lot of overlap with your argument and existentialism in general.



[quote]If the higher power is found in some alternate dimension where the rules of science are nothing like our own, then explaining how that power came to be could be simple...[b]in that reality, it's beyond our imagination[/b].[/quote]
that's a really smart way of looking at it IMO.

[QUOTE=gigantes]@primetime,
is your argument about all that influenced by the recent science theory that our universe is a computer simulation?

either way, that theory is apparently gaining a good bit of traction in the academic world and has a lot of overlap with your argument and existentialism in general.




that's a really smart way of looking at it IMO.[/QUOTE]
My thoughts in that post didn't come from that but I have read up on that, apparently there are similarities throughput the universe that are similar to the way computer programs work, it's fascinating stuff.


I have always felt that both atheists and theists believe that any "God" has to be some perfect flawless being, but that just isn't realistic . A higher power would just be something vastly intelligent compared to humans. Like we are to ants. Ants would view us as "God" but we are flawed as ****. Our higher power could easily be the same way. Intelligence that makes us look like insects in comparison, but highly flawed, and no thought given to treating us fairly.

[IMG]http://www.picshunger.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/believe1.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://timscogitorium.com/tinblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Einstein-on-God.jpg[/IMG]


Hold this eternal [SIZE="7"]L[/SIZE], atheists.

[IMG]https://quotesaga.s3.amazonaws.com/quote/QS_f96d818ee00742ca9619d4958ef30b57.jpg[/IMG]

[SIZE="7"][B]RIP [/B]ATHEISM [/SIZE]

[I]Agnostics disguised as atheists![/I]

[QUOTE=~primetime~][b]I have always felt that both atheists and theists believe that any "God" has to be some perfect flawless being, but that just isn't realistic.[/b] A higher power would just be something vastly intelligent compared to humans. Like we are to ants. Ants would view us as "God" but we are flawed as ****. Our higher power could easily be the same way. Intelligence that makes us look like insects in comparison, but highly flawed, and no thought given to treating us fairly.[/QUOTE]
it's pretty clear at this point that humans, like most other animals, are uncomfortable in the face of uncertainty. and the human brain being arguably the most complex of all animal brains on earth, is that much more uncomfortable... to the point of being easily terrified / neurotic at the vast complexity of the unknown.

at the risk of judging broad groups of ppl (seriously, who the f-ck am i to judge?), i think most people lack the humility and braveness to tackle being an agnostic... and therefore most people have more binary thinking about this stuff, tending to gravitate towards theism or atheism.

[QUOTE=JEFFERSON MONEY]A few moments ago, you literally, called Christianity and Islam "corrupted offshoots," and claimed that there is no Hell. Both statements false according to all 3 Scriptures.

The penalty for people who lie, and the people who follow those who lie are very, very, very harsh. Let's hope we're not categorized under them, man. And Allah knows best.
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1934&Itemid=93[/url]


[IMG]http://7768-presscdn-0-28.pagely.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/hell-fire-1.jpg[/IMG]


Hell is very, very, very real. Most people (includingmyself are in a spiritual slumber) and after death is as they become awake. I wouldn't wish Hell on my worst enemies, let alone strangers over the internet. People should be educated and learn about the Creator.. This website should serve as a much better place of learning than it currently is.



Now back in 622 AD, when Prophet Muhammad (PBUH), like all the Prophets before him (including [U]Moses[/U] (who said his troubles were with Moses), and Jesus) , were assigned to call people towards God. What were they met with? Prophets, who were specifically put on Earth as a mercy to help their people tread the path of providence to God, and compel them to do that which is ultimately good for them, had to deal with:

- Mockery

- Slander

- Character assassination
ex.
- People cracking jokes
ex.
- Attempts to poison his food
ex.
- More mockery
ex.
- Accusations of being "bewitched"
ex.

What are you and Kyrie doing, right now, Nick? It is a very evil thing to deny the Truth because it came out of the mouths of someone that's not part of your "tribe". That's the very definition of racism.

DO NOT CLICK THE FOLLOWING LINKS if you're scared of getting banned:
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=776&Itemid=60[/url]
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=275&Itemid=36[/url] (Curse for people who hide religious commandments)
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=955&Itemid=61[/url]
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1819&Itemid=89[/url]
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1250&Itemid=62[/url]
[url]http://www.qtafsir.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=122&Itemid=36[/url]
DO NOT CLICK THE ABOVE LINKS if you're scared of getting banned:


History repeats itself in all ways. Now, I'm just a guy among you, nothing special about me. But I've been on the boards for 12 years and have grown quite fond of a large number of you. As if you're my brothers.

As brothers, we can agree we want what's best for each other, yes? For starters, let's [U][B]at least try to prevent each other from going down dark paths towards Hell, yeah?[/B][/U]

The first step is to know God
[url]https://d1.islamhouse.com/data/en/ih_books/single/en_Knowing_Allah_Purpose_of_Our_Existence_and_Our_End_Allah_Makes_All_That_Known_by_His_Words.pdf[/url]
[url]http://www.gotquestions.org/Bible-knowledge.html[/url]
[url]http://www.newadvent.org/summa/1014.htm[/url]
[url]http://thetorah.com/seeking-torah-god/[/url][/QUOTE]


The problem with this post is that you're doing the exact same thing that Nick Young and the rest of the Jews on here are doing. Everyone is assuming that their belief is correct and is almost dismissive of any any other suggestion otherwise.

You cannot quote Islamic religious scripture as proof to men who might not agree with you that he's a prophet of God.
This is tantamount to a Christian saying there is a limbo because the bible says so. Presuppositionalist approaches don't get us anywhere.

[QUOTE=Nick Young][IMG]http://www.picshunger.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/04/believe1.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://timscogitorium.com/tinblog/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Einstein-on-God.jpg[/IMG]


Hold this eternal [SIZE="7"]L[/SIZE], atheists.

[IMG]https://quotesaga.s3.amazonaws.com/quote/QS_f96d818ee00742ca9619d4958ef30b57.jpg[/IMG]

[SIZE="7"][B]RIP [/B]ATHEISM [/SIZE][/QUOTE]

Why would Isaac newton's opinion on religion matter? Or Einstein? They could be physics geniuses but they're entitled to their own view on ontology. And others might not agree.

[QUOTE]As a man who has devoted his whole life to the most clear headed science, to the study of matter, I can tell you as a result of my research about atoms this much: There is no matter as such. All matter originates and exists only by virtue of a force which brings the particle of an atom to vibration and holds this most minute solar system of the atom together. We must assume behind this force the existence of a conscious and intelligent mind. This mind is the matrix of all matter.


[/QUOTE]

Max Planck preceded quantum mechanics and wouldn't have had a clue what he's talking about when it comes to subatomic particles. Planck was clueless about wave particle duality and the quantization of electromagnetic waves' energy levels.
He was.a genius at his time and his constant is immensely important in the world of physics but this is a terrible quote to present. Max planck couldn't teach Niels Bhor, W. Heisenberg, Max Born or Albert Einstein the first thing about quarks, leptons, bosons or quantum mechanics.