Question for atheists (believers welcome too)

@santuccie (3375)
United States
April 19, 2008 3:05am CST
First, read my posts under responses #22 and #26 in this thread: http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1457432.aspx?p=3 Now, my question to you is this: Unless you're essentially agnostic, you actually believe that there is no God, and that this universe and everything in it assembled itself over billions/trillions of years. Are your views based mostly on science, or on contradictions in scripture? I see Christians and other religious people frequently get ripped to shreds when they get into scriptural debates, but my testimony and loosely monotheistic arguments in science seem to back atheists into a corner. I've yet to find anyone who could defeat these arguments. Can you? P.S.: If you are a believer, I welcome you also to inject whatever views you may have into this discussion. It doesn't matter to me who your deity is, or how many you have; this discussion is about "Creative Intelligence." Anything you have to offer is worth my time to read.
1 person likes this
5 responses
24 Apr 08
I relay can add anything more than what i said above, I guess i should have writen it in my own responce,LOL. Anyway, it is hard for me to fathom the depths unbelivers will go NOT to beleive in God, They will say their are no absalutes, for one thing they are very absolute about it. For instance, God can't exist becouse who made God? They ask this question knowing you will say "nobody crated god, He has always been." Ha! they say, "If life began by God then somewhere God had to be created, he can't always have been." So then I say okay, where did everything in the universe come from? answer: the big bang... Okay where did the big bang come from? answer: from energy that was compressed into a single atom that exploded into everything that is the universe... Okay where did the energy come from? answer; It didn't come from anywhere, it was always there. HA!!! You said befor it was inpossible for something to have always existed!!! They can beleive in an atom that had no beggining and no end, but their minds can' wrap itself around an intelegent though (GOD) that has always been. I beleive it is becouse they can not comprehind NOTHING, by that I mean the absense of everything, no light, no darkness, no atoms or thought. This was our universe befor the devine spark of Light and the Word spoke it into existence. Enstien was so close with his general relitivity, about the constent motion of matter and the combined laws of thermodynamics. The odds of spontanious life comming into existance like stated above is astronomical, Becouse not only does chance have to put every molicule together correct, but in the right order. Can you emagine if chance never created trees or vegitation? or water? this is what I mean, chance had to get the suport system down first, then the micro organisms, and the slow development of all species. Truly a tornado has a better chance of creating a functional 747 in its wake than spontaious life with no intellegent forthought. I think I will get som amino acids and other chimicals together and throw it in to a vat and see what i can create by chance. What is so hard in understanding that life in all forms is to complexed for accedent? Why is it that mans mind has no limits? Why is it that we alone are aware of not only our planet but the cosmos as well? Why is it that mans three greatest question thrughout history has been; who am I, why am I here, and where did I come from? Answers, I am the created image of God, I am here to find my way back to the Creator, And upon finding the Creator, knowing Him from where I came.
1 person likes this
@santuccie (3375)
• United States
24 Apr 08
One disagreement I have with this is man's mind having no limits. We truly can comprehend a lot, but quantum mechanics predict that there may be far more than the three spacial dimensions, and time, being the fourth. We humans can only perceive the first three, while we are conscious of our travel through the fourth. Our minds are certainly powerful as is, but not infinitely so. That notwithstanding, your response is terrific! You and I are on exactly the same page with regard to what chance would have to do in order to produce life as we know it without any external influence. Look at how many systems our bodies have, the organs which comprise them, the tissues which comprise them, and finally, the system in each of the cells which comprise these tissues. All these work together to keep us alive. Remove the skeletal system, and we lie helpless like rag dolls. Remove the digestive system, and we die within two weeks if not sooner. Remove the respiratory system, and we die within minutes. Remove the nervous system, and you have nothing but a big clump of cells that can't work together. Remove the circulatory system, and nothing in the body works at all. One topic that I find of real interest, though I must admit I only barely understand it, is handedness in amino acids. I was first introduced to this subject, and what it means for the odds against abiogenesis, when I read "Chemical soup is not your ancestor!" by Carl Wieland, an interview with Dr. Aw. You can read the interview here: http://www.answersingenesis.org/creation/v16/i2/soup.asp If you want even more ammo for your arsenal, look here (this site also covers handedness in amino acids): http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/index.html Indeed, chance would have had a really tall order to fulfill! Between you and theprogamer, I'm not sure whose response I like better. I'll have to take some time with this. Now that I have two very powerful arguments in this thread, I will probably wait until discussions here slow to a crawl or complete stop. In the meantime, you both get all pluses from me, and many thanks. Our time together here is much to my delight. Salute! -santuccie P.S.: Laughing at dumb jokes is still good to your health!!!
24 Apr 08
Okay, can I intice you to think outside of the box, or actualy lets start inside the box. lets say you are a box with five openings, thrugh these five openings you preceive the world/universe. Becouse you only have five openings you are limited in your perception. Now lets say you have realized a flaw in your perception of the universe becouse you only can preseive the universe in five ways, To you the universe is real becouse of the openings, Now lets say becouse you now preciev your view is flawed you must now come up with a new opening to preceive the universe. With this opening now you can preceive not only the universe but the 'Creator', Only by your preception that your veiw was wrong and in error were you able to preceive a sixth opening, an opening to the mind of the Creator himself. Ofcourse these opening are our five senses. we must come to a point in our life that we must admit that in these five sense we ARE limited, by not just quantom phisics, but in the way we can exspress and precieve the creation around us. By letting ourselves come to the conclusion that there must be another opening to the universe, the real universe, not the one we experiance inside the box, but the universe we live outside the box in connection to our Creator becomes the real universe, and there in that reality do we fully relize how little we know about anything and begin to understand the true limitlessness of our minds when conneceted to the source of all things.
1 person likes this
@santuccie (3375)
• United States
25 Apr 08
I sort of get what you're saying (I had to read really slow to take it in), but I'm still not completely convinced. I won't expressly say you're wrong, though, because I don't have any way of knowing. On the one hand, our immortal spirits might have to adhere to the effective laws in this corporal universe as long as they occupy a corporal, mortal body. On the other hand, it may very well be possible to "break out of our shell." In fact, the transformation of a born-again believer may be such an example, in that we start to see things we never saw before. But I've yet to find passage into the very mind of God. I believe I've actually heard His voice once or twice, when a powerful "urge" told me to leave the house immediately. I've just barely caught rides to appointments on more than one occasion this way, when I was running late (the last time this happened was four years ago). But that's about the closest contact I've had. I've been told before that there are secrets of God's design that might be too much for a mortal mind. I am of the understanding that, while an immortal spirit remains just that, the body's dependence on it evidences a certain connection. Supposedly people have had out-of-body experiences, but had to hurry to get back in before the body perished. Likewise, people are always claiming to have encountered ghosts, trapped in a world-between-worlds because of unfinished business. These are just little details that come to mind. None of them prove anything for me, but I'm not really troubled with this, either. The fact that I have a connection to God at all is reason enough for me to rejoice. And when the time comes for us to join Him, perhaps we will for once realize our full potential.
• Thailand
19 Apr 08
It is not that I don't believe in God. I just find that she is unnecessary to understand the universe.
1 person likes this
@santuccie (3375)
• United States
19 Apr 08
Hi, I respect your view, but I have another question: Are you agnostic, or do you lean more toward the belief that God is real? Personally, I don't seek God just for the sake of knowledge. I seek God in gratitude. It makes no sense to me to say something like, "Thanks for giving me life, God. Now butt out and let me live this life without you!" I'm not saying this is your attitude; I'm just speaking hypothetically. "God is everything, or He is nothing," that's what they say. Upon realizing He was not nothing, I asked what I could do for Him. I don't know if you've ever heard this before, but a "joke" I've heard several times in my life goes something like this: The president of the UN General Assembly goes before God, and says to Him, "God, perhaps you've noticed all the technological advancements we have made. We are now capable of doing anything you can do, and we don't need you anymore." God replied, "So you can do anything I can do, can you?" As the man nodded affirmatively, God scooped up a handful of dirt and made another man. God said, "Now you try." The president reached down to grab some dirt, but God smacked his hand and said, "Get your own dirt!" Everything in this universe was created by Him, for Him (Him/Her/It). In God's universe I am entitled to nothing. Everything I have is a gift, and I always acknowledge those who give me gifts, including God. Thank you for your response! -santuccie P.S.: Laughing at dumb jokes is still good for your health!!!
• India
20 Apr 08
Your 'joke' made me laugh, but there is profound truth in what you said!!!
1 person likes this
20 Apr 08
You are very eliquent in your speaking and very concise in your anilitical and critical thinking. To me there is no diference between science and creation as they both try to answer the same question, why am I here and what is my purose. Science at one time was lead by religion, but the closed minded people who were afraid of their authority being chalanged would not except prevailing conclusions to theories that said we were not the center of the universe, let alone our own solor system, These people coused great harm to the belife of creationism. The laws of the universe and exspressed in the general relitivity theory to me can point to nothing but devine or intelligent design. To say that life is spontanious and sprang up with no thought is paramount to a tornado plowing through a junkyard and the debreis coming down in the form , no a funtioning Boeing 747. Even over the bilions of years that the universe had to do this it would be the best outside bet in history that not only could it get millions of lifeforms correct but do it in the right order as well. Evalotion does have its place, but on a micro, not the macro level of one thing becomeing another. Micro evealution was needed to bring life in stages to the point we see it now, And even the destinktion of sevral speacies was needed. One thing leads to another and needed for the avancement of the other untill the former is no longer neede and thus becomes competative with the latter and thus must be removed from the equasion. Fundamentalist beleiving that the bible is to be taken literaly further exasperate the amnity between science and creation. Faioth is one thing but to disbelive the truth is another. the story of creation in the bible is at best an alogorical coment, taken from a document that out dates Moses's writeings some 3000 years. And even in the document itself it offers no time table between the creation of the heavens and the earth and when the spirit of God hovered over the face of the deep and said 'let there be light'. As an appologist I find your answers superb, Meaningfull and delightfull.
1 person likes this
@theprogamer (10543)
• United States
23 Apr 08
Doing this at 65% instead of 120, but I hope you enjoy the efforts. I think the question could be answered with a who or a what... but I'm more focused on a why... There is also a where too... supposedly defined by some black hole locations, but not confirmed totally. I have seen contradictions in scripture as well as the human variable in religion. Imperfect and willing to abuse religion for its own purposes (control, fear). I do not disrepect the religious though. I have my own thoughts on the matter and I do entertain the possibility of creator(s). I also entertain the notion of energies, matter, or even other quantum and physical scenarios being the answer to the universe. There is another possibility that the universe as we perceive it is only a fraction of something even greater. Its also possible that none of this, the universe, creator, "spiritual" energies...none of it exists... There are some scientific rationalizations like those you shared Santu. I'm reminded of string theory and the possibility of 10 dimensions (I believe 26 in another theory) but they are imperceivable by humans. Similar to "time" not being completely perceivable by humans. Quite possible something unknown to us exists in any or all of those dimensions, but again, unable to perceive it. These discussions may also lend itself to the discussion, since you did say anything offered is worth the read. http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1360349.aspx http://www.mylot.com/w/discussions/1360501.aspx Plenty of things about religion and creation are questionable, same with some issues in science (Hadean-Archean eons for example). There are facts with the latter, but little to no evidence of what really happened in terms of life. And I do throw the same question when it comes to origins of the universe... there is no definite witness or evidence, just theories to fit observations and facts (expanding universe... hydrogen and helium abundances). I also think about how "perfectly" some things occured. How life evolved and the intricacies of the environment to sustain it. It may not seem like much, but random or minor differences in our current environment would make it unsustainable for life (oxygen content being the most apparent). Its a puzzle, a very interesting one.
1 person likes this
24 Apr 08
Isn't it great we can breath oxygen? Wich is in all eccense a bi-product waste of plants and therefor a polutent to the first forms of life on this planet! Just think, by chance the universal primordial soup first produced plants that expelled carbon dioxicide as waste, and then by chance plants that flurished in this polutent and produced as a biproduct oxxygen, these plans were ofcourse marine. And then by chance becouse of this pollutent aqudic life came into being that just so happend to need this biproduct, and so on, and so on.......................................! Untill some 10-12,000 years ago homoseapian, a mamal whos apperiance on the planet wasn't even a tick or a tock on the universal clock took over and dominated all life forms on the planet. Hurray for chance!
1 person likes this
• India
19 Apr 08
Hi, I am a Christian. And I have debated with atheists here many times. And it is disappointing to read atheists post about contradictions in the Bible which subsequently lead them to the conclusion that God does not exist. I just don't think it is a valid logic because if Christian understanding of God is untrue or wrong I think there are other expressions too. And therefore one needs to examine whether Hinduism or Islam or Judaism etc are correctly perceiving god or not. Or even otherwise if the existing religious expressions of God is untrue I don't see how one can conclude that there is no God. Another point I want to mention is that when atheists attack Christianity there is a misunderstanding of Christian theology. They think they understand, but they don't. And I think it's unfair to attack without having done some study. For discussion yes, but to say it's wrong and ridiculous without having examined well I think it's not fair. I have not read any posts by atheist on Christianity that I can say this is a fair critique. May be there are, and I have not read!
1 person likes this
• Belgium
20 Apr 08
Why do I not believe in a god? Well, mostly because I don't think the question 'how did the universe get here' should be answered with a 'who' but rather a 'what.'
@santuccie (3375)
• United States
20 Apr 08
Thank you for your response. So, are your views based mostly on science, or on contradictions in scripture?
• Belgium
21 Apr 08
I'd have to say, science. I'm quite convinced that all scriptures are simply stories written by men so I don't think that contradictions in scripture would contradict the existence of a God. However, attributing a 'who' to what caused our presence seems too much like a fairy tale for my likings.
1 person likes this
@santuccie (3375)
• United States
21 Apr 08
Seemingly simple logic, but that doesn't close the books for me. When I think "what," I think of a "Creative Intelligence." I read your blog, and I don't believe your reasoning has anything to do with petty semantics; I think it's personal. It's not God who (that) offended you, but Christians. For the record, I am not a Christian; I am just a plain monotheist. Some might say, "spiritual," but that term doesn't quite work for me. I don't just say that I believe in something, then leave it at that. I do pray, among other things. I don't attempt to confine God to a name, gender, form, or persona. I take for granted that God is a conscious being, and well aware of my presence and circumstances (see my testimony in the link I provided), but that's about as far as it goes. I occasionally reference scripture, but not because I take literally every word in the Bible, and I certainly don't profess anything I have no tangible evidence to support. My beliefs have to do with biology, anatomy, probability, and personal experience. Anyway, to each his own. I fully understand your resentment toward Christians, and I don't blame you. Any religion that spreads by the sword is not of God, yet practically every organized religion in history has done exactly that. However, I don't let other people's conduct dictate what I believe or don't believe; whether or not your reaction is what Christians would have hoped for, you give them power over you nonetheless by doing so. I prefer to figure things out for myself (see my scientific arguments and testimony in the link I provided). Thank you for your response!