Thread: Question for Atheists.

Originally Posted by Darkmatters

This (god being considered masculine) is just one example of how the church has perverted the actual core message of various belief systems and used them to promote their own political agendas. When Michelangelo painted God on the Sistene Chapel ceiling as an old man with buff muscles and a flowing white beard, it was meant as an allegory

That single painting forever changed the way people view God! Before the renaissance, in the dark ages, they actually got one thing right. You were not allowed to paint God in anyway shape or form, because such a painting would be a false idol (or a false representation of God). They took this false idol business seriously. There is evidence that many of the artists in the dark ages actually did know their anatomy. But they painted Jesus and other biblical figures stylized because they decided since they have never met these people, it would be wrong to try to paint them photo-realistic.

And that to do so, would create a false idol!

Well, they made plenty of false idols in the renaissance! Who doesn't know what Jesus is 'supposed' to look like?

Btw the God in Michelangelos ceiling was based off the current day Pope.











"WORSHIP ME! I AM YOUR GOD-KING! RAWR RAWR RAWR!"
(yes I think all popes sound like this!)

The Pope looks very mafioso and evil.

Originally Posted by sora12

Hello there.
I am interested in knowing when some of you who are Atheist became/ realized you were atheist and or how? (Sorry if I worded the question in a weird way.) Lately, I've been doubting my belief in God. I grew up all my life believing in him and I've never really given a second thought to his existence. So I just wanted to see if anybody went through a similar experience before they became Atheist and stuff like that.

I was in about as deep as one could be; I went to a hardcore pentecostal church about 4 times a week for 7 years, I prayed all the time, spoke in tongues and everything. I thought that all atheists would go to hell and that it was my mission to save them. I believed everything until last year when I first started to question whether god was really there or not.
The main event that made me question my beliefs was when I watched a bit by Joe Rogan with my Christian friend. It was about Noah's ark and how impossible it would be for that story to have actually happened. Most of what he said was really logical so I turned to my friend with wide open eyes and he did the same to me. We both knew what the other was thinking: If this story wasn't true how could we be sure the rest of the bible was true? Thus I began my search for the truth.
I went online everyday from that day forth searching for answers. I researched both sides of the argument for hours on end. Some days I would spend the whole day reading about the fallacies of religion, while on other days I would spend the whole day looking for sound arguments for religion but rarely did I ever find any. After 7 months of this I didn't have to decide whether I believed or not; I don't think I could even will myself to believe anymore even if I wanted to. So now I am an atheist all thanks to Joe Rogan .

Growing up in a country with 'one of the highest level of irreligious individuals in the world' helped quite a bit.

The problem here is that many people have a mistaken concept of God. If we conceive of God as physical, anthropomorphic (like man) being, the question of God’s origin is valid. However, such a concept of God is alien to the Bible . Consider the following descriptions of God from the Bible:


John 4: 24
God is a Spirit: ...

Matthew 16:17
... for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto thee, but my father which is in heaven.

Numbers 23:19
God is not a man, that he should ... ;


Not only is God described as being outside space, but He is also described as being outside of time...

2 Peter 3:8
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.

Psalm 90:4
For a thousand years in thy sight are but as yesterday when it is past, and as a watch in the night.

Psalm 102:27
But thou art the same, and thy years shall have no end.

Acts 1:7
...It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his power.

If God is a being that is unlimited in time, and if He has access to every piece of time as if it were now, the question of who created God is an invalid question. When asked “Who or what created God?” we are making the assumption that God was created. If God exists outside of time and space, and if He is the Creator of time and space, He obviously was not created! God began the beginning! This is why He says, “I am Alpha and Omega, the beginning and the end, the first and the last” (Revelation 22:13).

God created time. The statement of Genesis, “In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth,” is making reference to the creation of time. The reason that things like heat death, the expansion of the universe, and the depletion of hydrogen do not apply to God is because He is outside of time. God has always been. He did things before time began (see 1 Corinthians 2:7). He not only began time; He will also end it. When time ends, all matter and all mankind will enter eternity—a timeless condition free of the negative things that time brings upon us now.

2 Peter 3:10-11
But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up. Seeing then that all these things shall be dissolved, what manner of persons ought ye to be in all holy conversation and godliness.

Also, how can you explain DNA.. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!

Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.Why is this so amazing? ....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

The laws of science have always been. They are great, they are impressive, and they are complex, just like the character God. You say God doesn't need a creator. Why do the laws of science?

One day I actually gave it some thought. And I decided it was bogus.

Well, I could ask you the same thing. If you believe that the laws of science have always existed, why not believe that God has always existed? In my opinion, it is a lot more plausible that the earth and the universe had an intelligent creator than believe in the low probability that everything in the universe just happened to come from nothing..

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

Well, I could ask you the same thing. If you believe that the laws of science have always existed, why not believe that God has always existed? In my opinion, it is a lot more plausible that the earth and the universe had an intelligent creator than believe in the low probability that everything in the universe just happened to come from nothing..

Low probability?

So you would think that it would make more sense that humans constructed the Himalayan mountain range than that they formed through natural processes?

How did I imply that? Im talking about the beginning of the universe here.
when you have a large number of independent variables and each of them has a finite probability, the total probability becomes astronomical. If you draw a card from a deck of cards once, the odds of getting an ace of spades is one in 52. The odds of drawing an ace of spades twice in a row back-to-back is one in 2,704 (1/52 x 1/52). The odds of doing it four times in a row is one in 7,311,616. This same technique has to be applied to all of the variables necessary to produce an atom, a planet, life, etc., if the calculation is done on a purely chance basis. The probability figures come up with numbers like one chance in ten to the 800th power! Even famous atheists like Francis Crick and Antony Flew have agreed that chance is not a valid means of explaining these numbers. They suggest that aliens or some other intelligence is responsible, which does not answer the question but just pushes it back one level.

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

Well, I could ask you the same thing. If you believe that the laws of science have always existed, why not believe that God has always existed? In my opinion, it is a lot more plausible that the earth and the universe had an intelligent creator than believe in the low probability that everything in the universe just happened to come from nothing..

I did not say everything in the universe came from nothing. I said the laws of science have always been. Do you think God came from nothing? We know the laws of science exist. For all we know so far, God is just an idea.

I am talking about parallel concepts in which one involves what has been tested and shown to exist and the other has not. You assume God has always existed and created the universe, but you rule out the possibility that the universe was induced or is manifested by laws of science that have always existed. Why the difference?

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

How did I imply that? Im talking about the beginning of the universe here.
when you have a large number of independent variables and each of them has a finite probability, the total probability becomes astronomical. If you draw a card from a deck of cards once, the odds of getting an ace of spades is one in 52. The odds of drawing an ace of spades twice in a row back-to-back is one in 2,704 (1/52 x 1/52). The odds of doing it four times in a row is one in 7,311,616. This same technique has to be applied to all of the variables necessary to produce an atom, a planet, life, etc., if the calculation is done on a purely chance basis. The probability figures come up with numbers like one chance in ten to the 800th power! Even famous atheists like Francis Crick and Antony Flew have agreed that chance is not a valid means of explaining these numbers. They suggest that aliens or some other intelligence is responsible, which does not answer the question but just pushes it back one level.

With so much stuff in the universe and the principle of order in science, the formation of material order was inevitable. If it hadn't been the current order, it would have been another one.

God is even more complex, right? Tell me about the probability of him.

As scientists examine the cosmos, they do not find it to be infinitely old or infinitely big. If the big bang theory is accepted in any of its versions, the universe is finite in both size and age. Textbooks will estimate the number of baryons in the universe as ten to the 78th power, and that is not in the range of the probabilities that exist. The cosmos is not big enough nor old enough to allow chance to be an operating mechanism. Proposals of parallel universes and virtual existence are not supported by evidence and appear to be attempts to avoid the admission of intelligence in the creation. How do the laws of science explain things like the complexity of human DNA..and that humans arent just a body and brain but also have a soul and higher conciousness.. To me it appears that there are more unanswered questions that arise in the assumption that there is no higher intelligence than our own, than to believe that God exists.

I didn't say the universe has always existed, though maybe it has. I said the laws of science have always existed. Laws of science existing outside of space and time are at the root of our universe. Those laws have always existed.

What do you mean the universe is not big enough or old enough for chance to be an operating mechanism? I said order is a major principle. Order is inevitable. There is a 100% chance of order. You are just taking the order we have and saying there was a low probability of it. You could say that about whatever the order ended up being. There had to be one of some type.

How do I explain something as complex as DNA? Evolution. How do you explain something as complex as God?

Every argument you make for the existence of God can apply just as well to the laws of science, except for one important thing. We know the laws of science exist. Also, the arguments you make about God apply just as well to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Why not assume its existence? Why not the existence of the Great Pumpkin? The Magic Unicorn? The Staypuff Marshmallow Man?

Yaveh is not the first god to be called "the Alpha and the Omega". In fact, all the ideas that went into Yaveh's description are not new... they were all used for various and sundry other gods before him, just as Jesus was pretty much an amalgamation of ideas of other prophets and half-human sons of gods before him. This doesn't mean there wasn't a historical Jesus, but that a lot of the mythologies surrounding him are just that - mythologies.

I see no reason why the creator needed to be intelligent. Science pretty much understands how the universe was formed... and I put a lot more stock in that concept than one created by superstitious primitives thousands of years ago. Even if the core ideas of the bible hold some truth, it's a sure bet primitive man who wrote it down in the form that came to be known as "the Bible" interpreted things in ways that made sense to them at the time.

In fact I'd go so far as to say creation myths are a human invention common to all early religions, as are the moralities associated with each religion. There is a core of profound wisdom at the center of each religion, but it's so deeply buried in the dogmatic beliefs and mythologies that it's almost impossible to separate out. In order to do so you need to study various religions and try to find the similarities.

Personally I think Buddhism gets it just about the closest.

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

As scientists examine the cosmos, they do not find it to be infinitely old or infinitely big. If the big bang theory is accepted in any of its versions, the universe is finite in both size and age. Textbooks will estimate the number of baryons in the universe as ten to the 78th power, and that is not in the range of the probabilities that exist. The cosmos is not big enough nor old enough to allow chance to be an operating mechanism. Proposals of parallel universes and virtual existence are not supported by evidence and appear to be attempts to avoid the admission of intelligence in the creation. How do the laws of science explain things like the complexity of human DNA..and that humans arent just a body and brain but also have a soul and higher conciousness.. To me it appears that there are more unanswered questions that arise in the assumption that there is no higher intelligence than our own, than to believe that God exists.

Scientists understand that the space created by the big bang probably does not constitute the entire universe, meaning it could very well be infinite. It probably is infinite. People often mistake our perception of the universe, our "bubble," as the entire universe. It is well accepted among most all physicists that something exists beyond our "bubble," or more accurately, within our bubble, in which case our perception of the of the universe would be expanded past its previous limitations.

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

How did I imply that? Im talking about the beginning of the universe here.
when you have a large number of independent variables and each of them has a finite probability, the total probability becomes astronomical. If you draw a card from a deck of cards once, the odds of getting an ace of spades is one in 52. The odds of drawing an ace of spades twice in a row back-to-back is one in 2,704 (1/52 x 1/52). The odds of doing it four times in a row is one in 7,311,616. This same technique has to be applied to all of the variables necessary to produce an atom, a planet, life, etc., if the calculation is done on a purely chance basis. The probability figures come up with numbers like one chance in ten to the 800th power! Even famous atheists like Francis Crick and Antony Flew have agreed that chance is not a valid means of explaining these numbers. They suggest that aliens or some other intelligence is responsible, which does not answer the question but just pushes it back one level.

The universe does not function through the drawing of cards from a hat. It is a rigid, deterministic system. Nothing happens spontaneously (Without cause) within the universe.

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

Also, how can you explain DNA.. Someone who writes an instruction manual does so with purpose. Did you know that in every cell of our bodies there exists a very detailed instruction code, much like a miniature computer program? As you may know, a computer program is made up of ones and zeros, like this: 110010101011000. The way they are arranged tell the computer program what to do. The DNA code in each of our cells is very similar. It's made up of four chemicals that scientists abbreviate as A, T, G, and C. These are arranged in the human cell like this: CGTGTGACTCGCTCCTGAT and so on. There are three billion of these letters in every human cell!!

Well, just like you can program your phone to beep for specific reasons, DNA instructs the cell. DNA is a three-billion-lettered program telling the cell to act in a certain way. It is a full instruction manual.Why is this so amazing? ....how did this information program wind up in each human cell? These are not just chemicals. These are chemicals that instruct, that code in a very detailed way exactly how the person's body should develop.

Natural, biological causes are completely lacking as an explanation when programmed information is involved. You cannot find instruction, precise information like this, without someone intentionally constructing it.

Evolution. The human genome didn't just spontaneously leap into existence by some incredible miracle; it grew very slowly over billions of years. What is so unfeasible about that? Genes in the genome tell a cell what proteins and compounds to produce. Is it all that hard to imagine that, given the sheer size of the earth and diversity of conditions, some sort of rudimentary early life would develop in a sort of primordial soup, and that that life would find a niche, from which to take root, grow, and evolve? Just because you fail to comprehend something, or are unable to wrap your mind around an idea, does not contribute one iota of evidence for a higher power. For you, DNA is an unexplained phenomenon (though science explains it quite well, and gathers more evidence all the time). There is more evidence for abiogenesis than there is God, and far more for evolution. In terms of evidence, God is roughly on par with the flying spaghetti monster; there is none. Why should God be exempt from logic, just because a large number of people believe in this idea? A few hundred years ago, people everywhere thought the world was flat, and that the earth was at the center of the universe. Questioning is an excellent thing. Reevaluating your beliefs is a good thing. Why do you lack such confidence in science and solutions grounded in reality?

Some would tell me to "have faith." Why is faith good? I'm getting along just fine without it. The world would get along just fine without it. Before you quote bible verses again, I should point out that the bible is an absolutely horrid source of evidence. It is an ever-mutating book of fables written several thousand years ago in a time when sea monsters were still considered a legitimate threat. Furthermore, there is no evidence whatsoever that a higher power wrote the original book, or that the original was ordained from God. For anything to be taken seriously within the book, it requires a suspension of critical thinking in exchange for blind faith. I repeat: why is faith good?

Yes, there are mysteries out there, but they won't be solved by just attributing them to a "higher power" and calling it a day. Unexplained events are unexplained, not the work of a divine being. Show me one reason, one event in the entire history of the world, where under reasonable experimental conditions, anyone has ever shown any reason to believe in a higher power.

I dont doubt science. I think science and christianity go hand in hand. I think there are a lot of misconceptions about the bible and science. If God gave us the Bible which tells us about what He did, there cannot possibly be a contradiction. If there is a contradiction, it is either because we have misunderstood the Bible or we have misunderstood scientific evidence. The lesson of the past has been that mankind has misunderstood both and has pitted his human traditions against his bad science, resulting in total confusion. It is bad enough that this has caused religious division and strife. science and faith are symbiotic in nature--each beneficial to the other.The fossils show us the fact that animals have changed.The fact that living things can change is indisputable. In the prehistory of the earth in Genesis ,the earth went through an undated, untimed period in which the resources man would need were produced. They were produced by the original materials being created and then being altered by natural processes so that man could find them. If we free ourselves from human traditions and creeds and look open-mindedly and fairly at the evidence, we can see that science and the Bible are friends--not enemies. Bad science and bad theology have caused an unnecessary conflict with enormous damage being done to both science and theology. If we look at these two areas as if they exist in a positive symbiotic way, we can see that the written word revealed in the Scriptures and the created message in the world around us have the same message and compliment one another.
Many Christian scientists embrace both their Christian faith and scientific theories of cosmology and evolution. That is, they accept the factual, testable aspects of these theories, but they also acknowledge a real and tangible role for God in the process.

http://www.clarifyingchristianity.com/science.shtml
http://www.godandscience.org/apologe...encebible.html

Faith starts from knowledge, even if it reaches beyond it, and its character as faith is not destroyed by its association with knowledge. There can be history without faith. There were some who saw Jesus, heard him teach and even witnessed him perform miracles who did not believe in him. Can there be faith without history?. Even if Jesus did not teach all of those things we think he taught, even if he did not perform all of those miracles recounted in the Gospels, and even if he was not raised from the dead, people could still believe in him. But the problem is that such a faith is empty. It is a false faith. As Paul said: "If Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain. ... lf Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins" (1 Cor. 15:14, 17).
We need a rational, historical basis for our faith, so that it will not become a subjective, individual feeling which is not guided by any objective criterion. History, then, prevents faith becoming fantasy.

Woes, don't forget about this...

Originally Posted by Universal Mind

I didn't say the universe has always existed, though maybe it has. I said the laws of science have always existed. Laws of science existing outside of space and time are at the root of our universe. Those laws have always existed.

What do you mean the universe is not big enough or old enough for chance to be an operating mechanism? I said order is a major principle. Order is inevitable. There is a 100% chance of order. You are just taking the order we have and saying there was a low probability of it. You could say that about whatever the order ended up being. There had to be one of some type.

How do I explain something as complex as DNA? Evolution. How do you explain something as complex as God?

Every argument you make for the existence of God can apply just as well to the laws of science, except for one important thing. We know the laws of science exist. Also, the arguments you make about God apply just as well to the Flying Spaghetti Monster. Why not assume its existence? Why not the existence of the Great Pumpkin? The Magic Unicorn? The Staypuff Marshmallow Man?

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

I dont doubt science. I think science and christianity go hand in hand. I think there are a lot of misconceptions about the bible and science. If God gave us the Bible which tells us about what He did, there cannot possibly be a contradiction. If there is a contradiction, it is either because we have misunderstood the Bible or we have misunderstood scientific evidence.

How do you classify a certain interpretation of the bible as a misconception when you are encouraged to create your own interpretation? There are literally hundreds of interpretations, maybe you misunderstood. I'm no scientific expert, but I can clearly see that the bible and science do not go hand in hand. There are many things in the bible that are not scientifically possible, and there are many things in the bible that are in direct contradiction with scientific theories.

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *

How did I imply that? Im talking about the beginning of the universe here.
when you have a large number of independent variables and each of them has a finite probability, the total probability becomes astronomical. If you draw a card from a deck of cards once, the odds of getting an ace of spades is one in 52. The odds of drawing an ace of spades twice in a row back-to-back is one in 2,704 (1/52 x 1/52). The odds of doing it four times in a row is one in 7,311,616. This same technique has to be applied to all of the variables necessary to produce an atom, a planet, life, etc., if the calculation is done on a purely chance basis. The probability figures come up with numbers like one chance in ten to the 800th power! Even famous atheists like Francis Crick and Antony Flew have agreed that chance is not a valid means of explaining these numbers. They suggest that aliens or some other intelligence is responsible, which does not answer the question but just pushes it back one level.

First, it isn't purely chance. Second:

Originally Posted by Sound

Just going to cite some numbers off wikipedia.

The universe is about 8,678 x 10^23 km wide (that's 867 800 000 000 000 000 000 000 kilometres.) (disclaimer: this number is quite uncertain. The theories about the size of the universe rages from 13,7 billion light-years to 180 billion light-years... but doesn't really matter. There still isn't an adjective strong enough to describe how big it is.)

In this space, there is about 3-7 x 10^22 stars (30-70 000 000 000 000 000 000 000 / 30-70 sextillion stars), organized in about 80 000 000 000 galaxies.

Someone look at these numbers and tell me chance has nothing to do with it.

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Size_of_the_universe

If you want to talk improbability, consider the Improbability of God.

Originally Posted by * Diamond Eyes *
I dont doubt science. I think science and christianity go hand in hand. I think there are a lot of misconceptions about the bible and science. If God gave us the Bible which tells us about what He did, there cannot possibly be a contradiction. If there is a contradiction, it is either because we have misunderstood the Bible or we have misunderstood scientific evidence.

Big list of Contradictions in the Bible

Interpret that. Do you not see the absurdity of taking a 2,000 year old book at face value, when virtually every iota of evidence gathered since either contradicts it or shows it to be unnecessary?

In the prehistory of the earth in Genesis ,the earth went through an undated, untimed period in which the resources man would need were produced. They were produced by the original materials being created and then being altered by natural processes so that man could find them.

Which begs a few questions: One, why in all the cosmos are men so special that an entire freaking planet needs to be built especially for them? Two, why don't you just find sword blades lying around? Why must iron ore be smelted and undergo complex processes to form alloys with other metals that also must be smelted? Can't flint arrowheads be explained by natural geological processes, or did some creator intentionally scatter obsidian all over in the hopes that one day, people may use it? God is wholly unnecessary.

Even if Jesus did not teach all of those things we think he taught, even if he did not perform all of those miracles recounted in the Gospels, and even if he was not raised from the dead, people could still believe in him. But the problem is that such a faith is empty. It is a false faith. As Paul said: "If Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain. ... lf Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins" (1 Cor. 15:14, 17).
We need a rational, historical basis for our faith, so that it will not become a subjective, individual feeling which is not guided by any objective criterion. History, then, prevents faith becoming fantasy.

Again, why is faith good? I have asked this question several times and received no answer. So what if people one day wake up and realize that xtianity is a joke? Will the world come to an end? Will the idea of "sin" even exist? It sounds more like a cover-your-ass-to-not-go-to-hell tactic than anything else. In all likelihood, xtianity is a hollow faith. Why haven't we heard a peep out of God since biblical times? Why is the Bible the only book speaking of Christ's magical resurrection? If you saw a dude die and come back to life, you'd probably make a note of it and get around to writing a book. Alas, though, all we have to go on is a single book, a single source of relatively unknown origin, that has been rewritten and modified all throughout history. You cannot seriously expect the bible as it is today and how it was almost two thousand years ago to bear any sort of similarity. Rewriting history to affirm your own beliefs is ridiculous.

Even if Jesus did not teach all of those things we think he taught, even if he did not perform all of those miracles recounted in the Gospels, and even if he was not raised from the dead, people could still believe in him. But the problem is that such a faith is empty. It is a false faith. As Paul said: "If Christ has not been raised, then our proclamation has been in vain and your faith has been in vain. ... lf Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins" (1 Cor. 15:14, 17).
We need a rational, historical basis for our faith, so that it will not become a subjective, individual feeling which is not guided by any objective criterion. History, then, prevents faith becoming fantasy.

Only according to the christian church.

The Dalai Lama was flabbergasted when he first began to visit the western world to discover how prevalent the insidious idea of original sin is here. He asked how you can love anyone, including your god, if you don't first love yourself? And why would a god need to first instill sin into his subjects in order to bully them into believing in him to receive salvation? It's a catch 22. The Buddhist idea is that we're born in perfection - which is the natural state.

You were not born a sinner... you only become one by believing the idea of original sin foisted upon you by the Bible.

We are 98% apes.

What's the other 2%? Fish? Rhinoceros? Bacteria?