atheist logic

[Pygoscelis]

If I carved a face on a huge wall of stone, and I hid the items without you knowing, and I took you to a trip and we saw the mountain, carved. Would you believe me if I said "this occured through thousands and millions of years of wind, and corrosion"

I may, especially if it was a face and if I trusted you to be honest. Paradolia of faces is especially strong in the human mind. We see faces everywhere. Remember the "face on mars"?

Now, lets say I concluded that it wasn't made by mere erosion. Why would I then skip to the conclusion that you did it? Just as why should I skip to the conclusion that a "God" created our universe? It could be space aliens from another universe. Or it could be natural forces such as evolution. Or it could have always existed. I don't pretend to know.

If we posit that there must be a beginning to all existence (which I don't know one way or the other), and if we posit a chain of sentient creators, then there had to be a first sentient creator and that sentient creator had to come to be somehow through a non-sentient creation (natural forces). And if that happens, then why posit a sentient creator, or chain of them, at all? That would only seem to overly complicate, making it less likely.

Moreover, if we had an active God that actually interacts and interfered with current human affairs, judges us, etc, then I would expect way more evidence than what I see around me in nature. And if a creator God did design all I see around me in nature, I would have to question the morality of that God, as he/she/it would have designed everything from cancer to hurricanes to insects that eat their prey from the inside out. I would also have to question the morality and sense of God that would judge me for not believing in him when he could so easily convince me. He could just make me know he's there if he's all powerful.... When I think through this I run into problem after problem for your God idea.

 

[Serinity]

I may, especially if it was a face and if I trusted you to be honest. Paradolia of faces is especially strong in the human mind. We see faces everywhere. Remember the "face on mars"?

Now, lets say I concluded that it wasn't made by mere erosion. Why would I then skip to the conclusion that you did it? Just as why should I skip to the conclusion that a "God" created our universe? It could be space aliens from another universe. Or it could be natural forces such as evolution. Or it could have always existed. I don't pretend to know.

If we posit that there must be a beginning to all existence (which I don't know one way or the other), and if we posit a chain of sentient creators, then there had to be a first sentient creator and that sentient creator had to come to be somehow through a non-sentient creation (natural forces). And if that happens, then why posit a sentient creator, or chain of them, at all? That would only seem to overly complicate, making it less likely.

The Creator is uncreated and uncaused, cause an endless chain of creators would result in the universe never being created. Thus it can't be. And since we're created means there is only one creator. And a creator can't be created.

 

[Pygoscelis]

The Creator is uncreated and uncaused, cause an endless chain of creators would result in the universe never being created. Thus it can't be. And since we're created means there is only one creator. And a creator can't be created.

Who said an endless chain? Perhaps there is one creator, perhaps there are two (the one who created us and the one who created him). Perhaps there are 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 and on and on. We don't know. But at the end of the day, if you insist that everything must be created (as opposed to always having existed) then you need a way that everything came to be, and that would include any particular creator. So at the very start, your proposed creator had to be created, and natural forces would have to be the way it happened. Maybe it turns out that WE are one of the creators (once technology is advanced enough) and this is all a time loop.

Or to put it more succinctly, if something can't come from nothing, and nothing can have existed forever, then that would include your creator God. To say otherwise is the special pleading fallacy.

 

[Serinity]

Who said an endless chain? Perhaps there is one creator, perhaps there are two (the one who created us and the one who created him). Perhaps there are 3 or 4 or 5 or 6 and on and on. We don't know. But at the end of the day, if you insist that everything must be created (as opposed to always having existed) then you need a way that everything came to be, and that would include any particular creator. So at the very start, your proposed creator had to be created, and natural forces would have to be the way it happened. Maybe it turns out that WE are one of the creators (once technology is advanced enough) and this is all a time loop.

Or to put it more succinctly, if something can't come from nothing, and nothing can have existed forever, then that would include your creator God. To say otherwise is the special pleading fallacy.

Once something is created, it can't be God, cause God is the Creator of everything created. God is whom we refer to as the One who created everything. He is the initiator, the originator of everything.

And you assume about God that which you've no proof. God has no beginning nor end.

My proof for God's existence is the creation. As for WHO God is, and WHAT God is, one can't assume without proof. From what I've of evidence, I can say that God created everything, and is all-knowing - all-powerful etc. Evident in creation.

you come up with all those what ifs and buts, but these are all assumptions. An assumption without evidence or proof is a lie. Cause if I say "I can fly" and I don't show you it, then I am lying.

'nothing' is by definition 'nothing'. And don't jump to conclusions so hastily. We work from what we have and can see - to deduce.

From what I can see - someone had to have created this - why? Cause everything with a beginning must have a cause. Too complex to have come without a cause, or an unconscious being.

Don't you agree that someone has to have made this universe? If so who is that 'someone' who we call God? That is the question you've to ask yourself. Don't jump to conclusions so rapidly.

Anyways, reflect and contemplate, and keep asking yourself "how did this come?" etc.

 

[Pygoscelis]

Don't you agree that someone has to have made this universe?

No. I don't agree. I don't pretend to know one way or the other, and the data I have been able to review doesn't point in that direction.

If so who is that 'someone' who we call God? That is the question you've to ask yourself. Don't jump to conclusions so rapidly.

The irony in this statement in incredibly thick. You are the one claiming a magical spiritual being that created all and claiming specific things about what it is and what it wants, etc. I make no such claims. I'm not the one jumping to conclusions. I am merely taking your own unproved claims and applying some analysis to them.

Anyways, reflect and contemplate, and keep asking yourself "how did this come?" etc.

I do so with Science. And I know I will never have a perfect and complete answer, always changing my understanding as better data comes in. This is the difference between science/reason and "revelation"/faith.

 

[IrfanUllahKhan]

Dawah to all non-Muslims (including athiests) should be made in a very ahsan (beautiful) manner!

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you czgibson;

I am alarmed by the casual dismissal of science that we are seeing in this thread.

Science seems to be blowing in the wind, when we talk about God. How the universe came to be is history, can science prove beyond a doubt, how the universe and life came into being without God?

Evolution sounds like a very convincing theory, but with the complexities of life we see, how could evolution happen without the guiding hand of God?

In the spirit of searching for God,

Eric

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Science seems to be blowing in the wind, when we talk about God. How the universe came to be is history, can science prove beyond a doubt, how the universe and life came into being without God?

Not necessarily, no. What we do know however is that all of our scientific understanding at present works perfectly well without needing to assume the existence of God.

Evolution sounds like a very convincing theory, but with the complexities of life we see, how could evolution happen without the guiding hand of God?

The simple answer is with the provision of lots of time. The four and a half billion year period that our planet has existed has enabled a huge number of species to arise, evolve and become extinct.

If you do want to credit God with all of this, since an estimated 99% of all the species that have ever existed on Earth are now extinct, you have to conclude that he is either an incompetent designer or simply very wasteful indeed.

Peace

 

[Serinity]

No. I don't agree. I don't pretend to know one way or the other, and the data I have been able to review doesn't point in that direction.



The irony in this statement in incredibly thick. You are the one claiming a magical spiritual being that created all and claiming specific things about what it is and what it wants, etc. I make no such claims. I'm not the one jumping to conclusions. I am merely taking your own unproved claims and applying some analysis to them.



I do so with Science. And I know I will never have a perfect and complete answer, always changing my understanding as better data comes in. This is the difference between science/reason and "revelation"/faith.

my claims are based on reflection of our existence etc. It isn't something I just made up. If anything, you are the one coming with all the ifs and buts, etc.
what I know of Allah is from the Quran. I do not speak from myself. I know Allah is all-powerful, because so He said in the Quran. and also seeing around me etc.

Whatever comes from us - can't be truth. Ie. we are not the determiner of truth.

I find it more likely for there to be a God, especially from seeing around me.

I've ran out of interest to talk about this. Perhaps someone else may continue.
May Allah guide you. Ameen.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

I don´t know where you got the winged horses to this discussion but how you can say they aren´t true or that "we know it isn´t true"? As Allah has all the power, He can easily create a winged horse which has existed only at once (if it is what Allah wants). As we believe: “His command, when He wants anything, is only to say to it: Be, so it is.” [36:82]

The winged horse entered the discussion because it is one of the things your religion asks you to believe which is not true.

If you're going to claim that it is true, then you are claiming something extraordinary, and you will need equally extraordinary evidence to defend your claim. If the best evidence you have is that another supernatural creature (which you have no evidence for) can create anything he likes, then that is some pretty weak evidence.

You may as well say that Superman exists because you saw him in a movie. In fact, that would be better evidence for the existence of Superman than what you have here. At least we would be able to see moving images of him.

Given that a winged horse is genetically impossible, and given that you have no good evidence for it, then why believe it?

Peace

 

[ardianto]

Greetings,



The winged horse entered the discussion because it is one of the things your religion asks you to believe which is not true.

If you're going to claim that it is true, then you are claiming something extraordinary, and you will need equally extraordinary evidence to defend your claim. If the best evidence you have is that another supernatural creature (which you have no evidence for) can create anything he likes, then that is some pretty weak evidence.

You may as well say that Superman exists because you saw him in a movie. In fact, that would be better evidence for the existence of Superman than what you have here. At least we would be able to see moving images of him.

Given that a winged horse is genetically impossible, and given that you have no good evidence for it, then why believe it?

Peace

Greetings.

Allah can create a creature that look like a horse with wings. But He decided to not create it. That's why winged horse never exist. The image of winged horse with woman face that you can see in classical Islamic art is purely based on human creativity. There's no evidence from Islamic religious scripture that prophet Muhammad rode this creature in Isra Miraj journey. That's why many Muslim scholars in Indonesia forbid people draw winged horse like this in depicting Isra Miraj.

Peace too.

 

[Serinity]

Greetings,



The winged horse entered the discussion because it is one of the things your religion asks you to believe which is not true.

If you're going to claim that it is true, then you are claiming something extraordinary, and you will need equally extraordinary evidence to defend your claim. If the best evidence you have is that another supernatural creature (which you have no evidence for) can create anything he likes, then that is some pretty weak evidence.

You may as well say that Superman exists because you saw him in a movie. In fact, that would be better evidence for the existence of Superman than what you have here. At least we would be able to see moving images of him.

Given that a winged horse is genetically impossible, and given that you have no good evidence for it, then why believe it?

Peace

Nothing is impossible for Allah. What you deem as impossible, may infact be possible. In this case, yes, if Allah wills, a horse with wings, is possible. Allah created the genetics.

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Nothing is impossible for Allah. What you deem as impossible, may infact be possible. In this case, yes, if Allah wills, a horse with wings, is possible. Allah created the genetics.

As I said before: If the best evidence you have is that another supernatural creature (which you have no evidence for) can create anything he likes, then that is some pretty weak evidence. Unless you can come up with better evidence, then there is no reason for any sensible person to believe it. I am glad to see that ardianto doesn't believe it.

Peace

 

[sister herb]

Greetings,



As I said before: If the best evidence you have is that another supernatural creature (which you have no evidence for) can create anything he likes, then that is some pretty weak evidence. Unless you can come up with better evidence, then there is no reason for any sensible person to believe it. I am glad to see that ardianto doesn't believe it.

Peace

Actually, we have an evidence about this "another supernatural creature which can create anything He likes". We call it as the Quran.

 

[Pygoscelis]

^ And czgibson has evidence that Superman is real. He calls it D.C. Comics.

 

[ardianto]

Allah can create anything, but He create His creation with the way and form that can be understood by human mind. Allah did not create winged horse because horse bone structure is not designed to have wings and then fly. If Allah created horse-like creature with wings, then this creature must be look odd. With horse head, four footed, but had bird body.

About bouraq, the winged horse with woman face in classical Islamic art. There's no any hadith that describe bouraq like this. This depiction actually created by Muslim artist in the Golden Age which they were inspired by Pegasus. The Golden Age itself was the age of open-mindedness which Muslims opened their mind to receive knowledge and thought from other societies then develop it to be more advanced.

 

[Serinity]

^ And czgibson has evidence that Superman is real. He calls it D.C. Comics.

The ignorance in this is thick. This is the example of someone who discards reason or refuse to reason/think.

 

[ardianto]

Greetings,



As I said before: If the best evidence you have is that another supernatural creature (which you have no evidence for) can create anything he likes, then that is some pretty weak evidence. Unless you can come up with better evidence, then there is no reason for any sensible person to believe it. I am glad to see that ardianto doesn't believe it.

Peace

Greetings czgibson.

Maybe you are wonder how can a sensible person like me believe in God although I don't find material evidence for this belief?. ..... It's because He answered my prayer.

I have ever experienced few events that "too perfect for a coincidence", and made me got what I requested in my prayer. It made me realize that there is a divine power that arrange something and make it happen.

The only way to find God is through prayer. If you cannot find God, it's because you never pray.

No, no, I do not mean to urge you to become religious. There is no compulsion to embrace religion. But I hope this explanation can make you understand what makes religious people believe in God.

Peace.

 

[Eric H]

Greetings and peace be with you czgibson;

The comparative religion section is on a 15 day trial, this thread could be doomed to self destruct shortly, but life carries on

Not necessarily, no. What we do know however is that all of our scientific understanding at present works perfectly well without needing to assume the existence of God.

We are here today, so something must have had no beginning or something came from nothing, is there a third option? Whether that first cause was God or a carbon particle, science has no answer, science may be working perfectly well, but it seems woefully inadequate.

The simple answer is with the provision of lots of time. The four and a half billion year period that our planet has existed has enabled a huge number of species to arise, evolve and become extinct.

I have followed such arguments, but the detail of how the eye evolved is not convincing, but the greater challenge for blind nature, is how did the skeletal system evolve without a guiding hand?

If you do want to credit God with all of this, since an estimated 99% of all the species that have ever existed on Earth are now extinct, you have to conclude that he is either an incompetent designer or simply very wasteful indeed.

Not really, both you and I will be extinct within the next hundred years, what is the difference?

I think God set mankind a challenge, how do we get on with each other despite all our differences. How should we be fair and just to each other?

When we mess it all up, God can put all things right in a greater good life after death.

In the spirit of searching for God

Eric

 

[czgibson]

Greetings,

Maybe you are wonder how can a sensible person like me believe in God although I don't find material evidence for this belief?. ..... It's because He answered my prayer.

I have ever experienced few events that "too perfect for a coincidence", and made me got what I requested in my prayer. It made me realize that there is a divine power that arrange something and make it happen.

I still call it coincidence, and I think it would be even more extraordinary if surprising coincidences like this never happened.

I also still believe you are a sensible person, as well as kind. When you offered to pay Eric H's jizya the other day I was on the verge of standing up next to my computer to give you a round of applause.

The only way to find God is through prayer. If you cannot find God, it's because you never pray.

During my time at Catholic school I had plenty of opportunities to try out prayer, with plenty of advice from monks and priests (I have known many). No results.

No, no, I do not mean to urge you to become religious. There is no compulsion to embrace religion. But I hope this explanation can make you understand what makes religious people believe in God.

I'm glad you feel your belief gives you meaning in your life. I have just never seen any evidence that is remotely compelling.

Peace