EminemBase vs. Blu - God

[Block]

I agree with pretty much your whole post.

But atheists don't claim absolute certainties.

I'm glad we agree. Some Atheists do proclaim certainties. In fact, a LOT of uneducated Atheists do. The same way Christians do.

[Eedee]

You are still stuck in the same position to explain the creator. You have just kicked the can back.

and now it's an even more complex can to explain, as it created us).

Playing devil's advocate here...


Why does the burden of proof lie with the creationist, when the very explanation of how things came to be is a paradox in and of itself? Any theory that can be made, at some point, reaches its pinnacle and can no longer explain how or why. The big bang, for example, constantly contradicts itself by stating that everything came from nothing. That's the number 1 most fundamental law of physics being broken.

Shouldn't be the scientists who explain this?

Usually it's the creationists that say "God exists, believe in him or you're going to Hell!" first, then the atheist replies "Show me the proof", etc. The burden of proof is on the one asserting the claim. Rarely do atheists out of nowhere say "God doesn't exist", and if they do they're fucking retarded. The proper statement is "With all the acquired evidence thus far in human wanderings, the probability that God exists is very, very low".

[CrashBand]

You are still stuck in the same position to explain the creator. You have just kicked the can back.

and now it's an even more complex can to explain, as it created us).

Playing devil's advocate here...


Why does the burden of proof lie with the creationist, when the very explanation of how things came to be is a paradox in and of itself? Any theory that can be made, at some point, reaches its pinnacle and can no longer explain how or why. The big bang, for example, constantly contradicts itself by stating that everything came from nothing. That's the number 1 most fundamental law of physics being broken.

Shouldn't be the scientists who explain this?

Well that just shows adding a creator is unnecessary.

If you don't need to explain the creator then why do you need to explain the universe?

[Eedee]

^ Carl Sagan has something to say on this matter, as well.

[Block]

And no, evolution is not a prerequisite for being an atheist, or vice versa.

No one said it is. What was said is that it is widely accepted.

The long post said "Narrative is a particularly important aspect of Atheism".

And then went on to explain evolution and the big bang etc.

Whereas, narrative is not only not important but it is unnecessary for atheism.

If a theory of how things came to be is unnecessary, then how is an individual to explain the how? That doesn't make sense, really. The big bang and evolution (or similar theories) are pivotal parts of Atheistic belief. Evolution was named because it is the most widely accepted. Class's reaction is a good example. He stated, (in a very sarcastic way, mind you) "you don't believe in evolution, nothing you say counts," or something of that nature. Which shows the passion behind Atheists and evolution.

[CrashBand]

I agree with pretty much your whole post.

But atheists don't claim absolute certainties.

I'm glad we agree. Some Atheists do proclaim certainties. In fact, a LOT of uneducated Atheists do. The same way Christians do.

In my opinion will there are definitely some atheists that very arrogant about their beliefs.

However it pales in comparison to claiming something that by definition is unprovable. (but I suppose I agree with you about claiming god 100% doesn't exist is just as bad / arrogant).

Unfortunately, the PR face of the atheist is of a smug loud person while the PR face of a believer is of a peaceful "humble" observer. Which is pretty ironic.

Science isn't arrogant like that at all though, when scientists don’t know something — they admit it. Pretending to know things one doesn’t know is a profound liability in science.

[CrashBand]

The long post said "Narrative is a particularly important aspect of Atheism".

And then went on to explain evolution and the big bang etc.

Whereas, narrative is not only not important but it is unnecessary for atheism.

If a theory of how things came to be is unnecessary, then how is an individual to explain the how? That doesn't make sense, really. The big bang and evolution (or similar theories) are pivotal parts of Atheistic belief. Evolution was named because it is the most widely accepted. Class's reaction is a good example. He stated, (in a very sarcastic way, mind you) "you don't believe in evolution, nothing you say counts," or something of that nature. Which shows the passion behind Atheists and evolution.

Yeah, but you don't need to believe in evolution to be an atheist. This is a pretty key point.

I suppose, it's pivotal in contradicting a lot of the bible. i.e. the narrative may be the reason one rejects their beliefs.

But someone ignorant to evolution and the big bang can still not believe in a god.

[Block]

"With all the acquired evidence thus far in human wanderings, the probability that God exists is very, very low".

But that's not true either... The probably that a RELIGIOUS God exists is VERY low. The probability of a creator, however, is a totally different argument. And there is absolutely no evidence against it. That's not to say that there aren't theories stating that it is possible for us to exist without a creator.

As I said, every theory has a point where it reaches its pinnacle and cannot explain things any further, and starts contradicting itself. These contradictions, in combination with the probabilities and research done, are what lead me to believe in a creator. Creator, not to be confused with God of the Bible, quaran, etc.

[Amaranthine]

Hooray for agnosticism. That's all I have to say on the subject.

[Willy]

But those aren't the reasons why I believe this, which was my point.

It is. To explain things / to make sense of the universe.

I said all those were reasons to believe in a god - explanation, comfort, purpose.

What are ya questions?

You are still stuck in the same position to explain the creator. You have just kicked the can back.

(and now it's an even more complex can to explain, as it created us).

The underlying reasons I was referring to were comfort and purpose. Surely you don't think I get much comfort or purpose from believing existence is a giant computer simulation...

I already mentioned that I was kicking the can back, but stated it was beyond our scope of thought to be able to comprehend it. That explanation exists outside the governing laws of the simulation.

Check this out: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qh8QfKVc ... re=related

And here's a hint: Regardless of whether or not I actually believe this to be true, I think it opens up interesting points of discussion on a topic that has been beaten to death with typical responses.

[CrashBand]

Hooray for agnosticism. That's all I have to say on the subject.

Agnosticism and Atheism aren't mutually exclusive, btw.

They're answering different questions.

If you're asked "is there a god?" and you answer "I don't know." that's agnostic.

If you're asked "Do you believe in a god?" then you have to answer yes or no. And if your answer to the first is "I don't know." Then the answer to the second is pretty much no.

There is no real need for the term 'agnostic' tbh.

[CrashBand]

The underlying reasons I was referring to were comfort and purpose. Surely you don't think I get much comfort or purpose from believing existence is a giant computer simulation...

I was saying 'explanation' is just as big of a reason pretty much. Well, it certainly used to be.

I already mentioned that I was kicking the can back, but stated it was beyond our scope of thought to be able to comprehend it. That explanation exists outside the governing laws of the simulation.

So if you're just kicking the can back what's the point of having this blind faith. There is still no reason to believe in this.

I'll watch the vid though.

[classthe_king]

Evolution / big bang is commonly accepted as "how things came to be" within the Atheistic community. For fuck sake, YOU attempted to belittle me for not believing in it. Doesn't that tell you something? You're obviously passionate about it; as are most atheists. Stop contradicting yourself.

Yes, but they still have nothing to do with atheism itself. Atheists are usually more rational and more scientific thinkers and more rational scientific thinkers also happen to agree with evolution and the big bang theory but that doesn't mean anything. Atheism is simply not believing in god. There is no holy book for evolution that tells atheists what to believe nor are there atheist leaders such as priests or rabbi's that tell other atheists what to do. You could not believe in evolution or the big bang theory at all and still be an atheist. I don't understand why you don't understand this.

[Willy]

The underlying reasons I was referring to were comfort and purpose. Surely you don't think I get much comfort or purpose from believing existence is a giant computer simulation...

I was saying 'explanation' is just as big of a reason pretty much. Well, it certainly used to be.

I already mentioned that I was kicking the can back, but stated it was beyond our scope of thought to be able to comprehend it. That explanation exists outside the governing laws of the simulation.

So if you're just kicking the can back what's the point of having this blind faith. There is still no reason to believe in this.

I'll watch the vid though.

Because if we already see how building our own simulated universe is theoretically possible, it is only a matter of time before our technology is going to be capable of keeping up with the math. And as long as we don't run ourselves into extinction, we have all the time in the world.

[classthe_king]

"With all the acquired evidence thus far in human wanderings, the probability that God exists is very, very low".

But that's not true either... The probably that a RELIGIOUS God exists is VERY low. The probability of a creator, however, is a totally different argument. And there is absolutely no evidence against it. That's not to say that there aren't theories stating that it is possible for us to exist without a creator.

As I said, every theory has a point where it reaches its pinnacle and cannot explain things any further, and starts contradicting itself. These contradictions, in combination with the probabilities and research done, are what lead me to believe in a creator. Creator, not to be confused with God of the Bible, quaran, etc.

I'll respond to this since you've seemed to be civil the last page.

I agree with pretty much everything you said here. The probability of one of the major religion's god being true is very low because they also make tons of other claims that can be proven wrong and while it's impossible to prove merely a creator wrong, it's also impossible to prove that he does exists so what's the point? If him existing has the same effect on our lives as him not existing then he might as well not exist because it makes no difference. Yeah you can say well god initiated the big bang and god guided evolution and that couldn't be proven wrong but it's completely unnecessary and if problems can be solved without the need to bring in a creator then there is no reason to.