An Atheistic Misconception of an Infinite God

  • Thread starter Thread starter James_S_Saint
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
J

James_S_Saint

Guest
I have just watched yet another Atheistic presentation of how the universe is constructed. It became difficult to watch as there were 5 minutes of rhetoric and insinuation about how foolish the God fearing are for every 10 seconds of explanation concerning the universe. But after sitting patiently through it, I couldn’t help but be appalled at the extreme irony of the Atheist’s presentation and attitude.

He, being a physicist, stated that because we understand energy and string theory, we don’t need any God and that people thinking that the entire universe was created just for humans is so terribly arrogant. Yet all the while, it was so horribly obvious to me that he was the one being so excessively arrogant.

On a different forum, I had been discussing the possible theories concerning how the very first instance of anything coming from nothing might be achieved. It was a discussion about the very first cause - The “First Cause” of creation.

Most of the Atheists responses began with concepts concerning string theory and how a vacuum in space is really filled with pre-energy and such is the cause of the universe. I had to repeatedly remind them that what they were talking about was on an entirely different level of thought to what I was talking about and it eventually occurred to me to say;

“Comparing the very first event of creation or the very first difference within the nothingness to even a single ‘string’ in string theory is like comparing a quark to a freight train.”

But that was only after having to reveal that imagining that our universe is the entirety of creation (as was the assumption in the presentation) is imagining that a single grain of sand (our universe) is the entirely of an ocean of desert made of similar grains of sand. And Man has spent his entire existence as a species merely discovering the vastness of his little single grain of sand.

What we so casually refer to as God not only caused that infinitely small first occurrence of difference in the nothingness, but also has created that entire ocean of grains of sand that are each the entirety of what we think of as our entire universe.

The presumption of the Atheist in the presentation was vile, ignorant, arrogance in thinking that he was even approaching any complete understanding of the real situation. But all the while, being an acclaimed physicist, he looks down on the religious as though they were the arrogant ones for thinking that any God had anything to do with his excessively simple minded thought of what real creation entails.

The total sum of all that physics, cosmology, and Science has accumulated as knowledge merely applies to an infinitesimal spec of all of creation and doesn’t even approach any theory of what causes that very infinitely small first cause of anything existing at all. Yet from that infinitesimal perspective, the preachers of Secular Atheism presume to know so very much of all there is to the point of proclaiming that “we see no God and we have examined everything, thus God must be merely the fantasy of superstitious, ignorant, and arrogant people.” But of course, those “believers” claim nothing about knowing the infinity of God.

It is yet another case of the guilty projecting their own guilt onto others and is truly phenomenally ironic.
 
“Comparing the very first event of creation or the very first difference within the nothingness to even a single ‘string’ in string theory is like comparing a quark to a freight train.”
How do you know?
But that was only after having to reveal that imagining that our universe is the entirety of creation (as was the assumption in the presentation) is imagining that a single grain of sand (our universe) is the entirely of an ocean of desert made of similar grains of sand.
How do you know?
What we so casually refer to as God not only caused that infinitely small first occurrence of difference in the nothingness, but also has created that entire ocean of grains of sand that are each the entirety of what we think of as our entire universe.
How do you know?
The presumption of the Atheist in the presentation was vile, ignorant, arrogance in thinking that he was even approaching any complete understanding of the real situation. But all the while, being an acclaimed physicist, he looks down on the religious as though they were the arrogant ones for thinking that any God had anything to do with his excessively simple minded thought of what real creation entails.
How do you know that his idea of creation is wrong? Aren’t you being just as arrogant as you claim this scientist is? What makes you think you know better?
The total sum of all that physics, cosmology, and Science has accumulated as knowledge merely applies to an infinitesimal spec of all of creation and doesn’t even approach any theory of what causes that very infinitely small first cause of anything existing at all.
How do you know?
Yet from that infinitesimal perspective, the preachers of Secular Atheism presume to know so very much of all there is to the point of proclaiming that “we see no God and we have examined everything, thus God must be merely the fantasy of superstitious, ignorant, and arrogant people.” But of course, those “believers” claim nothing about knowing the infinity of God.
You’re talking at cross-purposes here. The atheist opinion of theists is not fundamentally to do with whether or not those theists claim to know anything about an particular property of God (although when it happens, it does emphasise the baseless dogma from which much of religious belief is spawned). It’s to do with the inconsistent and irrational belief in something for which no evidence exists. You seem to have set up a straw man here, not for the first time.
It is yet another case of the guilty projecting their own guilt onto others and is truly phenomenally ironic.
It’s quite a common gambit by theists to start talking about the guilt, fear etc. of atheists, when in fact atheists experience no such emotions in the context of religion. The use of such emotive language clearly says more about the fundamental mindset of the theist making such claims, than it does about anything else. There lies the true irony.
 
But after sitting patiently through it, I couldn’t help but be appalled at the extreme irony of **the Atheist’s **presentation and attitude.
To be honest, I stopped reading here. Once you clumped every atheist into some sort of general abstraction–“The Atheist”–that you could mock, I lost interest. Learn not to straw man.
 
Like religious people, there are atheist of all kinds.

I was born and raised an atheist, because my parents are, and to me, the idea of God is so warped it is really difficult to understand the whole theory of God. There has been no hatred towards any religion, nor is there protestations, merely the simple fact that “It is difficult and seemingly imposible to understand why anybody would think there is a God!”

Especially when, religions supposedly claimed harmony amongst other things, is like the number one factor why there is so much suffering because people are unacceptive towards each others beliefs~

But after making the transition to being Catholic, I just felt that I became enlightened, and things I did not understand, become clear to me. I’m not an outwardly arrogant person in the sense that I must belittle those who are religious, but I clearly see how arrogant I was back in the past, because of my ignorance. There is alot of “inner pride” in me before that is now slowly sliding away.

And our perfect God is a great scientist ~ when he created the universe, he makes it logical, so that us humans could understand it from a scientific point of view 🙂
 
And our perfect God is a great scientist ~ when he created the universe, he makes it logical, so that us humans could understand it from a scientific point of view 🙂
Haha… I never considered that perspective of benevolence. 😃

But do realize that I intentionally entitled this thread “An Atheist…” because I am well aware that ALL Atheists are not the same except for their one shared misunderstanding.

But the vile and vulgar nature of those Atheistic priests is a little difficult to take. I seriously dislike the intentional manipulation of a large populous for political gain, even when the religious do it.

Truth is forsaken entirely when politics is the incentive.
 
Haha… I never considered that perspective of benevolence. 😃

But do realize that I intentionally entitled this thread “An Atheist…” because I am well aware that ALL Atheists are not the same except for their one shared misunderstanding.

But the vile and vulgar nature of those Atheistic priests is a little difficult to take. I seriously dislike the intentional manipulation of a large populous for political gain, even when the religious do it.

Truth is forsaken entirely when politics is the incentive.
You have failed to mention the man’s name, his title, or the name of the program, or when it aired, or well- heck, do you dislike citing your sources that much???

How long would a catholic naysayer last here with this kind of a post? utterly lacking any citations whatsoever…
 
You have failed to mention the man’s name, his title, or the name of the program, or when it aired, or well- heck, do you dislike citing your sources that much???

How long would a catholic naysayer last here with this kind of a post? utterly lacking any citations whatsoever…
I was not proposing a debate concerning the nature of the persons involved and intentionally did not mention any names. The real issue is the irony of insisting that religious people are arrogant in espousing that they know anything while the priests of Atheism espouse that they know that there isn’t a God because they have examined everything (sufficiently).

It is ridiculous because if asked, they can’t even tell me what a God is, much less if they have seen one around. Their accepted definition is something like, “A fictional character with omnimax characteristics”. Well, Duhuhh..
 
I was not proposing a debate concerning the nature of the persons involved and intentionally did not mention any names. The real issue is the irony of insisting that religious people are arrogant in espousing that they know anything while the priests of Atheism espouse that they know that there isn’t a God because they have examined everything (sufficiently).

It is ridiculous because if asked, they can’t even tell me what a God is, much less if they have seen one around. Their accepted definition is something like, “A fictional character with omnimax characteristics”. Well, Duhuhh..
Well, you just about left any respectable debater with no options but to ignore your thread. One can not simply take your word for what happened, and the way it came off to comment. Anyone who would, would simply be a “me tooer”
 
… the priests of Atheism espouse that they know that there isn’t a God …
Can you point to just one of these people who have said that they know there isn’t a God?

It gets really boring reading theists on this forum who, despite having it explained to them in words of one syllable, still insist on misrepresenting the atheist position.

If you can’t be honest, why would anybody talk to you except to charitably point out, for the billionth time, that your presumptions are wrong.
 
Well, you just about left any respectable debater with no options but to ignore your thread. One can not simply take your word for what happened, and the way it came off to comment. Anyone who would, would simply be a “me tooer”
Again, you presume that debate was the intent. Discussion is viable and does not require debate tactics to try to convince someone of superior vantage.

My real issue is not really the Atheistic perspective, but the obvious intentional effort to manipulate a population with videos and moves that subtly imply that millions of those *other *people are unintelligent, naive, and stupid.

It is about the same as a Christian making a movie implying, if not espousing, that all Muslims are just ignorant and stupid people because “we” know SO much more of reality than those poor saps.

To say such a thing to a very limited audience would be a different concern and far more acceptable but even that isn’t allowed among the religious. So why is it allowed for the anti-religious? Hollywood has been producing anti-Christian psychological filming for 2 generations subtly creating a war by establishing an inherent hypnotic mental picture of reality.

The use of such tactics on a large open population is vile, but as I said, the issue is simply the irony, the guilty espousing the guilt of others or in this case, the kettle calling the fire itself “black”.
 
Again, you presume that debate was the intent. Discussion is viable and does not require debate tactics to try to convince someone of superior vantage.

My real issue is not really the Atheistic perspective, but the obvious intentional effort to manipulate a population with videos and moves that subtly imply that millions of those *other *people are unintelligent, naive, and stupid.

It is about the same as a Christian making a movie implying, if not espousing, that all Muslims are just ignorant and stupid people because “we” know SO much more of reality than those poor saps.

To say such a thing to a very limited audience would be a different concern and far more acceptable but even that isn’t allowed among the religious. So why is it allowed for the anti-religious? Hollywood has been producing anti-Christian psychological filming for 2 generations subtly creating a war by establishing an inherent hypnotic mental picture of reality.

The use of such tactics on a large open population is vile, but as I said, the issue is simply the irony, the guilty espousing the guilt of others or in this case, the kettle calling the fire itself “black”.
#1- if debate was not the intention- why post in a debate section in this forum?
#2- accusasions of manipulation could best be answered if given more facts, and less personal viewpoints. I could claim manipulation by christians all the live long day if I wished, but I would at the very least cite my complaints
#3- I’m not sure if you have missed the myriads of threads on muslims here at this forum, and well…
#4- not sure I follow you here at all- elaborate as to how you feel this way please.
#5- Call me simple, but you are way over my head on this claim. The vileness, and Irony, the kettle, etc. I can’t follow it unless you are clear. You are simply tossing out things and not connecting anything to something of substance for me to even comment on. Please help me out here.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top