How can you respond into this atheist statement?

  • Thread starter Thread starter childhoodtimes
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

childhoodtimes

Guest
*“Just out of curiosity, as the bible says God created light and then separate light and darkness. Since everything must be created, who created the darkness then? If God did, then what was before the darkness? Ok, ok, darkness is an empty space. Then who created the empty space? If it has been there all along, that empty space must be God himself. ‘No! No! God is outside time and space.’ Err, do you mean he is inside some kind of solid packed with carbon atoms or inside the carbon itself surrounded by electrons? I will leave these to you”. *

-----------“I’ve read this in a friendster profile of an Atheist”
-me
 
childhoodtimes said:
*“Just out of curiosity, as the bible says God created light and then separate light and darkness. Since everything must be created, who created the darkness then? If God did, then what was before the darkness? Ok, ok, darkness is an empty space. Then who created the empty space? If it has been there all along, that empty space must be God himself. ‘No! No! God is outside time and space.’ Err, do you mean he is inside some kind of solid packed with carbon atoms or inside the carbon itself surrounded by electrons? I will leave these to you”. *

-----------“I’ve read this in a friendster profile of an Atheist”
Code: 
                                                              -me
Click to expand...
The person who wrote this has a poor understanding of the bible, God, and science.

God is existence. God is being itself. God is neither space, time or any physical thing. These things exist only because of that which is existence. Existence permeates all that which comes into and participates in the nature of existence, but it is not synonymous, in respect of its nature, with any of that which is created as a result of existence. Existence in principle necessarily transcends all physics, and precedes all physics in respect of its being.

The bible is not a science text book, and there is no evidence that it was ever meant to be considered as such by those who authored it.
 
Pantheism - the belief that God is a part of creation - is a heresy.

The Bible ain’t a science book, and the Church has always taught it isn’t. Those who believe it is a textbook are not in agreement with the Catholic Faith.
 
Eucharisted said:
Pantheism - the belief that God is a part of creation - is a heresy.

The Bible ain’t a science book, and the Church has always taught it isn’t. Those who believe it is a textbook are not in agreement with the Catholic Faith.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but this is conjecture on your part. Nowhere has the Church ever said that believing the Bible is a science textbook is unorthodox, so long as this is a private opinion. I am not trying to say one should hold this opinion, but that alone does not necessarily make it unorthodox.

That being said, The Church has also never said that Sacred Scripture is a comprehensive overview of all time. That would make the Bible just slightly larger than it is now! 😃

Genesis is only a narrative of the Creation of our world, not of everything God has ever created. So this is basically a straw man argument. The fact that the Bible does not contain an extensive explanatory narrative of eveything the Holy Trinity has ever done does not make it false. The atheist’s argument is quaint, but irrelevant.

Hope this helps!
 
childhoodtimes said:
*“Just out of curiosity, as the bible says God created light and then separate light and darkness. Since everything must be created, who created the darkness then? If God did, then what was before the darkness? Ok, ok, darkness is an empty space. Then who created the empty space? If it has been there all along, that empty space must be God himself. ‘No! No! God is outside time and space.’ Err, do you mean he is inside some kind of solid packed with carbon atoms or inside the carbon itself surrounded by electrons? I will leave these to you”. *

-----------“I’ve read this in a friendster profile of an Atheist”
Code: 
                                                              -me
Click to expand...
The bible says Jesus is light. Jesus according to the catholic church, is not created and is God.
Darkness seems to be where this God says people are that reject him.
So, it is only existant because of rejection of God.
That makes me wonder about the whole let there be light in Genesis.
 
childhoodtimes said:
*“Just out of curiosity, as the bible says God created light and then separate light and darkness. Since everything must be created, who created the darkness then? If God did, then what was before the darkness? Ok, ok, darkness is an empty space. Then who created the empty space? If it has been there all along, that empty space must be God himself. ‘No! No! God is outside time and space.’ Err, do you mean he is inside some kind of solid packed with carbon atoms or inside the carbon itself surrounded by electrons? I will leave these to you”. *

-----------“I’ve read this in a friendster profile of an Atheist”
Code: 
                                                              -me
Click to expand...
Trying to convince an unbeliever what the Bible teaches is usually not the way to begin.
First, he most likely doesn’t have any understndaing of the Sacred Sciptures.His pre-conceived ideas are set. Ask him who he thinks God is?
I would certainly pray for this person.
I know only one unbeliever. I tried to quote a passage to him once and he was very irate. He just wasn’t ready to hear this.
I still pray for Him. In fact I wish everyone would pray for him. His name is Fred.

God bless,
jean
 
jean8 said:
Trying to convince an unbeliever what the Bible teaches is usually not the way to begin.
First, he most likely doesn’t have any understndaing of the Sacred Sciptures.His pre-conceived ideas are set. Ask him who he thinks God is?
I would certainly pray for this person.
I know only one unbeliever. I tried to quote a passage to him once and he was very irate. He just wasn’t ready to hear this.
I still pray for Him. In fact I wish everyone would pray for him. His name is Fred.

God bless,
jean
Click to expand...
Can I ask what passage you quoted to cause him to be “irate”? Personally, I find most if not all of them neutral or ridiculous sounding, some make me irate, but why would an evangelist use those?
 
liquidpele said:
Not according to quantum mechanics.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_fluctuations
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Casimir_effect
Click to expand...
That’s true, I was aware of that. But I was thinking he meant empty space before the universe was created (i.e. when God was creating). Which would not have been subject to the laws of physics since it was outside the known universe.

But then again, I spose there was no empty space before the universe was created…ok, now I’m making my head hurt…
 
Darkness is nothing other than a word man uses to describe the absence of light. The void is merely the absence of any existing matter. (this is different from a vacuum) I would suggest he read the Hexamiron, by St. Basil. I would ask he read all nine homilies but, if he does not want to, maybe just the first three. I think he will find them interesting reading, expecially if he keeps in mind that it was written over 1600 years ago…
It can be found on the web.
 
rciadan said:
Darkness is nothing other than a word man uses to describe the absence of light.
Click to expand...
Hello, I’m bored. I have decided to make you a victim of one of my intellectual mind games. In short, i have decided to wind you up, but in a friendly way. What i am about to write is not my world view; its just a puzzle.
well, here goes.

If it were true that darkness is an absence of light, then what would happen if there was no such thing as light? The problem is, what you are saying would suggest that darkness is not real, but if there is no light, then there would be only darkness, “absolutely”; which would suggest that darkness is actually a thing.

If light is not absolute, then its possible for it not to exist. Yet by saying that darkness is not a real thing, this would suggest that light is an absolute thing in itself.

Or you could say that both are just illusions, projections of an underlying reality.
 
MindOverMatter said:
Hello, I’m bored. I have decided to make you a victim of one of my intellectual mind games. In short, i have decided to wind you up, but in a friendly way. What i am about to write is not my world view; its just a puzzle.
well, here goes.

If it were true that darkness is an absence of light, then what would happen if there was no such thing as light? The problem is, what you are saying would suggest that darkness is not real, but if there is no light, then there would be only darkness, “absolutely”; which would suggest that darkness is actually a thing.

If light is not absolute, then its possible for it not to exist. Yet by saying that darkness is not a real thing, this would suggest that light is an absolute thing in itself.

Or you could say that both are just illusions, projections of an underlying reality.
Click to expand...
I did not say it is not real. It is as real as you and i, who would cease to be if God ceased to will it. BTW- Thanks! I needed a little humor. It has been tough around here lately…
How do you like Father Stan Fortuna? He is a Catholic Rapper
 
childhoodtimes said:
*“Just out of curiosity, as the bible says God created light and then separate light and darkness. Since everything must be created, who created the darkness then? If God did, then what was before the darkness? Ok, ok, darkness is an empty space. Then who created the empty space? If it has been there all along, that empty space must be God himself. ‘No! No! God is outside time and space.’ Err, do you mean he is inside some kind of solid packed with carbon atoms or inside the carbon itself surrounded by electrons? I will leave these to you”. *

-----------“I’ve read this in a friendster profile of an Atheist”

-me
Click to expand...

God is Transcendent - not “in place”. His only “place” is Himself. And God is infinitely unlike any created thing; God is Unique, & Incomparable. And Infinite. And He is contained by nothing, yet contains all created being.​

Your questioner is making the classic error of thinking about God as though God were one item in the universe among others. This is completely wrong. 😦 God is the Cause of those items, those creatures - not one of them. The only for God to be in the universe in the way creatures are, is (it seems) for Him to be Incarnate; because human nature is created. But God as God is indescribably different from all creatures, possible or real or conceivable.
 
MindOverMatter said:
Hello, I’m bored. I have decided to make you a victim of one of my intellectual mind games. In short, i have decided to wind you up, but in a friendly way. What i am about to write is not my world view; its just a puzzle.
well, here goes.

If it were true that darkness is an absence of light, then what would happen if there was no such thing as light? The problem is, what you are saying would suggest that darkness is not real, but if there is no light, then there would be only darkness, “absolutely”; which would suggest that darkness is actually a thing.

If light is not absolute, then its possible for it not to exist. Yet by saying that darkness is not a real thing, this would suggest that light is an absolute thing in itself.

Or you could say that both are just illusions, projections of an underlying reality.
Click to expand...
Darkness is the antithesis of light. It needed no name prior to having an opposite. Thus, this statement is flawed. It there were no such this as light, then darkness would not need a name.
 
Drawmack said:
Darkness is the antithesis of light. It needed no name prior to having an opposite. Thus, this statement is flawed. It there were no such this as light, then darkness would not need a name.
Click to expand...
But, darkness can also mean, darkness of mind, or darkness of thought. Or, the darkness of stout beer.

Perhaps light is presupposed, but, not causative?

jd
 
JDaniel said:
But, darkness can also mean, darkness of mind, or darkness of thought. Or, the darkness of stout beer.

Perhaps light is presupposed, but, not causative?

jd
Click to expand...
no. Again, the darkness you refer to in this case is the absence of the light of Christ: of the light of faith and the goodness of God.
 
JDaniel said:
But, darkness can also mean, darkness of mind, or darkness of thought. Or, the darkness of stout beer.

Perhaps light is presupposed, but, not causative?

jd
Click to expand...
You are taking the terms out of the context of this conversation. The original poster wasn’t talking about mind, thought, or beer. He was talking about darkness and light as they relate to the stories of creation in Genesis.

Next time you want to introduce logical fallacy into a conversation please don’t do it in response to my post.
 
Drawmack said:
Darkness is the antithesis of light. It needed no name prior to having an opposite. Thus, this statement is flawed. It there were no such thing as light, then darkness would not need a name.
Click to expand...
Well said, and thus, the puzzle is solved…except… I think I have the genesis of another thread…
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top