The absurdity of atheism

  • Thread starter Thread starter tonyrey
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bradski said:
Well, if I were the only person on the planet, then it would be something of a waste of space.There is quite possibly an infinity of information beyond the observable universe which is forever beyond our reach. It is literally impossible to access it, let along get to it. Why do you think God made stuff that to all intents and purposes, as far as we are concerned, doesn’t exist?
Click to expand...
Your entire complaint relies on the assumption that there is something outside of our universe. You are attacking God for theoretically creating something that could possibly exist, but also might not… I hope you see this problem with this…

Beyond that, If it does exist, why would you assume we wouldn’t be able to study it? Sure, it maybe be outside of our particular universe, but if it’s part of physical creation then we should be able to study it given enough time and research. Sure we can’t right now, but then, two hundred years ago we couldn’t really study the human mind, or the atomic structure of our universe. With time, our scope of knowledge and what we can study expands. The assertion that it’s impossible to access is groundless.

Even if it is impossible to study it, it could be that it is necessary for the proper functioning of the universe. The fact that we can’t study it doesn’t mean that it somehow “doesn’t exist” to us. We can’t study dark matter… yet, but we’re pretty certain it exists and is absolutely necessary.
It is an assumption that He got it right the first time. Maybe it took Him 5 billion attempts to get it right.
Click to expand...
Again, I ask, why does it matter? If He created five billion universes before this one, then He did. What does that matter? Even if He did, there’s no reason to conclude that any of them are “right” or “wrong.” There are as He created them; “right” and “wrong” as you’re using them is wholly subjective.

You completely ignored the substance of my question, which leads me to conclude that either you didn’t read everything I wrote, or you don’t have an answer, and rather than acknowledging that fact chose to ignore the question and respond to the premise rather then the substance.
 
Bradski said:
It is an assumption that He got it right the first time. Maybe it took Him 5 billion attempts to get it right.
Click to expand...
If he made so many universes, why would it take him so long to get it right?

Are you saying God is a Blind Watchmaker? :confused:

You are starting to sound like Spinoza/Darwin. 😉
 
ProdglArchitect said:
Your entire complaint relies on the assumption that there is something outside of our universe. You are attacking God for theoretically creating something that could possibly exist, but also might not… I hope you see this problem with this…

Beyond that, If it does exist, why would you assume we wouldn’t be able to study it?
Click to expand...
There IS something outside the observable universe. There always has been and there always will be. We cannot access it, literally, because it is moving away from us faster than the speed of light. That is, the space between us is expanding so fast that light from a distant object is actually receding, not getting closer. To all intents and purposes, it doesn’t exist. It cannot be for us. Any idea why it was made?
 
tonyrey said:
Atheism is the dogmatic belief that** everything** is ultimately valueless yet that belief presupposes its own value! What is your view?
Click to expand...
I’m a former Roman Catholic and now Atheist.

My life has value. It’s valuable to my kids, my neighbours, my employer, my friends. Heck it’s even valuable to the grass on my front lawn, as I tackle the weeds, so as to allow the grass to grow.

Lots of things have value, with or without a human interacting with it.
 
987mk said:
I’m a former Roman Catholic and now Atheist.

My life has value. It’s valuable to my kids, my neighbours, my employer, my friends. Heck it’s even valuable to the grass on my front lawn, as I tackle the weeds, so as to allow the grass to grow.

Lots of things have value, with or without a human interacting with it.
Click to expand...
Indeed! The question is how all the valuable aspects of life originated. Accidentally? By pure chance?
 
Bradski said:
There IS something outside the observable universe. There always has been and there always will be.
Click to expand...
And by what evidence do you make that assertion?
We cannot access it, literally, because it is moving away from us faster than the speed of light. That is, the space between us is expanding so fast that light from a distant object is actually receding, not getting closer. To all intents and purposes, it doesn’t exist. It cannot be for us. Any idea why it was made?
Click to expand...
You still haven’t provided evidence that there is something. You’ve certainly asserted it, but you’ve not provided any reason behind that assertion. Again, I point out that you’re attacking God for creating something which may not actually exist, which is an irrational basis for any position.

Also, as I said in my previous post, even if there is something, there’s no reason to assume that we will never be able to study it. We already study things which we cannot interact with due to distance (i.e. every other star in the universe…), and we study thing which aren’t observable by normal means. There’s no reason to blindly assume that we’ll never be able to study this theoretical something outside of our universe in the same way we study far away stars and universal background radiation. All of this is really inconsequential to the actual question though.

Your assertion that something is pointless simply because we cannot interact with it is, frankly, childish and stupid. There are a nearly infinite number of things that have an impact on you which you have never, and will never, be able to interact with. It does not exist to you beyond the fact that it has an influence on you. One prime example is the entirety of history prior to this very moment. By your own criteria, it no longer exists because we cannot access it. (Not the best example, I know, but I’m in a hurry and it was the best one I could come up with on a whim.) Our ability to interact with something is not a proper criteria by which to judge something’s necessity. If there is something which exists outside of the universe which we cannot interact with, it may or may not be necessary; we don’t know. Whether or not it’s necessary is really unimportant. Why would something not seeming necessary to us somehow make God wrong for creating it?

Maybe he created it because He wanted to, knowing full well that we would never experience it. That doesn’t make Him wrong, and it doesn’t make Him right. Again, as I’ve pointed out twice before already, “right” and “wrong” are subjective terms the way you’re using them, and are really unimportant to the question of the necessity of an external creator.

I’m out for the evening, and will check back in in the morning. Have a good one.
 
Charlemagne_III said:
If he made so many universes, why would it take him so long to get it right?

Are you saying God is a Blind Watchmaker? :confused:

You are starting to sound like Spinoza/Darwin. 😉
Click to expand...
The difference between those two men was that Spinoza saw God in Nature!
 
tonyrey said:
“stimulated” gives the same away. In other words we are still cogs in the machine of nature and not responsible for our thoughts or actions. If we are simply naked apes we have no choice in the way we respond.
Click to expand...
Correction: “stimulated” gives the** g**ame away"!
 
ProdglArchitect said:
And by what evidence do you make that assertion?

You still haven’t provided evidence that there is something. You’ve certainly asserted it, but you’ve not provided any reason behind that assertion. Again, I point out that you’re attacking God for creating something which may not actually exist, which is an irrational basis for any position.

Also, as I said in my previous post, even if there is something, there’s no reason to assume that we will never be able to study it. We already study things which we cannot interact with due to distance (i.e. every other star in the universe…), and we study thing which aren’t observable by normal means. There’s no reason to blindly assume that we’ll never be able to study this theoretical something outside of our universe in the same way we study far away stars and universal background radiation. All of this is really inconsequential to the actual question though.

Your assertion that something is pointless simply because we cannot interact with it is, frankly, childish and stupid. There are a nearly infinite number of things that have an impact on you which you have never, and will never, be able to interact with. It does not exist to you beyond the fact that it has an influence on you. One prime example is the entirety of history prior to this very moment. By your own criteria, it no longer exists because we cannot access it. (Not the best example, I know, but I’m in a hurry and it was the best one I could come up with on a whim.) Our ability to interact with something is not a proper criteria by which to judge something’s necessity. If there is something which exists outside of the universe which we cannot interact with, it may or may not be necessary; we don’t know. Whether or not it’s necessary is really unimportant. Why would something not seeming necessary to us somehow make God wrong for creating it?

Maybe he created it because He wanted to, knowing full well that we would never experience it. That doesn’t make Him wrong, and it doesn’t make Him right. Again, as I’ve pointed out twice before already, “right” and “wrong” are subjective terms the way you’re using them, and are really unimportant to the question of the necessity of an external creator.

I’m out for the evening, and will check back in in the morning. Have a good one.
Click to expand...
,In any case it is pure speculation on Bradski’s part. There’s no proof, no evidence at all.
 
tonyrey said:
Indeed! The question is how all the valuable aspects of life originated. Accidentally? By pure chance?
Click to expand...
We don’t know what caused the universe to come into existence.

One day science may uncover the answer.
 
987mk said:
We don’t know what caused the universe to come into existence.

One day science may uncover the answer.
Click to expand...
You honestly believe so?
I have no idea how I would empirically determine what existed before time or space.
We really do not know if we can, but I admire your faith that the universe is intelligible and that our minds can understand it.
 
Aloysium said:
You honestly believe so?
I have no idea how I would empirically determine what existed before time or space.
We really do not know if we can, but I admire your faith that the universe is intelligible and that our minds can understand it.
Click to expand...
I do know that proclaiming that you are absolutely certain that a supernatural God existed before space & time is not something that I can take seriously.
 
987mk said:
Vishnu? . . . .
Click to expand...
987mk said:
I do know that proclaiming that you are absolutely certain that a supernatural God existed before space & time is not something that I can take seriously.
Click to expand...
I’m not exactly sure what I’m doing here, but it seems that a philosophical discussion, lacking connection to what is true, is rather pointless.
The fact is that we are all engaged in a relationship with God. There, I’ve said it and done my bit.

Although you don’t take me seriously, your mentioning Vishnu got me thinking. There are so many stories in Hinduism.
It doesn’t have a Magisterium, so the teachings and exercises are only as good as one’s Guru.

Let’s talk about Vishnu. He rests on Śeṣa, an eternal, thousand-headed serpent who perpetually sings the glories of Vishnu as they float in space, an endless ocean of milk. Śeṣa is very interesting, being the origin of all incarnations. When he uncoils, creation takes place and time moves; when he coils back, the universe ends. Śeṣa is fully independent, both a servant of and a manifestation of Vishnu, he is infinite and transcendenl to all time and space, remaining when all else ceases to exist.

Like Śeṣa, although finite in being, I take every opportunity to think about and to sing God’s praises. Thanks.
 
987mk said:
We don’t know what caused the universe to come into existence.

One day science may uncover the answer.
Click to expand...
We do know that rational minds caused science to come into existence. Can science explain itself? :whistle:
 
Bradski said:
God must be omnipotent because he made everything there is. But who says He got it right the first time? Where is the evidence that there was only one big bang and that we are the result?

As I said, there is no way to prove that there have not been an infinite number of big bangs spanning eternity. An infinite number of universes being created and then eventually ceasing to exist. Some lasting billions of years, some a second or so. Some suitable for life, some not. Saying that there has only been one is an assumption. And one without any basis.
Click to expand...
Quantity shouldn’t be confused with quality nor should quality be equated with identity. Variety may well be the spice of life in many different universes but one thing is common to all (at least all those being considered on this thread): physicality - and there is good reason to believe all forms of physicality have their limitations:

“The Slings and Arrows of outrageous Fortune… and the thousand Natural shocks
That Flesh is heir to…” - Hamlet

((Interpreting “flesh” as the biochemical basis of life, whatever that may be.)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top