World without God?

[YHWH_Christ]

A famous atheist has said that the universe is exactly how we would expect it to be if there was no God. Evolution and natural selection demonstrate that matter is capable of organizing itself in complex ways without the need of an outside creator. Astronomy demonstrates that earth is insignificant in the universe as there are millions upon millions of star systems with many planets similar to ours and in fact our own sun is an average star. The existence of suffering in the universe. The lack of coherency in all world religions, for example, if the Bible is divine then why does it contain so many errors and why does it look to be the product of certain cultures in specific time periods? And also things like quantum mechanics which shows that something can come out of nothing without the need for an all powerful creator. So although logical arguments can be made for the existence of God, based on our own observations of the universe it seems unlikely he exists and that in fact the world is exactly how one would expect it to be without God.

How do we respond to all of this?

 

[Beryllos]

I look at the universe and the world and see so much beauty and underlying order that I am convinced that there must be a wise and loving God.

There is ugliness and disorder as well. Famous atheist sees a glass half empty. I see a glass half full, and it’s just what I need.

 

[Beryllos]

And also things like quantum mechanics which shows that something can come out of nothing…

This is the only statement in your post that I disagree with. I know physics and quantum mechanics very well, and you don’t get something from nothing. I believe this misunderstanding may have originated from the concept of virtual particles, which are only manifested in the presence of other objects and come with some energy cost.

 

[vern_humphrey]

That famous Atheist (Steven Hawking) made a fundamental mistake. His position is based on String Theory – according to the standard model of physics there should be particles that vibrate (like a plucked guitar string.) These particles are therefore called “strings.” But they vibrate in TEN dimensions, not only in three.

This has led to all kinds of speculation – where are the other seven dimensions?

A famous engineering professor was wont to say, “If you can’t draw something, you don’t understand it.” So here’s a challenge – draw a ten dimensional object. You can’t – and no one else can. We can’t even draw or imagine four dimensional objects.

So Stephen Hawking had to draw with WORDS. And to do that, you need to use your words precisely. He says the universe was created by a clash of the “branes.” No God needed.

Hold on there! “Universe” means “everything that exists.” If the “branes” exist, they HAVE to be part of the Universe, by definition. When the Universe did not exist, the “branes” didn’t exist, either.

 

[niceatheist]

Actually so far as I understand it, Hawking’s view on the origins of the universe are based on Imaginary Time, not on string theory. He was never a strong advocate of string theory.

More fully, Hawking advocated for a No Boundary Universe. In essence, the idea of a No Boundary universe is to treat the universe like a four dimensional version of a sphere. In three dimensions, a sphere is finite in size, but has no boundary (ie. you can fly around the Earth, but not fall off).

Hartle–Hawking state - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Hodos]

Except for the fact that the same atheists can’t figure out how the universe created itself out of nothing without something to provide an outside force to get the ball rolling.

 

[lelinator]

Regarding evolution, I know there are species that have evolved by adapting in different ways to create wide variations within a species. But has anyone ever found a species that has been found to evolve into a new species?

Please, please please don’t turn this into another evolution thread.

 

[lelinator]

Except for the fact that the same atheists can’t figure out how the universe created itself out of nothing without something to provide an outside force to get the ball rolling.

Neither can theists, so it seems like a draw.

 

[adamhovey1988]

I think it important to remember that laws exist in nature, because there is a lawgiver. I also want to point out that every scientist I know believes in God , maybe not every science teacher, but every legitimate scientist I know believes in God. A few of which are practicing Catholics, including a deacon. They certainly didn’t come to the conclusion that the Universe can exist without God

 

[IWantGod]

A famous atheist has said that the universe is exactly how we would expect it to be if there was no God. Evolution and natural selection demonstrate that matter is capable of organizing itself in complex ways without the need of an outside creator.

Well, i have to say that this is very short sighted, because i see goal-directed teleological behaviour in the activity of biological organisms, including ourselves; they act for goal-directed ends and i wouldn’t expect that to be true if metaphysical-naturalism were true. If metaphysical naturalism is true there is no goal-directed activity and there are no ends in nature.

The fact that we exist in a natural order, has no relevance to the question of why any particular behaviour would exist if there were no God. The best answer an atheist can give is a brute-fact.

 

[IWantGod]

And also things like quantum mechanics which shows that something can come out of nothing without the need for an all powerful creator.

If you live in the world long enough you will realise that people tend to distort facts to serve there own end, and it takes a very humble person not to fall into that same trap.

Science has never argued that things can come out of nothing without a cause and it never will. The best that a scientist can argue in principle is that a thing has no physical cause or deterministic cause. Anybody who argues that quantum mechanics is evidence of something coming out of nothing without a cause either doesn’t understand what they are saying, or they are being deceptive; whichever the case they are certainly not doing science.

 

[po18guy]

“Nonsense” is the best word to describe such willful ignoring of the physics involved. The universe is demonstrably expanding from a single point. Is matter, in a state of non-existence, capable of creating itself?

Nonsense.

 

[Wesrock]

A famous atheist has said that the universe is exactly how we would expect it to be if there was no God. Evolution and natural selection demonstrate that matter is capable of organizing itself in complex ways without the need of an outside creator. Astronomy demonstrates that earth is insignificant in the universe as there are millions upon millions of star systems with many planets similar to ours and in fact our own sun is an average star.

I wouldn’t expect intelligibility let alone any world at all without God.

 

[IWantGod]

Life is a tragic parody if there is no God and i would find it very difficult to live in such a world. But that is only because i know that my dignity as a living person would be based on a fantasy and wouldn’t actually be true in reality. I have no true rights or value in such a world beyond my use to someone else. I would be nothing more than an expression of energy, an object that knows that it is an object; and i would desire true moral and existential dignity and there would be no such thing; and my efforts for such an end would be absurd; ultimately ending in my non-existence. Humanity would just be something that happened, all that pain, anguish, happiness, joy, guilt, war and human ego in the midst of absolute absurdity. Hence it would be a dark parody for the simple fact that all our activities was all for nothing accept the fantasy in our heads, and all along your value as a living being was defined by nothing more than the whim of some other mind that was going to ceased to exist. It’s completely irrational.

But we know what it means for there to be no God. I think an atheist would agree with you if they really understood the gravity of such a question.

 

[IWantGod]

I wouldn’t expect intelligibility let alone any world at all without God.

Yeah, but try convincing them of that. lol. We take the world for granted. Our capacity to experience good in our lives and intelligibility is not dependent on knowing God. So i can see why people would just assume that the existence of such things would make sense without God’s existence.

 

[Frankie65]

if the Bible is divine then why does it contain so many errors

For all the books which the Church receives as sacred and canonical are written wholly and entirely, with all their parts, at the dictation of the Holy Ghost; and so far is it from being possible that any error can co-exist with inspiration, that inspiration not only is essentially incompatible with error but excludes and rejects it as absolutely and necessarily, as it is impossible that God Himself, the supreme Truth, can utter that which is not true. . . . It follows that those who maintain that an error is possible in any genuine passage of the sacred writings either pervert the Catholic notion of inspiration or make God the author of such error ( Providentissimus Deus , 20-21). Written 1893 Pope Leo XIII

 

[Zach]

I think it important to remember that laws exist in nature, because there is a lawgiver. I also

Yes those who say virtual particles pop into existence out of nothing within the universe extend that to claim the universe could also have popped into existence on its own out of nothing. Even if that were possible it’s still not going all the way back to a final or first cause. There still has to be a law, and thus lawgiver, that would allow for the universe to pop into existence. Even in a multiverse scenario in which universes pop into existence constantly there still has to be an intelligence outside the multiverse to design the laws that got the whole thing going in the first place.

 

[vz71]

Astronomy demonstrates that earth is insignificant in the universe as there are millions upon millions of star systems with many planets similar to ours and in fact our own sun is an average star.

What exactly is similar?
So far every planet we have found is completely incompatible with life as we know it.
This makes the Earth unique.

 

[niceatheist]

YHWH_Christ:

Astronomy demonstrates that earth is insignificant in the universe as there are millions upon millions of star systems with many planets similar to ours and in fact our own sun is an average star.

What exactly is similar?
So far every planet we have found is completely incompatible with life as we know it.
This makes the Earth unique.

We’re only getting to the point where we can even detect terrestrial-like worlds. I think making claims of an inherently statistical nature with a very small sample size is a pretty dubious exercise.

 

[lelinator]

Just an observation, but the seeming lack of any opposition in this thread to the "God did it" arguments, would seem to indicate that the flag police have done their job well. And have left this forum with little more than talking heads.

How very sad.