A simple challenge for atheists

[fr0d0]

Am I the only one that raised an eyebrow at this??

It didn't raise mine. Unless you assume a god, why would you hypothesize a god creating anything? And beyond lacking any other answer why hypothesize god?

Why are you guys going on about serious things when losty is educating us on where to put things???

[Losty]

It didn't raise mine. Unless you assume a god, why would you hypothesize a god creating anything? And beyond lacking any other answer why hypothesize god?

Why are you guys going on about serious things when losty is educating us on where to put things???

Not every single one of my posts is about sex....I don't think...hmm :p

[robvalue]

Thanks for backing up my statement guys with compelling evidence, I appreciate it. It seems some people like to entirely ignore objective evidence when it is inconvenient but believe as true other things without any evidence at all.

[downbeatplumb]

Imagine an alternate universe which contains a single hydrogen atom. (Lets not include dark matter or other forces in the discussion for the purpose of simplicity.) You could replace the atom with a proton, a neutron, a sub-atomic particle, or a string. The point is, it's real. It can be measured.

Now where did this hydrogen atom come from?
Was it just always there?
Did it spontaneously appear, ie. magically?
Did someone create it?

How did it come into being?

Well it's your fantasy universe and your a Christian so I'm guessing it was god placed it there.

Am I right? what do I win.

Of course your fantasy universe has no bearing on the real universe.

What caused the real universe? the current answer is we don't know but people are working on it.

[Cyberman]

Not every single one of my posts is about sex....I don't think...hmm :p

You said "post" (giggety, fnarr fnarr and oo-er mrs).

[Tonus]

Not every single one of my posts is about sex....I don't think...hmm :p

Since I'm a guy, I can interpret any post to be about sex. One upside of this: it makes the Bible much more entertaining to read.

[The Grand Nudger]

You're probably spot on in your translation more often then you realize.

Rule 34A.D., there is porn -in it-.

How do you think they held the attention long enough to tell the tale, eh? Bestiality, interracial, incest, anal, girl on girl, bukkake, selfies, occult....guy on guy.....MILF, kiddie/lollipop, hair fetish, big dick, leg and foot, bdsm, femdom, spanking, facesitting, snuff, guro, menstrual, preggo, cuckold, plenty of bareback, yiffy ffs......POV, twink.........it's all in there.*

(*this list isn't even close to exhaustive with regards to bible pron, theres also some shit about loving a neighbor..or someone.....and maybe a near xenocide - IDK, who cares - cuz pron)

[bob96]

My faith in God comes from the Bible.

You have put your faith into manuscripts about bronze age nomads with no peer review or substance, yet you ignore the science journals of the 21st century with facts, empirical data and repeatable results.

AND, there is not a single bronze age manuscript that was written from a first hand account. The bible itself was not created until 4th century AD, but this is valid information?

Where did you get the belief that the bible was created in the 4th century AD???

---

[quote='bob96' pid='841867' dateline='1420932837']Now, since I've shown you mine, how about you show me yours? Where's this objective evidence detailing the existence of god outside of the universe, where he creates physical laws?

Objective evidence is used to evaluate things inside the universe. Since I believe in a God who is outside the universe, there can be no objective evidence. My original question had no mention of God, but people on the forum have asked that I rewrite the question to include God.

[bob96]

Ah yes, the argument from ignorance regarding complexity; "I can't think of how this could have happened naturally, therefore it didn't." Sorry, but complexity is not exclusively a sign of design- in fact if you think of it simplicity is more a hallmark of design than complexity- and not knowing how it happened is not evidence for god. Try again.

So I can't use the same argument that was used by a world leading atheist?

In that case, I believe what the following scientists believe.

“The question of whether there exists a Creator and Ruler of the Universe has been answered in the affirmative by some of the highest intellects that have ever existed.”
–Charles Darwin, the founder of evolutionary biology, as cited in his book Descent of Man.


“Both religion and science require a belief in God. For believers, God is in the beginning, and for physicists He is at the end of all considerations… To the former He is the foundation, to the latter, the crown of the edifice of every generalized world view.”

“There can never be any real opposition between religion and science; for the one is the complement of the other. Every serious and reflective person realizes, I think, that the religious element in his nature must be recognized and cultivated if all the powers of the human soul are to act together in perfect balance and harmony. And indeed it was not by accident that the greatest thinkers of all ages were deeply religious souls.”

–Max Planck, the Nobel Prize winning physicist considered to be the founder of quantum theory, and one of the most important physicists of the 20th century, indeed of all time.

Religion and Natural Science (Lecture Given 1937) Scientific Autobiography and Other Papers, trans. F. Gaynor (New York, 1949), pp. 184



“I have looked into most philosophical systems and I have seen that none will work without God.”

“Science is incompetent to reason upon the creation of matter itself out of nothing. We have reached the utmost limit of our thinking faculties when we have admitted that because matter cannot be eternal and self-existent it must have been created.”
–Physicist and mathematician James Clerk Maxwell, who is credited with formulating classical electromagnetic theory and whose contributions to science are considered to be of the same magnitude to those of Einstein and Newton.


“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.”
–Albert Einstein
(The Wall Street Journal, Dec 24, 1997, article by Jim Holt, “Science Resurrects God.”)

“I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts; the rest are details.”
–Albert Einstein
(From E. Salaman, “A Talk With Einstein,” The Listener 54 (1955), pp. 370-371, quoted in Jammer, p. 123).

“The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who – in their grudge against traditional religion as the ‘opium of the masses’ – cannot hear the music of the spheres.”
–Albert Einstein

[Alex K]

“The more I study science, the more I believe in God.”
–Albert Einstein
(The Wall Street Journal, Dec 24, 1997, article by Jim Holt, “Science Resurrects God.”)

“I want to know how God created this world. I am not interested in this or that phenomenon, in the spectrum of this or that element. I want to know his thoughts; the rest are details.”
–Albert Einstein
(From E. Salaman, “A Talk With Einstein,” The Listener 54 (1955), pp. 370-371, quoted in Jammer, p. 123).

“The fanatical atheists are like slaves who are still feeling the weight of their chains which they have thrown off after hard struggle. They are creatures who – in their grudge against traditional religion as the ‘opium of the masses’ – cannot hear the music of the spheres.”
–Albert Einstein

It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.”

Actually, if you had read the actual WSJ article rather than copypasting from idiot websites, you'd have found that Jim Holt writes the following:

The more I study science the more I believe in God," Albert Einstein once remarked. Einstein's Supreme Being, it should be noted, was a remote and disinterested one, more or less identifiable with the final laws of physics--a far cry from the God of Kierkegaard and Mother Teresa, the God incarnated under the reign of Augustus as a Galilean craftsman and crucified during the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate in an act of redemption.

Darwin himself of course was a deist at best later in his life. The quote which you mindlessly copy-pasted which is taken from Descent of Man, in context explains (in a quite racist fashion for todays standards) how the belief in God does not seem to be innate in humans, but is a cultural trait. Even when Darwin himself did not really believe in a personal God who is present in the world, one can nevertheless repeatedly find in his writings (especially in the earlier ones like Voyage of the Beagle) that he thinks religion is a noble thing which distinguishes cultured societies from "savages". That doesn't exactly mean that he found any of the concrete religious doctrines convincing.

That being said, who cares what any of these people believe? Darwin and Einstein are not the popes of science, nor of atheism. I know it is hard to comprehend for someone who is programmed on the theist mindset.