Is Lack of Belief the Best You Can Do?

[drfuzzy]

---

 I disagree with the author. A lot of Atheists...recognize.

1. It's possible time must have started.
2. It's possible that there is no real possibility of the universe being in a timeless state then causing a time state.

This is gives plausibility to Deism in many of their minds. 

---

That is to say, a Creator may be necessary for all we know. This is not the same as possibilities of fairies etc.

Why not?  We have no evidence of a creator, and we have no evidence of fairies.

---

 I further argue. Some Atheists positively know time must have started and always talk about the universe was without time and then shifted to time, but give possibility in that it may be impossible for that to happen.

In this case, active disbelief would a positive faith in not only that they know it's possible a timeless creator didn't create this world, but that are relatively certain that a Creator is not the only option available.

That said, I feel the most honest Atheist I know on these forums is Tiberius in which he stated that he doesn't know whether Theists actually know God exists. He just believes he himself doesn't know God exists and hence doesn't believe in God.

And this is logical step to take. The reason being if you are open to the possibility of it existing, you should not deny the possibility of people having knowledge of it existing unless you can prove: Where it to exist, it would not impart knowledge.

---

 I further argue you should question whether that knowledge is in you (but I understand Atheists will not do that) somehow, but you just have to recognize it.

 Well then, god did a really shitty job of hiding that knowledge. We really have to dig for it, and some people who pray for decades never find it.  Terrible communication skills. And if it was really there, why is that "knowledge" different depending upon what church your parents went to? If there was a "message" it should all be the same message, and it should be provable.

---

All points of time came to be, and if all points of time came to be, then it cannot be said any of time didn't start or that time over all didn't start or that all of time didn't start, and hence we know time started.

So if a person accepts that much, they have to think what is more special pleading saying that universe had a timeless state that resulted in time state universe as we know it or to say no it could not have started change in itself without time being present already. 

---

That said a person can say he still doesn't believe either way. But it is a whole different thing to treat the possibility of the Creator in the realm of invisible dragons or what not. -- Again, why not? We don't have proof of either.

---

The same is with consciousness being explained by a soul or a soul being observable to us. Or other things like the transcendent nature of love or goodness.

---

People can say they don't believe either way, but it's a whole different level of dishonesty to say you know it's not true or you know a Creator cannot or has not imparted knowledge of it's nature of it's existence to human beings.

You've been on this forum a while, MK.  You know that even folks here who claim to be gnostic atheists will assert that science has utterly failed to prove for or against the existence of a deity. It is also true that the fragmentation of religions and the lack of a coherent message weighs in against the existence of a deity.  We don't know whether there is one or not.  There is simply a lack of evidence for belief.  That's interesting in the light of sects like fundie xtians or fundie muslims, who pray for the day when "every knee shall bow" to their god. God wants a coherent message - get the preachers out of the way and let god give one. Then we would actually have some proof.