(June 6, 2012 at 4:51 pm)MysticKnight Wrote: The teleological argument coupled with first cause argument if both valid just prove a Creator is extremely likely but tell us nothing of his qualities except his ability to create.Actually, not everything may need a cause. Virtual particles pop in and out of existence seemingly without a cause. The fact that the universe was once smaller than a virtual particle suggests that it could of popped into existence without a cause. What's interesting is that it doesn't violate the known laws of nature, meaning it's very much possible. The fact that there was no before the big bang and so no time to create the universe in. Which rules out a need for a god.
Quote:So to me, it seems rather hard atheism (denial of God) or belief in God (gnostic type) is the best options.Atheism isn't the denial of the existence of god, it's a rejection of the claim that a god or gods exist.
I don't deny god's existence, I reject the claim. I really don't believe. Lack of belief, not denial.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence - Carl Sagan
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
Mankind's intelligence walks hand in hand with it's stupidity.
Being an atheist says nothing about your overall intelligence, it just means you don't believe in god. Atheists can be as bright as any scientist and as stupid as any creationist.
You never really know just how stupid someone is, until you've argued with them.
