1. Are you absolutely sure there is no God? If not, then is it not possible that there is a God? And if it is possible that God exists, then can you think of any reason that would keep you from wanting to look at the evidence?
I'm not sure there is no god, in the fact the a god(s) in some iterations of the term is quite possible. No I can't thing of any thing that has stopped from looking at the "evidence" and arguments for a god, I just find them to be in error, especially in reference to the christian god.
2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, then would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe?
Do you understand how we tell something is intelligently designed? Lets take a beautiful smooth quarter staff, like what was commonly carried in the middle ages.
![[Image: wooden-quarterstaff-981-p.asp]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=www.thevikingstore.co.uk%2Fwooden-quarterstaff-981-p.asp)
This is a very simple device, but you look at it and you know instantly this had a designer, because we can see the intent of the design and it in use.
Now let takes caves as another example. These are very complicated and can stretch for miles and miles, and are often very beautiful. Like this cave pictured here
![[Image: File:Resava_cave.jpg]](https://images.weserv.nl/?url=en.wikipedia.org%2Fwiki%2FResava_cave%23mediaviewer%2FFile%3AResava_cave.jpg)
Yet we know cave have no designer because we now understand the geological processes that make them. So just because something looks designed and is complex doesn't mean it is. Escpecially because we now have some understanding of the universe around us and can easily see that the explanations given by the bible are simply babbling ignorance.
3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something? If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?
Stuff comes from nothing all the time. In fact there is a major feild of science devoted to the study of the phenomenon called quantum physics.
4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?
Of course, our eyes are quite limited really. Tell me if god designed us, we can't we see more of the radio spectrum, instead of the tiny sliver we do see?
5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?
No, but everything you mentioned previously is easily detectable, where as your god is totally undetectable in any consistent way. Do you bleieve in any thing else at all that is totally undetectable but requires you to have faith instead?
6. In the light of the big bang evidence for the origin of the universe, is it more reasonable to believe that no one created something out of nothing or someone created something out of nothing?
Given the evidence, we have no reason to think that anyone existed at the time of the big bang, but yet particles pop in and out of nothing all the time. So the former.
7. Would you agree that something presently exists? If something presently exists, and something cannot come from nothing, then would you also agree that something must have always existed?
No, as I stated before there is a whole catalog of particles that pop out of nothing millions of times a second.
8. If it takes an intelligent being to produce an encyclopedia, then would it not also take an intelligent being to produce the equivalent of 1000 sets of an encyclopedia full of information in the first one-celled animal? (Even atheists such as Richard Dawkins acknowledges that “amoebas have as much information in their DNA as 1000 Encyclopaedia Britannicas.” Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: WW. Norton and Co., 1996), 116.)
No, it does not. You see every piece of information in the encyclopedia is meant to communicate something, where as the vast majority is DNA is simply junk.
9. If an effect cannot be greater than its cause (since you can’t give what you do not have to give), then does it not make more sense that mind produced matter than that matter produced mind, as atheists say?
What makes you think that my mind is greater then matter, when my mind is easily explained as matter interacting with electric signals?
10. Is there anything wrong anywhere? If so, how can we know unless there is a moral law?
we can know this because we are creatures with a innate sense of empathy.
11. If every law needs a lawgiver, does it not make sense to say a moral law needs a Moral Lawgiver?
I'm sorry were you assuming I would say yes to the last question?
12. Would you agree that if it took intelligence to make a model universe in a science lab, then it took super-intelligence to make the real universe?
Nope. I can a model of everest, does that mean everest was designed? Even though we understand the natural process that makes mountains very well and have observed it happen with simple experimentation.
13. Would you agree that it takes a cause to make a small glass ball found in the woods? And would you agree that making the ball larger does not eliminate the need for a cause? If so, then doesn’t the biggest ball of all (the whole universe) need a cause?
Sure, but that kind of reasoning fails in the case of the big bang beacuse your presuming the existance of time and thus cause and effect. There was no time before the big bang, thus opening the door to all sorts of crazy shit.
14. If there is a cause beyond the whole finite (limited) universe, would not this cause have to be beyond the finite, namely, non-finite or infinite?
Not neccesarily, as I explained before your reasoning method breaks down when talking about the big bang.
15. In the light of the anthropic principle (that the universe was fine-tuned for the emergence of life from its very inception), wouldn’t it make sense to say there was an intelligent being who preplanned human life?
I would answer you myself, but I think that neil degrasse tyson puts it much better in the following video
For those of you that want to see the original post
http://geekychristian.com/questions-for-...agnostics/
I'm not sure there is no god, in the fact the a god(s) in some iterations of the term is quite possible. No I can't thing of any thing that has stopped from looking at the "evidence" and arguments for a god, I just find them to be in error, especially in reference to the christian god.
2. Would you agree that intelligently designed things call for an intelligent designer of them? If so, then would you agree that evidence for intelligent design in the universe would be evidence for a designer of the universe?
Do you understand how we tell something is intelligently designed? Lets take a beautiful smooth quarter staff, like what was commonly carried in the middle ages.
This is a very simple device, but you look at it and you know instantly this had a designer, because we can see the intent of the design and it in use.
Now let takes caves as another example. These are very complicated and can stretch for miles and miles, and are often very beautiful. Like this cave pictured here
Yet we know cave have no designer because we now understand the geological processes that make them. So just because something looks designed and is complex doesn't mean it is. Escpecially because we now have some understanding of the universe around us and can easily see that the explanations given by the bible are simply babbling ignorance.
3. Would you agree that nothing cannot produce something? If so, then if the universe did not exist but then came to exist, wouldn’t this be evidence of a cause beyond the universe?
Stuff comes from nothing all the time. In fact there is a major feild of science devoted to the study of the phenomenon called quantum physics.
4. Would you agree with me that just because we cannot see something with our eyes—such as our mind, gravity, magnetism, the wind—that does not mean it doesn’t exist?
Of course, our eyes are quite limited really. Tell me if god designed us, we can't we see more of the radio spectrum, instead of the tiny sliver we do see?
5. Would you also agree that just because we cannot see God with our eyes does not necessarily mean He doesn’t exist?
No, but everything you mentioned previously is easily detectable, where as your god is totally undetectable in any consistent way. Do you bleieve in any thing else at all that is totally undetectable but requires you to have faith instead?
6. In the light of the big bang evidence for the origin of the universe, is it more reasonable to believe that no one created something out of nothing or someone created something out of nothing?
Given the evidence, we have no reason to think that anyone existed at the time of the big bang, but yet particles pop in and out of nothing all the time. So the former.
7. Would you agree that something presently exists? If something presently exists, and something cannot come from nothing, then would you also agree that something must have always existed?
No, as I stated before there is a whole catalog of particles that pop out of nothing millions of times a second.
8. If it takes an intelligent being to produce an encyclopedia, then would it not also take an intelligent being to produce the equivalent of 1000 sets of an encyclopedia full of information in the first one-celled animal? (Even atheists such as Richard Dawkins acknowledges that “amoebas have as much information in their DNA as 1000 Encyclopaedia Britannicas.” Richard Dawkins, The Blind Watchmaker (New York: WW. Norton and Co., 1996), 116.)
No, it does not. You see every piece of information in the encyclopedia is meant to communicate something, where as the vast majority is DNA is simply junk.
9. If an effect cannot be greater than its cause (since you can’t give what you do not have to give), then does it not make more sense that mind produced matter than that matter produced mind, as atheists say?
What makes you think that my mind is greater then matter, when my mind is easily explained as matter interacting with electric signals?
10. Is there anything wrong anywhere? If so, how can we know unless there is a moral law?
we can know this because we are creatures with a innate sense of empathy.
11. If every law needs a lawgiver, does it not make sense to say a moral law needs a Moral Lawgiver?
I'm sorry were you assuming I would say yes to the last question?
12. Would you agree that if it took intelligence to make a model universe in a science lab, then it took super-intelligence to make the real universe?
Nope. I can a model of everest, does that mean everest was designed? Even though we understand the natural process that makes mountains very well and have observed it happen with simple experimentation.
13. Would you agree that it takes a cause to make a small glass ball found in the woods? And would you agree that making the ball larger does not eliminate the need for a cause? If so, then doesn’t the biggest ball of all (the whole universe) need a cause?
Sure, but that kind of reasoning fails in the case of the big bang beacuse your presuming the existance of time and thus cause and effect. There was no time before the big bang, thus opening the door to all sorts of crazy shit.
14. If there is a cause beyond the whole finite (limited) universe, would not this cause have to be beyond the finite, namely, non-finite or infinite?
Not neccesarily, as I explained before your reasoning method breaks down when talking about the big bang.
15. In the light of the anthropic principle (that the universe was fine-tuned for the emergence of life from its very inception), wouldn’t it make sense to say there was an intelligent being who preplanned human life?
I would answer you myself, but I think that neil degrasse tyson puts it much better in the following video
For those of you that want to see the original post
http://geekychristian.com/questions-for-...agnostics/
To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
