A simple challenge for atheists

[Losty]

Thanks for the first reasonable answer.

No idea.

You made up a scenario and then asked a question. You did not provide enough information to conclude an answer. The only possible reasonable answer is "I don't know".

Let me give you a word problem.

Bob has 5 apples. Sally has 3 celery sticks. How did Bob make enough chicken salad for the party?

Answer: you don't know because I haven't given enough information.

[Esquilax]

So the question then is, can a material thing in our universe come into existence from nothing without God putting it there?

Sure: if our universe is one of many, then material things could be ported over from one to another. If the universe is cyclical, then it would be bouncing from bang to crunch and back again. There's even some evidence that such things can spontaneously come into existence. Ultimately, neither of us has enough evidence or information to come to a solid conclusion or calculation of probability on this question.

The difference between a christian and an atheist is that the former uses that lack of evidence, that ignorance, as justification for positing a god, while the latter isn't willing to make such an unjustified leap.

[watchamadoodle]

I like to think about things that are beyond my education level.

Anyway, is there a way to make dimensions, geometry, time, etc. an emergenty property of information, entropy, etc.?

Like rather than a global time there is merely causation. If something causes something else then we have a before and after time. If multiple threads of causality merge then we synchronize those independent threads of befores and afters. As independent threads become more interconnected it begins to approximate a universal time, but actually there is no time - just intertwining befores and afters?

You could take a similar approach with space/position maybe? Instead of space, position, etc. we have bits of entropy that are somewhat related to each other. The positions and geometry are an emergent approximation of the relationships. Maybe the dimensions are not even uniform throughout the universe - 2.11 dimensions here and 3.65 dimensions there?

Maybe some things like quantum entanglement would seem less weird if we realized that space and time are emergent properties of the universe?

I hope somebody can understand what I'm imagining in my unscientific way.

[Tonus]

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.

I could replace the atom with god and ask the same questions. I don't accept your assertion that god is to be granted an automatic exemption from your "everything has to be created by something" argument. You'll have to come up with something better than 'because I said so' if you intend to convince us that your argument is anything more than wishful thinking.

[Full Circle]

I admit using the word "challenge" was pretty arrogant. I should have used the word question. I'm just wondering how people can believe it possible that "something" came from "nothing" or "was always just there".

A miracle is not an explanation of what we cannot comprehend.
L K Washburn

Not having an answer is not a reason to inject the non-answer of wooperstition (just coined the word, I kill myself).

[Thumpalumpacus]

Do you believe that God 'was always just there'?
Boru

Yes, of course. God is immaterial. Though the question is, how can "some thing", ie. a material object in our universe come from nowhere?

I don't know. How can some invisible being think something into existence?

That's right, you don't know.

[Jenny A]

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?

I have several answers to this little hypothetical.

First the existence of a single atom presents no evidence for anything except that atom's existence. From it's existence you can infer that either it always existed, or that it was created by something (which either is outside this alternative universe or has since, like Elvis, left the building), or that it spontaneously popped into existence. Actually, you could consider other possibilities such as that the alternative universe once had a great deal more matter and that everything else has since leaked out. Or that the atom used to exist somewhere else and has leaked into your alternate universe.

But where I presume you want to get to is that the atom couldn't have always existed, therefore god must have made that little atom. That isn't really a solution because then you have to explain whether god always existed or just popped into existence. The conundrum is exactly the same, except that at least we know (for purposes of your hypothetical anyway) that the atom exists. You're asking us to solve one conundrum with a bigger more complex conundrum.

Worse yet, god, even if he existed still doesn't answer the question. If in the beginning there was nothing but god, what did god make the atom out of?

What you are really saying is we don't know, therefore god. But nothing makes god the obvious answer unless you presuppose god. And if I don't get to presuppose the atom, you don't get to presuppose god.

The difference between you and I, is I'm not uncomfortable with we don't know as an answer. Absent real evidence, we don't know is often the best, if not the most comfortable, answer. It has the additional benefit of spurring us on to find a real answer. If your answer is god, you've explained nothing and stopped looking for an explanation.

[robvalue]

Hello there, welcome

Everyone beat me to it, not much more I can say. I was especially going to say all that really advanced science stuff that I totally understood. Really stole my thunder.

But again, the important thing is that "I don't know" is a perfectly acceptable answer, and often the only honest answer.

[Crossless2.0]

I don't know, and neither do you. OP, please explain the difference between saying 'I don't know' and 'God did it'. Is not 'God did it' just another way of saying 'I don't have a fucking clue'?

[robvalue]

There is also a reason why making up an answer is worse than admitting you don't know. If you make one up, and become comfortable with it, you lose the incentive to go and find out the real answer. As well as misleading anyone who relies on you for accurate information.

There may be no real answer yet, but if no one is looking, it won't get found. Hence religion stunting science.