Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Log in or create an account to join the discussions on the Atheist Republic forums.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
Donating = Loving
Bringing you atheist articles and building active godless communities takes hundreds of hours and resources each month. If you find any joy or stimulation at Atheist Republic, please consider becoming a Supporting Member with a recurring monthly donation of your choosing, between a cup of tea and a good dinner.
FREE E-BOOKS
Get the book "Why There Is No God" and one more book for FREE!
Sign up below for the Atheist Republic Newsletter to get the books.
Record Your Message!
Record your voice here for it to be aired on the Atheist Republic Voicemails Podcast.
Send us your views and opinions, your personal stories, messages of support, comments on recent news, or any comments you would like to share about your part of the world.
Note : By clicking record you are allowing us to broadcast your message on any of our platforms.
Affiliate Disclaimer
Links to atheist related books, shirts and movies and other atheism related products are affiliate links.
All proceeds will go to keeping the Atheist Republic website up and running; providing resources, advocacy, community tools and encouragement to atheists all over the world.
This is succinct and to the point, beautifully put arakish.
Lane Craig is a woefully inept with his interpretations of the physics he is trying to build his assumptions around.
The fact you can go in to a debate putting forward a case for a prime mover using classical general relativity is outstanding in my opinion.
He is also completely unable to put his hands up when his wrong.
I think it was Professor Carroll that caught him out on Lane Craig's views of the authors of the Borde-Guth-Vilenkin singularity theorem.
Carroll actually had an email he presented from Alan Guth that dismissed Craig's position.
@ Jazzy
No, I dismiss it because of the very lack of corroboration, i.e independent evidence of such an occurrence.
WL Craig treats the NT as evidence instead of the claim. He does that knowing that if he treats it as the claim it is legless. It has no foundation at all. You would do better reading Ehrman and Carrier. At least they have some facts not suppositions.
This is my oft stated position:" There is no contemporary evidence for the existence of a Jesus as described in the gospels. None. Zilch . Nada."
Please supply some evidence to change my mind.
An event by definition is a natural phenomenon.
If you believe that people can resurrect themselves, you have a different definition to death than I do.
Dark matter is quite the poor point of comparison. Unlike the god hypothesis, dark matter is a falsifiable hypothesis. God, however, cannot be falsified under any circumstances. The atheist "methodology" of not believing in god due to lack of possible evidence for his existence indeed is not contradicted by the atheist provisionally accepting a falsifiable hypothesis. One can be investigated, the other cannot. They aren't comparable items.
The opposite is the case, I'm afraid.
Your methodology rejects the supernatural by default, because you assume that everything must have a natural explanation, which makes atheism unfalsifiable. Dark matter or not, you can always claim that there's a natural explanation. The supernatural simply is never an option.
On the other hand, the supernatural intervention hypothesis is falsifiable. If anyone detects dark matter or finds out what natural laws cause such anomaly, then supernatural intervention is falsified.
The argument you made before hand regarding the supernatural intervention or ultimate cause postulates that if not a natural explanation it must be supernatural.
This methodology is a black and white fallacy as it doesn't incorporate all possible evidence and avenues, for example the preternatural, Which ironically has more plausibility then the supernatural.
Let us also not confuse atheism with naturalism, naturalism does indeed negate the supernatural due to it being unfalsifiable, untestable and unevidenced.
However, Atheism is literally not believing or being unconvinced by the evidence (or lack there of) for all god(s).
Natural laws are also not laws as is seemingly suggested, they are unbreakable patterns.
You are trying to compare two things that cannot be compared.
This is about as meaningful as saying "If anyone finds out what natural laws cause my socks to disappear, then supernatural intervention is falsified." There hasn't been any evidence of the supernatural that would qualify as a hypothesis that could be falsified.
@JazzTheist Hardly the case. We can only ever falsify or prove theorems or hypotheses about the world that are based on naturalistic assumptions. As natural beings ourselves, who only ever interacted with a natural universe, the discussions of "supernatural" or "metaphysical" items themselves are just that - discussions without connection to ourselves or the world we observe.
Also, while supernatural intervention itself is falsifiable, the concept of god at its most basic level is not. For example, there's no way to assail logically the Deist god that just set the world in motion but never intervened in its operations. This is fundamentally not falsifiable. Dark matter is falsifiable, black hole cosmology is falsifiable, loop quantum gravity is falsifiable, pilot wave theory is falsifiable, etc. etc. The god hypothesis at its most basic level was never comparable to any of these.
jazztheist: "On the other hand, the supernatural intervention hypothesis is falsifiable."
No it is not. It is due to the lack of falsifiability that makes the supernatural nothing more than a fantasy cooked up inside the mentally retarded minds of Religious Absolutists.
Answer this question: Why is it as science continues to progress that the pockets of "the god of gaps" continue to get smaller and smaller; thus, the Religious Absolutists are stuck creating even more and more sophisticated LIES that cannot be disproven?
rmfr
@JazzTheist
Our understanding of the laws of nature comes from our observation of events. If an event is possible, then by definition it is so because it is within the laws of nature.
It is meaningless to say that "an event is not possible according to the laws of nature, therefore it must be supernatural".
Pages