Existence part 2
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.
Prove it! Prove there has to be a cause. You can't. You can only speculate and make an assumption based on NOTHING! You don't even know and cannot prove that space, time, matter, and energy all came into existence at the same time. Again that is an assumption on your part.
So your #3 isn't valid. So #s 1,2 & 3 are not valid. There is nothing to support that they are.
I have never seen read or heard of any atheist claiming that there must be an "eternal" cause. Not once, ever. That is a presumptive lie on your part.
I don’t know why you keep calling me a liar. At worst I’m just wrong if my beliefs are untrue. In order for anything at all to exist there needs to be something that is eternal because it is not possible to have regression of an infinite number of causes. Since something does exist either the universe is eternal which it appears it is not even if you won’t accept the scientific evidence, or a cause outside of the universe must be eternal. If you have never heard or seen something does that mean that it does not exist? Do you possess all knowledge in order to make that claim one would have to.
No AJ777 it isn't that easy. You haven't proved anything. You haven't proved anything to be eternal or a prime mover. Your link doesn't even begin to qualify as proof of what you think is fact.
Is the universe or anything in the universe "eternal"? Well, the answer to that is we have no idea. There is no proof of that.
I understand your motivation for believing that there is something "eternal" (you want to call it god), but you just can't assert that something is eternal.
You are a liar for why I stated before, but the fact is I didn't call you a liar on this thread. That we have proof of. See how it works.
You cannot prove that space, time, matter, and energy, all began at the same time. You cannot prove that there is anything eternal. You cannot prove a prime mover. The website you offer doesn't prove any of these things either.
The website was not offered as a proof but as educational on Big Bang cosmology. Research it for yourself if you’d like to be convinced. You asked for a reason to believe god exists based on science. I gave it to you. In your view how can one prove something? What is the standard of proof?
That website didn't prove a god scientifically or any other way. I didn't ask for a reason to believe a god exists based on science. I asked for proof that a god exists.
Proof? Don't you know what proof is? Haven't you ever had to write a paper and defend it with PROOF?
Don't even bother. Every time you christians say you have proof, you don't. At some point in your line of logic, there is a huge gap.
So again what is your standard of proof? Can you prove that you exist to a 100% certainty?
So you can't prove your god so you try to deflect YOUR responsibility to me! Un-FUCKING-BELIEVABLE!
Get a fucking education. I have my degrees. I earned them. I WENT to school. I didn't go to some Bob Jones Uni. where all you have to do is go to a bunch of revivals and cheer like you are at a pep rally for a bullshit degree....in bible studies!
So we have established that YOU AJ777 don't know what "proof" is! Then you shouldn't try and defend your myth!
Did you take any philosophy classes. Maybe a little education on how we can know anything and to what standard would help you. The short answer is that it is impossible to know anything to a 100% certainty. Why is it you don’t think you have any burden of proof? How can I “prove” something to you if I don’t know what standard of proof if any is acceptable to you.
What a condescending asshole!
You are just trying to deflect what is YOUR basic responsibility to prove your god.
I take it you NEVER had a college course. I take it you NEVER had to submit a term paper or a thesis. You don't need to know "MY" standard for proof. You just have to meet the minimum requirement of proof.
Substantiated, confirmed, verifiable PROOF asshole!
Is that plain enough for you?
Not hearsay, not a legend, not bible verses, not an illusion, not obfuscation, not pseudo-science, not revisionist history, not fucked up logic.
You prove your god, with no gaps, no faith, use REAL facts!
Got it, pal?
You are asking for scientific evidence that God exists? This is a category error on your part sir. One cannot use that which measures the natural world or things inside the universe to find something outside of the natural world. Its like saying I can use the fahrenheit scale to determine how much I love pizza. We can see the effects of God on our universe. Like creation, the precise nature of the gravitational constant, etc.
BUUUUUZZZZZ! Wrong AJ777!
You say that your god is outside the natural world. Bullshit! The fact is that you can't measure your god because your god is nothing more than a stone age figment of human imagination.
You say that we see effects of your god, and you claim that these are "creation" and "gravitational constant". If that is the case you can prove a direct link.
You can't claim that something happens in the natural world cannot be measured by the same standard. You are just trying to wiggle out of YOUR responsibility to back up YOUR claim that there is a god.
I see NO effects of a god. I see no proof of a god.
And BTW FYI gravitational constant was proven to not be the case. In quantum theory, gravity works much differently. That is a scientific fact!
So can you see outside of the universe to know that God doesn’t exist? Are you lacking faith in a gravitational constant now? How would you then measure the supernatural using the natural?
I don't need to DISPROVE a god. You need to prove a god. It's your belief, not mine!
I just stated a scientific fact that apparently, you know nothing about.
I know a 10 billion mile pink elephant hiding behind the sun controlling everything that is invisible to the naked eye doesn't exist because there is no proof of such a thing. I don't need to disprove every fucked up myth that comes along, and the god theory is a fucked up myth.
This is why I'm in a Supreme position because I never said God exists nor have I said he does. The burden of proof does not apply to me because I never claimed to know weather God exist or not. When you make a claim he doesn't exit the burden of proof is on you because you are the one claiming to know something.
Which is why I will always be in a winning position between an atheist or a theist.
When did I come into existence? When my parents had sex and ovum allowed sperm to enter. Now I have begun my microscopic existence. Did I just pop out of nowhere? You could say that I was two things before this event. A sperm and an egg.
Never mind WHEN you come into existence do you come into existence at all? Did you always exist? If not what is the 3rd way for you to exist? I'm not asking the starting point of your existence but a 3rd possible way for you to exist other than the 2 ways I stated.
Zero: Look at the post above! That IS how I came into existence! Mommy and Daddy! Birds and the Bees! Do I need to explain to you about penises and vaginas? I will if necessary.
I'm not asking HOW you come into existence but do you come into existence at all? You went from when to how you come into existence im not asking that but do you come into existence in any possible way or have you always existed?
You have not added to the conversation or debunked my argument. Your example fits into the category of coming into existence and you have not added a 3rd way for something to exist. Therefore my point is still valid of the only being 2 way for something to exist.
I came into existence by sexual reproduction. The fact that you can not acknowledge that proves your argument is obfuscation.
Whats unclear about the fact that I am not asking you how you come into existence but do you come into existence in any type of way. Weather it's through sexual reproduction or if you pop out of thin air.
I came into existence through the merger of things that existed before me but which can not be considered eternal. Your limited word game does not take that into consideration.
@AJ777 and @Zero
You theists always make the same mistakes. You consider your personal religious dogma to be superior to logical scientific evidence. That's always your pre-determined starting point. You have no interest whatsoever in truth. Whenever you come across something you don't understand, you attribute it to your imaginary god instead of having the courage to admit that you don't know the answers.
It's funny that the only people who has mentioned God is you atheist, BTW I'm not a theist.
BULLSHIT ZERO either you are a theist or an atheist. Did you lie in your description?
I said I am a non atheist how is that saying I am a theist?
You can wrap up your little mind around things you don't know or don't understand don't get mad!!
I don't give a crap for what you call yourself - a rose by any other name would still be a rose - and you by any other name would still be someone who never learned to distinguish fact from fantasy.
Zero, if you don’t exist at all who is asking the question? Keith, seems to me that’s what you are doing, some of you guys are denying logical scientific evidence or ignorant of Big Bang cosmology either way this is allowing you to affirm your own religion of atheism. A religion is after all a set of beliefs. Honestly educate yourselves on the evidence for the Big Bang. It is at least reasonable to believe that fellow impartial atheist scientists who have studied the Big Bang are not trying to use a God of the gaps argument. There are many answers I don’t know, that doesn’t mean the ones that I do are wrong. You guys have not presented any evidence or logical arguments refuting the Kalam cosmological argument. Much anger though.
"There is only 2 way for something to exist, to come into existence or to always exist. Is this correct? If you know another way for something to exist please explain."
yes it's correct. there is no any other way because these two are contraries.