I am a Muslim, one of my arguments that God is real is that when the universe begun and matter collided with antimatter, where did that come from. I mean surely they would annihilate each other, but it is physically impossible for them to have a have come from 0(nothing) the reason being is because when they annihilate each other their charges are opposite so they have a charge of zero upon collision. But there mass is conserved the product of the masses are doubled so therefore it is impossible for the universe to have come out of nothing, so there must be something out there that created the universe.
Please guys please tell me what you think and share your opinions I am more than happy to have a friendly discussion ! :)
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
And how did your god go about initiating this?
Would it not follow that if all phenomena and events that come to be via cause and effect in the cosmos are of a natural circumstance, then the initial trigger is over 99.9% likely to be natural too, in keeping with the laws of physics and nature.
To claim otherwise you will have a heavy burden of proof to provide, unless you resort to a god of the gaps argument.
i don't know how He would've gone about doing this, what i am saying is that natural phenomena simply cannot have occurred outside the laws of physics. as in nothing could've just created itself
@Quantum Re: "How can something come from nothing?"
1. Define "nothing".
2. How do you (or anybody else) know if there has ever been such a thing as "nothing"?
how to you know God doesn't exist? i am asumming that you are an atheist
"how to you know God doesn't exist? i am asumming that you are an atheist"
Atheism is a lack of belief in a deity or deities, it's not a claim about knowledge contrary to theistic claims.
If someone claims invisible unicorns protect you, but can't be detected in any empirical way, would you believe it until someone disproved it?
You deny something you can't prove essentially, which is irrational1
Quantum, perhaps you don’t understand what atheism is and isn’t.
Atheism is a lack of belief in god(s)
Atheism is NOT a declaration that there are no gods.
Do you understand that those two things are very, very different?
Agnosticism is NOT a declaration that there is no God , It's the belief that "i don't know".
have a look at richard dawkins's 7 point scale
quantummechanist RE: Agnosticism is NOT a declaration that there is no God , It's the belief that "i don't know".
Not Quite. A - is a Latin prefix that means without. asexual - without sex, amoral - without morality, and A-gnostic - Without - ?????????
Gnostic or Gnosis is a word derived from Greek. Leave it to the English speakers of the world to mix these. Nevertheless, Greek is also used as a base for English. (A whole lot of English words come from Latin and Greek) But also Also, through Latin, we have the following English words, with root in gnosis: ignore, recognize, and etymologists suggest the word “know” is of the same origin as gnosis.
So that leaves us with A - without and gnosis - knowledge. The term agnostic says nothing at all about belief. It clearly states that "Nothing can be known."
You can believe in God and be an agnostic. "I don't know but I choose to believe anyway." The root of Pascal's Wager.
You can not believe and be an agnostic. I don't believe and I have no information what so ever about the existence of a god that would lead me think God is real..
I would make the assertion that everyone in the world is actually agnostic whether they believe of nor.. THERE IS NO KNOWLEDGE. At least none that can stand against critical inquiry. The God hypothesis is a non-falsifiable hypothesis. It can not be proved and that which can be asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence.
AGNOSTIC says nothing about belief. It is not a belief, that I don't know. It is the fact that the god hypothesis is unproved.
DAWKINS: "Pure Agnostic: God’s existence and non-existence are exactly equiprobable."
Again you have confused belief with knowledge. This is not a statement about belief. What Dawkins is saying is that "You can neither prove nor disprove God." That is what a non-falsifiable claim is. Atheists do not try to disprove gods. Christians and Theists do that as soon as they begin talking about their gods.
Actually it is, it is a declaration that nothing is known or can be known about something. It would axiomatically apply to all unfalsifiable claims. In science unfalsifiable claims are atomically rejected as unscientific, and the phrase "not even wrong" is often used to point out that they are useless as nothing can be learned from them.
I will ask here what I always ask, why would anyone believe something if they admit they can know nothing about it? Thus agnosticism is a statement about epistemological knowledge of a claim, but it is still possible to believe or not believe that claim, it is just absurdly stupid to believe a claim you admit you can know nothing about, as one could believe literally anything if it was defined in a way that made it unfalsifiable.
I see theists and religious apologists do this all the time, trying to define their deity into existence as if they have done something profound, and smugly insisting someone disprove what they have defined.
Unicorns and mermaids don't become real if you arbitrarily decide they are invisible and undetectable in any empirical way, and the same must rationally apply to deities.
What's irrational by definition, is using an argument from ignorance fallacy, as you have done here yet again. And I just fucking explained that atheism is neither a claim, or the denial of a claim. It is a position on one single belief, it is not a denial of any claim.
Do you believe there is an invisible unicorn shadowing you? Are you denying this claim? Can you prove your denial? It's undetectable in any empirical way after all. Now please don't just roll on with the same asinine argument. look the fucking thing up, understand what it means, and then grasp why it makes your argument BY DEFINITION irrational.
"Argument from ignorance (from Latin: argumentum ad ignorantiam), also known as appeal to ignorance (in which ignorance represents "a lack of contrary evidence") is a fallacy in informal logic."
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance
I can't prove Elvis doesn't bus tables at an pancake shake on the moon. Is it irrational for me to lack a belief in "Moon Elvis"?
"You deny something you can't prove essentially, which is irrational1"
Disbelieve, not deny, this is an old theist trick using argumentum ad ignorant to try and place a burden of proof on the lack of a belief, and by definition that is irrational.
You can't prove invisible Leprechauns don't exist, does this fact mean you believe they are real?
Sheldon,
Athieism is not a claim about knowledge contrary to theistic claims...Sheldon, you are softening: Atheism..not a claim about knowledge. That's what I thought.
I'm not aware of anyone who claims invisible unicorns protect them, so its a moot point. Besides, by definition, "invisible" whatevers would be undectable at least by vision.
I already told you elsewhere, you're simply too stupid to bother with, sorry but the simplest concepts are clearly beyond you.
"The education of fools is folly"
That's in the bible.
Apollo "Atheism..not a claim about knowledge. That's what I thought."
Now that I have explained it to you, even though you can fucking Google the definition which is definitive?
Did I mention you're too stupid to bother with?
Sheldon,
Since it is not a claim about knowledge, you have no knowledge with which to oppose theism.
Apollo "Since it (atheism) is not a claim about knowledge, you have no knowledge with which to oppose theism."
I'm not opposing theism, I simply don't believe it as you can demonstrate no objective evidence for the belief. Well done I knew you could do it if you tried.
YES DAMMNIT SHELDON!!! Invisible, non-corporal, magic, omnipotent, flying unicorns that give my mind secret messages and protect me are NOTHING AT ALL LIKE APOLLO'S silly version of god. Unicorns are real. There are thousands of books on them. Ask a room full of children to draw a unicorn and you will find all of them able to do it. Unicornness is innate in the human psyche. Ask the same group to draw a god and you will not get anything consistent.
There is no such evidence for Apollo's god. He just made it up/ He does not even use the Bible. He is just flapping his gums and inventing shit. NOTHING AT ALL LIKE UNICORNS.
@Quantum Re: "how to you know God doesn't exist?"
Howdy, Quantum. Good question. (Yep, I'm an atheist, by the way.) Happy to answer your question, but it is only fair that you also answer mine. 1. Please define "nothing". And 2. How do you know "nothing" exists or has ever existed?
As for how I know god does not exist, the honest answer is that I do not KNOW for 100% absolute certainty that a god does not exist. Matter of fact, NOBODY knows for certain if any god or gods exist. I simply do not BELIEVE that any god or gods exist, especially the gods depicted in the bible or Koran. In my mind, it is absurd to believe that any such entities are even plausible. The characteristics and abilities typically assigned to them totally defy all logic, reason, rationality, and common sense. And even IF those particular gods were somehow determined to be real, they are incredibly inhumane, narcissistic, egotistical, bigoted and insecure megalomaniacs who are not worthy of respect, much less worship.
So, let me ask you something. How do you know leprechauns do not exist? (I am assuming you are an aleprechaunist.)
I am an aleprechaunist but there is no way i could relate that to the existence of God
quantumlogicalfallacymechanist "I am an aleprechaunist"
Yeah, you're going to have to *PROVE that leprechauns don't exist sorry, apparently that's how it works now.
and when i was a kid my parents told me santa wasn't real
i am an asantaist too
"Tell me the reason you do not believe in any of the thousands of other gods, and you have answered the question why I cannot believe in any god." — (paraphrased) from Ricky Gervais
rmfr
EDIT: fixed typos
Fri, 11/02/2018 - 10:46
quantummechanist "and when i was a kid my parents told me santa wasn't real i am an asantaist too"
It's sweet you think you're no longer a kid, but yeah, you're going to have prove santa doesn't exist sorry, that's the new rules you've invented.
You can start by proving how a universe can some from nothing. If you can't santadidit QED, according to your new rules.
Atheists do not "assume" gods do not exist. This is an attempt by you to shift the burden of proof. No one has to assume anything about your silly ideas. If you think a magical flying sky daddy exists, then you HAVE TO PROVE IT. That which is asserted without evidence can be rejected without evidence. How is this not obvious. Evidence is required for every assertion you have ever made in your entire life but for one. "God Exists." This is the fallacy of "Special Pleading." You do not get to assert a god into existence. The world does not work that way.
First you have to provide objective evidence that your god is real. Then you have to prove your god created anything.
xenoview,
Why does he have to prove his God exists? he doesn't have to prove it, anymore than I or he has to prove you exist. For example, how do I know you exist? Your posts could be a fabrication by a computer for all I know. So your posts here don't prove you exist. Should I then lack belief in your existence? the only way I know you is through your creations, namely, your posts. Even though I could be mistaken about your existence, I believe it.
Similarily, many theists know God through God's creation, the universe. Its similiar to believeing you exist due to your creations.
@Apollo
Has god made any posts in this forum? I would tend to believe the existence of xeno than a god that does not even post in forums.
Someone makes a claim a god exists, it becomes incumbent on them to provide proof that this god exists.
David,
has God made any posts in this forum? you ask. I don't know. You seem to be implying you know he hasn't. Prove it.
In the meantime, the topic is How did the universe come from nothing. Atheists have, apparently, a priori rejected a creator God. so be it. but where did the univers come from? either it created itself, or it always existed. you are stuck with one or the other. Pick one and prove it.
Pages