look at it this way......how is it possible that energy in the start of the universe always existed.
Like how can something non personal always exist.
Its like saying the sky was always there. Its sort of a dead end
Even with God its a dead end as well because you say, well who created God?
EVERYWHERE you go with this logic you reach a dead end.
The best to be is agnostic, atheism is being so sure of something that might not even be true.
********
If i was wrong that would be fine, I mean I know i could be wrong lol
********
And like what do atheists mean by when they say God is hogwash because science.
Like okay, what science.
There is a lot to science that could be used to prove my point wrong.
********
Honestly I believe that sometimes things don't always have to have evidence to be possible.
Maybe God has his own reasons for not showing evidence always to minds who always want to know everything to feel security.
Think in that frame of mind, think out of the box.
And maybe God shows himself to be human at times maybe to relate to us.
Maybe God is so out of this world that we cannot understand what he will look like in his own natural form.
In other words, think outside of the box.
**********
You can't really answer the question either way, we don't know esxactly what happened in the beginning but each of us has our own opinions based off certain ways of thinking.
Either way atheism can be just as stupid as religion and vice versa.
You cannot explain everything.
We cannot know everything but indeed there are things we can know as well.
I am just saying is that you should remain open. Agnosticism is what is most logical
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.
We cannot know what exactly? Define god if you want someone to believe it exists, then prove it.
We can be reasonably sure that there was no Resurrection and Mohammed didn't arise on a winged horse. So, religionists should at least acknowledge that all religions are man made and no Abrahamic god(s) or any of these exist...
http://www.godchecker.com/
And although not everything is readily explained to everyone, it is also reasonable to accept that there is no convincing evidence of the supernatural. That is why it is often referred to as supernatural.
So how about keeping in touch with reality and being aware of what is true (that science, reason and critical thinking are the best means humans have to explore the world and universe) and reject intuition and "revelation" as practical alternatives. That would be a good start, not "agnosticism". "I don't know what I don't know" is no help.
And this is more pure drivel...
"Either way atheism can be just as stupid as religion and vice versa."
I acknowledge that non-believers can be as good or bad as believers. Unlike believers, non-believers don't claim that we have a religion that provides the basis of our society or behaviour.
"Atheist" and "apostate" are what religionists call non-believers and, when it suits them, members of other faiths. That is no help either. We don't have a word for people who don't believe in witches and another for those who disbelieve dragons exist. "Atheists" are never that stupid. We don't have a label like apostate to apply to people who leave political parties or science groups (which are at least normally democratic).
Personally, I think there are few things as damaging to mankind as religion and religious beliefs.
Sure, but then you are operating by guessing; no thanks.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why do you think there was non-zero amount of energy during the start/(distant past) of the universe?
You are right and wrong. Agnosticism says nothing about anything. I have made the assertion that "Everyone is agnostic with regards to the existence of God." This means there is no knowledge. As long as you are talking about knowledge, you are correct. "God exists." is a non-falsifiable proposition. It can neither be proved or disproved.
Theism and Atheism are not about knowledge; they are about belief. Knowledge is a subset of belief. Belief can be asserted with or without actual knowledge. Knowledge is a building block for belief. It consists of evidence, facts, and verifiable experimentation so that our beliefs are justified. Facts and evidence creates beliefs that are measurable, repeatable, valid to the same degree to everyone, and completely justified. Belief itself does not do this.
"Energy was the start of the universe?" What in the hell are you talking about? It's not anything like saying sky was always there. Your analogy if a false dichotomy. It makes no sense. No one knows how the universe began.... YET. You need to read some of them before blabbing about what is and is not possible.
"what do atheists mean by when they say God is hogwash." What do you mean "Because of science." Science has nothing to do with God or Gods. There are millions of Gods and not one of them has ever been proved to be real. All science says is that we are justified in rejecting any claim without sufficient evidence for that claim. It's called the null hypothesis. If you think your god is real, prove it. Until you do the default position is not to believe your "hogwash." If you think you can prove the existence of your god, please do so and stop whining about the mean atheists.
"Honestly I believe that sometimes things don't always have to have evidence to be possible." Possible is not actual. No one will successfully argue that God is not possible. But faith is not, nor has it ever been a path to truth. Billions of people have had faith in their gods and now we call it Greek, Roman, Hindu, Jewish etc... mythology. Please prove your god is different from the millions of Gods that came before.
"Maybe God has his own reasons for not showing evidence." Maybe a magical flying invisible non-corporal omnipotent omnipresent unicorn had a magical parrot for lunch and then shit out the universe. If we are going to be in the realm of "Maybe" anything is possible. Even your silly version of God that we think is hogwash.
"Either way atheism can be just as stupid as religion and vice versa." Please cite how you think Atheism is stupid. I genuinely want to know. All Atheism does is ask you to prove your god is real. You do that and we will all be Believers tomorrow. Probably not worshipers because your God of the Bible is an ass. but at least we would believe.
Atheism does not explain anything. It does not try to explain anything. Do you know what atheist means? A = without Theism = belief in god. Atheists do not believe in god or Gods. That's it. It has nothing to do with science. Nothing to do with evolution. Nothing to do with hating god. It has to do with the fact that you have not shown us your god. We are waiting for you to prove your god is real. How hard could that be?
"Agnosticism is not anything." Everyone is agnostic. All Christians are agnostic. They can not prove their God as there is no knowledge. Atheists are agnostic and also know nothing about God. It makes no sense to use agnostic as a defining term for anything. There are Theists and Atheists.
If I ask you "Do you believe in a God" and you respond " I am agnostic," You have not answered the question being asked. You are avoiding it. You either believe (without facts and evidence) in God claims or you do not believe in them.
If you say "I don't know" TO THE CHURCH - your are an atheist. You will burn in hell for your disbelief. Jesus is quite clear on this. You must accept him into your heart, beg his forgiveness for your sins, and love him more than your own family. Asserting that you do not know is not an option. You are either "with him or against him" according to the Bible. According to the Christian faith,"I don't know" will get you a spot in hell right next to an atheist.
Also non-believers don't put "there is no god" on money or in already dubious pledges of allegiance. People should stop trying to "think outside the box" just for long enough to accept inclusive, fair, equal, objectively defensible principles. By the way, 'secular' is another word that only exists due to organised religion.
Argumentum ad ignorantiam, your very first sentence. Now how can "the most logical position" start with a common logical fallacy?
@sheldon: Argumentum ad ignorantiam
If he actually knew what you were talking about, he would not have done it in the first place. All you are doing is throwing more "HOGWASH" at him. You have to say something like, "Your first sentence was a boo-boo."
@OP
Look up the definition of "god."
And then after looking that up, go ahead and try and tell me that: the most logical rational conclusion is: "we can not know for sure if there is some sort of object or being that has supernatural powers and requires worship," that: "it is impossible to know for sure if such a thing exists or not.
Sure, you could say it is 1 in a trillion raised by a trillion chance that something that defies all logic, reason and evidence does exist like that, but when we are talking those odds and accepting that kind of possibility, well anything is possible, including the rainbow farting unicorn god I just made up also might exist. It is far better for reasonable rational thought to dismiss such a long shot "well anything is possible, just extremely remote" ideas as garbage, and go with, all evidence and logic points that something like a god does not exist, without having to go into "must be omniscient to know for sure."
Edited for some clarity and grammatical errors.
It took me awhile to sort through the OP, and here's the short translation.
I say there's a god, you say proof of god is required. I say, think outside of the box.
It doesn't work that way deloj. Theists state there is a god, and theist teachings indicate that this god does work in this universe in such examples as floods and miracles. Therefore if a god exists, there have to be methods to discern this entity.
I will not accept this awkward plea to "think outside of the box" when it is not my problem in providing proof. How about you think outside of the box and consider accepting that this god is not real.
deloj: Atheism means you do not believe in any gods. It does not mean you are making a positive claim that there are no gods. I do, however. There are no gods. Can I prove that? No! I can not prove there is no Santa Claus either. But I have been saying it since childhood and no one has asked me for proof.
Agnosticism "is the view that the existence of God, of the divine or the supernatural is currently unknown or intrinsically unknowable." How do you know that?
Atheism does not require a belief - at its most basic, it is a lack of belief in the existence of gods.
For me, if you believe there is no evidence to justify belief in god, it would be foolish to be open to the possibility that god exists.
In my case, I know that the gods do not exist, because I can say without fear of being proven false that the non-phenomenal does not exist.
I actually have a new theory that could take everything you say into account and prove that my position is better:
What if God doesn't want you to know he's there?
Follow me on this. The Bible says that everything is evidence of this god and that Satan is trying to trick you. Like we couldn't explain why there's no evidence for this god so we had to introduce another one. But maybe the book is Satan talking. Maybe God wants you to use your intellect to reason that he doesn't exist and you don't have a god watching everything you do so he can actually see what you will do.
Then Satan, rather than trying to trick you into thinking there is no god, he wants you to devote yourself to belief in him so he can suck all the energy out of your soul.
Then it would all make sense. (EDIT: If you're into that sort of thing of course!)
@Kata Re: "New theory"
Holy shit! That was freakin' awesome! *Big Smile*
I'm glad you appreciated it Tin-Man.
Now, when the religious mobs come to the door you have to explain my theory and tell them that they are spreading Satan's will by attempting to implant doubt in your mind. There is no god, be gone!
Do you have a problem with saying: "Zeus does not exist. "(?) Or Apollo? Should we also speak about Valhalla as if it *might* be a real place? You know, Since we can't prove it doesn't exist?
deloj,
I define an atheist as someone who consciously rejects the idea of gods, goddesses, and other supernatural beings that a theist may conjure up. Therefore, I would not use the term "agnostic" to describe myself.
In the real world of atoms and energy, and anything that can affect such, certainty is not a valid criteria for drawing a conclusion. One may reject an idea for lack of evidence. We automatically reject the idea that there is a tea cup orbiting the sun between Jupiter and Saturn. We don't claim certainty, but with no factual support whatsoever we are entirely justified in rejecting that claim. Same with a god. Thus, we may rationally reject the god-claim even if certainty is out of the question.
I use the "agnostic" term to describe someone who views both alternatives as being roughly equal and cannot, therefore, rationally support either one.
@Kataclismic:
Re: "I have a theory. What if God doesn't want you to know he's there?" First of all you have no idea at all what a theory is.
Second, as long as we are in the realm of "WHAT IF" .... What if god is just a giant pissy tomato who runs about the ancient world singing "Attack of the Killer Tomato" with his little chosen tribe of desert dwellers while trying to smite anyone who looks at him crossly and failing at every attempt. If we are going to play "Pick The Hypothesis" anyone can invent a story and play along.
Come on in and join the fun!!!
Wow Cognostic! You're catching on!
@Kataclismic
Are you suggesting something like turtles and hares?
See Cognostic, what you're supposed to do is point out my flaws. What didn't I think of? What would tear my theory apart? It's no fun talking about your killer tomato god, he's totally self-evident. I mean, he's a tomato for crying out loud. Wait, he's a huge beefsteak right? He's a beefsteak tomato for crying out loud!
@Kataclismic: Well for fk sake. I was ready to convert to your god until you said that. You seemed so confident. You had me at "The Bible says everything is evidence for god." Hell.... There is a whole lot of everything and it all can't be wrong.
Oh right, you mean the god that doesn't want you to know there's a god? You're going to convert?
Man, when you start with the paradoxes you go right to the top!
I weary of these descriptive terms for non beleivers.
Am I an atheist, agnostic, apatheist, anti-theist or a very naughty boy?
I don't care.
I simply reject the idea of a god.
I have never seen a dead person come back to life.
I have never witnessed a miracle, had a vision, experienced an epiphany or a revelation.
My prayers have gone unanswered.
I have never met an angel.
God has never ever spoken to me or appeared in any of my dreams.
.
I am not bitter about it, but I have found that I take greater comfort and exhilarated delight experiencing the universe as a dangerous, amazing, careless place and understanding that everything it in, everything, has evolved from the seemingly chaotic, seemingly undirected forces of physics, chemistry and quantum mechanics, rather than believing in some bizarre, disembodied, omnipotent consciousness, existing outside time and space, dispensing capricious judgement, reward and punishment for every thought and action of every single member of an innumerable, unique, sentient species of ape on just one single planet in an immeasurable universe; a species whose ridiculously supposed sole purpose is to worship this preposterous unlimited celestial ego.
I take greater comfort in knowing my departed loved ones and friends rest in peace, absolute and eternal (which I confidently look forward to eventually myself), rather than vainly worry they are being cruelly tortured eternally in mediaeval lakes of fire, simply for not believing the unbelievable.
I could be wrong but I don't care. I have spent a lot of my life deliberating one way or the other but the supernatural simply makes no sense to me anymore. I am going with what I know. Without a god, life and the universe is far more fascinating and miraculous (there, I used THAT word, but its true) than if a omnipotent being controlled everything.
I have never met a theist who claimed to be agnostic or wore a t-shirt that read "Jesus loves you, but I don't know everything." Which explains why they think 'agnostic' is that halfway place.
As most of us know already, for theists, their god exists, end of story, no quibbles, right or wrong.
So I see no reason to water down my claim to not accepting the existence of god with meaningless qualifiers like 'agnostic' or the laughable "apatheist".
I do not accept the existence of gods. Call me what you like and believe what you want.
Dog-gonnit, Grin. That was fantastic. Very nicely stated. *tipping my hat to you*