Quizzes & Puzzles0 min ago
Is there a first cause? i.e. God?
69 Answers
Atheists have had great success in rubbishing the concept of a First Cause, i.e. God, as the prime mover and shaker of all of Creation.
Science simply says, "We don't know, but one day we will."
Sorry folks, that is simply not good enough when eternity is at stake.
So the question is, should not atheists seriously consider the possibility of God and adjust accordingly?
Science simply says, "We don't know, but one day we will."
Sorry folks, that is simply not good enough when eternity is at stake.
So the question is, should not atheists seriously consider the possibility of God and adjust accordingly?
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Theland1. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As an atheist I have to accept that the 'Big Bang' (or whatever other start to the Universe, and to life, you happen to believe in) MIGHT have come about through the actions of some supernatural being (who, if you like, I'll call 'God').
However there is no scientific logic to assuming that a 'Creator' would have any further interest in his (or should that be 'its'?) creation. A scientist might create life in a test tube but then walk away from it and take no further interest in its development. There is certainly no reason to assume that the scientist should seek to become a 'moral arbiter' of what happens within that test tube.
Further, your question makes assumptions by the use of the phrase 'adjust accordingly'. If there really is a 'God' who wants us to conform to his requirements, why should I assume that those requirements are the ones specified by Christianity, Islam or any other religion? Perhaps (as nature and evolution seem to indicate) God simply believes in the survival of the fittest? If that's true I should 'adjust accordingly' and arm myself with the most powerful weapons available and destroy everyone who gets in my way.
Chris
However there is no scientific logic to assuming that a 'Creator' would have any further interest in his (or should that be 'its'?) creation. A scientist might create life in a test tube but then walk away from it and take no further interest in its development. There is certainly no reason to assume that the scientist should seek to become a 'moral arbiter' of what happens within that test tube.
Further, your question makes assumptions by the use of the phrase 'adjust accordingly'. If there really is a 'God' who wants us to conform to his requirements, why should I assume that those requirements are the ones specified by Christianity, Islam or any other religion? Perhaps (as nature and evolution seem to indicate) God simply believes in the survival of the fittest? If that's true I should 'adjust accordingly' and arm myself with the most powerful weapons available and destroy everyone who gets in my way.
Chris
There's never been a shred of proof to support the existence of a God but evidence based on observation does support what people know of science. That isn't any thing archaic and set in stone but a continually expanding and evolving area of human intellect and understanding.
Shouldn't you also consider the question - should not theologists seriously consider the possibility of NO God and adjust accordingly?
Shouldn't you also consider the question - should not theologists seriously consider the possibility of NO God and adjust accordingly?
Hello Theland, long time no see. I do hope you are keeping well.
//Sorry folks, that is simply not good enough when eternity is at stake.//
How do you know eternity is at stake? Because someone else told you it is?
//It is not a question of religion, it is a question of logic.
What if, there were a God?"
"What if, there were no God?"//
What if? So what? It doesn't really matter whether a god created the universe or not, because if it did, it isn't the one you and the rest of the 'faithful' talk about anyway. Something mighty enough to do that is hardly likely to concern itself with your sex life. That's logic.
//Sorry folks, that is simply not good enough when eternity is at stake.//
How do you know eternity is at stake? Because someone else told you it is?
//It is not a question of religion, it is a question of logic.
What if, there were a God?"
"What if, there were no God?"//
What if? So what? It doesn't really matter whether a god created the universe or not, because if it did, it isn't the one you and the rest of the 'faithful' talk about anyway. Something mighty enough to do that is hardly likely to concern itself with your sex life. That's logic.
Hi Theland
Well I think theists have the same problem don't they?
God is the first cause - what created God? - hand waving, it's a miracle, don't ask questions -all that stuff !
At the heart of this is the nature of time - To even start to understand this you have to realise that Time can slow down and even stop at very high speeds or gravity.
This isn't just esoteric theory - without this knowledge of who time misbehaves like this your satnav wouldn't work!
Our best understanding is that time actually stops in a black hole and since a black hole is kind of like the big bang in reverse there's your prime mover.
We may learn more in time - fine detail is tough with such extreme events but it is a rational explanation that explains the facts better than a Charton Heston look-alike in a white beard waving his hands about
Well I think theists have the same problem don't they?
God is the first cause - what created God? - hand waving, it's a miracle, don't ask questions -all that stuff !
At the heart of this is the nature of time - To even start to understand this you have to realise that Time can slow down and even stop at very high speeds or gravity.
This isn't just esoteric theory - without this knowledge of who time misbehaves like this your satnav wouldn't work!
Our best understanding is that time actually stops in a black hole and since a black hole is kind of like the big bang in reverse there's your prime mover.
We may learn more in time - fine detail is tough with such extreme events but it is a rational explanation that explains the facts better than a Charton Heston look-alike in a white beard waving his hands about
Mankind's guess at how the Universe came into being is ...
"It must have been a bloke just like us, but a bit cleverer."
"He even looks just like us (having made us in His own image)."
Well, I for one am feeling quite empowered. Someone just like us created the Universe. And there was me thinking it must have been more complicated.
"It must have been a bloke just like us, but a bit cleverer."
"He even looks just like us (having made us in His own image)."
Well, I for one am feeling quite empowered. Someone just like us created the Universe. And there was me thinking it must have been more complicated.
Jake, at this moment in time (oops, sorry) science is irrelevant. Nothing proves god didn't do it - likewise, nothing proves he did - but rationality suggests the kind of faith we see all around us is ... well ... irrational.
Jayne, you do realise that if God made man in his image, God must look something like an amoeba! :o)
Jayne, you do realise that if God made man in his image, God must look something like an amoeba! :o)
