Ask an Atheist

[doseofreality]

Yet, it still hasn’t been refuted.

1. Everything that begins to exist has a cause.
2. The universe began to exist.
3. Therefore, Christianity is true.

Oh wait…the conclusion looks funny….Hrm... That isn’t the Kalam Cosmological Argument is it?
Nope... my bad… 3. Therefore, the universe has a cause...There we go!

The KCA is an argument for the existence of God not Christianity. Christians appeal to the Bible as proof for Christianity in particular and personal testimony...Evidence for the resurrection, etc, etc.

Premise 1: “Premise 1 seems obviously true—at the least, more so than its negation. First, it’s rooted in the necessary truth that something cannot come into being uncaused from nothing. To suggest that things could just pop into being uncaused out of nothing is literally worse than magic. Second, if things really could come into being uncaused out of nothing, then it’s inexplicable why just anything and everything do not come into existence uncaused from nothing. Third, premise 1 is constantly confirmed in our experience as we see things that begin to exist being brought about by prior causes.”- William Lane Craig

Not to beat a dead horse but I want to add a side note concerning the Cosmological Argument.

Premise 1 and 3 are straightforward.
Premise 2 depends how you define "universe".

For sake of argument lets say it is true, so the argument is valid and sound.

The problem you will find using this argument is that its only evidence for some "cause" not a personal God.
You have to then demonstrate that this "cause" has certain qualities, attributes, powers that would necessarily show that it could be a God.
Even more you still have to demonstrate that this "cause" has consciousness and communicates in some way.

So its a stepping stone for an argument for God, but by itself, it is rather ineffective.

 

[Deadtosin]

"still have to demonstrate that this "cause" has consciousness and communicates in some way."-Doseofreality

Hi, we call it "THE BIBLE."

 

[doseofreality]

"it actually isnt that complex. Backtrack evolution down to the first single celled organisms"-SkepticJosh

I just googled to see what science has to say about something as simple as a cell splitting into another cell. Here is what sciencemuseum.org has to say.

"the cell grows and rests, copies its DNA, and divides into two new cells."

it grows.. then this cell rests... then it copies it's DNA and then divides into two new cells. LOL A CELL IS DOING THIS!!! how does the cell know to rest? or to copy its DNA? ITS A CELL MAN!!!

It seems there is an internal trigger that lets the cell know to start replicating...
I am not a biologist or a geneticist so I cannot give a better explanation.

Cells Can Replicate Their DNA Precisely | Learn Science at Scitable

 

[doseofreality]

"still have to demonstrate that this "cause" has consciousness and communicates in some way."-Doseofreality

Hi, we call it "THE BIBLE."

No way, never heard of it...haha

 

[Deadtosin]

It seems there is an internal trigger that lets the cell know to start replicating...
I am not a biologist or a geneticist so I cannot give a better explanation.

Cells Can Replicate Their DNA Precisely | Learn Science at Scitable

I'm sure there is an internal trigger. How amazing

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Deadtosin, have you read 'Who Made God? Searching for a Theory of Everything' by Edgar Andrews?

 

[faroukfarouk]

Deadtosin, have you read 'Who Made God? Searching for a Theory of Everything' by Edgar Andrews?

I've seen some of Professor Edgar Andrews' material. It seems sound.

 

[Deadtosin]

why do people think that when they take something apart and learn how it works it must mean it wasn't by design. As if I could pull a hose off my car and then come to the conclusion it meant there had been no mechanic. "love is just a chemical in the brain." oh yeah? how would you have physically produced the feeling of love into a living body? Look at the brain!! wow, I'm falling in love with God all over again. I need to go to sleep...

 

[Deadtosin]

Deadtosin, have you read 'Who Made God? Searching for a Theory of Everything' by Edgar Andrews?

no, I've never even heard of it.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Scientific discoveries about the origin and history of the universe point to the existence of a transcendent causal Agent. So does the Bible. The prophets Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah, along with some of the psalmists, accurately described an expanding universe.

Hundreds of finely tuned details in the cosmos make human life possible, suggesting the perfect plan and design of an all-knowing, all-powerful, intelligent Creator-the same as the God described in Scripture.

Cosmic tests contradict all previous nontheistic cosmic models, including those developed during the twentieth century so pressured by the compelling cosmic evidence for a transcendent, personal Creator, twenty-first-century atheistic scientists have invented several highly imaginative alternate explanations for the universe that rely on infinite or near infinite universes simply to get one like ours which only pushes back the origin anyways for even a multiverse must have a beginning. In fact, any inflating space must have a beginning.

As Dr. Jeff Zweerink says:

"The multiverse does not help the naturalist eliminate God. In fact, in a strictly naturalist worldview, the multiverse adversely affects the scientific enterprise. Second, I see no inherent problems with God using a multiverse to create a place where Earth life, especially humanity, could grow and thrive.

It is uncertain whether the multiverse will ultimately prove true. However, the fact that so many prominent scientists see it as a potential explanation for the fine-tuning observed in this universe highlights the strength of evidence backing the inference that a Designer fashioned this universe."

So its a stepping stone for an argument for God, but by itself, it is rather ineffective.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Lol. You don't know it but you're making a point Alvin Plantinga did in 'Where the Conflict Really Lies: Science, Religion, and Naturalism.'

why do people think that when they take something apart and learn how it works it must mean it wasn't by design. As if I could pull a hose off my car and then come to the conclusion it meant there had been no mechanic.

 

[Nancyer]

I choose to believe it is God. You choose to believe otherwise. And if I'm right and your wrong, we'll know when the time comes and it is revealed. But if your right and I'm wrong, I guess we'll never know...

 

[doseofreality]

Scientific discoveries about the origin and history of the universe point to the existence of a transcendent causal Agent. So does the Bible. The prophets Job, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah, along with some of the psalmists, accurately described an expanding universe.

Hundreds of finely tuned details in the cosmos make human life possible, suggesting the perfect plan and design of an all-knowing, all-powerful, intelligent Creator-the same as the God described in Scripture.

Cosmic tests contradict all previous nontheistic cosmic models, including those developed during the twentieth century so pressured by the compelling cosmic evidence for a transcendent, personal Creator, twenty-first-century atheistic scientists have invented several highly imaginative alternate explanations for the universe that rely on infinite or near infinite universes simply to get one like ours which only pushes back the origin anyways for even a multiverse must have a beginning. In fact, any inflating space must have a beginning.

As Dr. Jeff Zweerink says:

"The multiverse does not help the naturalist eliminate God. In fact, in a strictly naturalist worldview, the multiverse adversely affects the scientific enterprise. Second, I see no inherent problems with God using a multiverse to create a place where Earth life, especially humanity, could grow and thrive.

It is uncertain whether the multiverse will ultimately prove true. However, the fact that so many prominent scientists see it as a potential explanation for the fine-tuning observed in this universe highlights the strength of evidence backing the inference that a Designer fashioned this universe."

It is true, there is the problem of infinite regress. It seems rational to me that something has always been or "eternal" in some sense.
This will give me something to think about.

However, Is it not possible for their to be design yet no "designer"? I mean why must we infer that this causal agent is a personal being who is actively designing things, can not design come from interpreting random patterns?

Anyway, on these points I am very agnostic and could easily be swayed to Deism at least.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

The standard atheist response is simply to attack the origin of God rather than deal with the problem. This fails though because using the equivalent of two time dimensions outside of our universe (or multiverse), the universe's (or multiverse's) Creator could perform an infinite number of cause-and-effect operations along an infinitely extended timeline that never crosses or touches this universe's timeline or multiverse's timelines.

In our time context, the Creator would have no beginning or end. That causal Agent would not have been created. The Creator would not have been created in any time context because the space-time theorems establish that in creating a time dimension at will, this Being's causal capabilities are in no way restricted or limited by time. Statistical improbability does not apply to a Being who always was, is, and will be.

So the attack fails but the original problem remains yet cannot be resolved the same way leading us back to God.

It is true, there is the problem of infinite regress. It seems rational to me that something has always been or "eternal" in some sense.
This will give me something to think about.

However, Is it not possible for their to be design yet no "designer"? I mean why must we infer that this causal agent is a personal being who is actively designing things, can not design come from interpreting random patterns?

Anyway, on these points I am very agnostic and could easily be swayed to Deism at least.

 

[Agricola]

He wouldn't. If he is a devout Muslim he is not a Christian. On the other hand a Muslim going through a crisis of faith might be drawn to Christian belief, or he might be drawn to atheism; however, he is not likely to tell anyone -- not his children, not his wife and not his friends.

You know there are Christian pastors in just such a predicament. They have lost their belief and become atheists, but still they carry on with their congregation keeping their secret from friends, wives and children. Their lives are not at risk, but much else is.

See: Clergy Project

You are skirting around my question, like you all do. Read again. I said, why would someone who spent all thier life as a devout Muslim, then convert to Christianity, when it means he is signing his own death warrant. Why would someone reject a life they have been brought up with to follow something else if it means they could be killed for it?

You also make the mistake of pointing out it happens all the time in Western Countries, yes we are a democracy, people can be what they like and change that every day as long as it is legal. Many clergy are spiritually dead and just doing it as a job, especailly in the state religions. If your local priest decided to pack it all in, does this mean he is going to be killed by mob justice, or have his superior put fatwa on him, or would he be arrested and sent to prison? NO.

However this is exactly what happens in places like Pakistan to Muslims who de-convert. SO why would someone stop going to mosque, deny Mohammed and declare Jesus is the Son of God, when even being in possession of Christian items will lead to arrest?

It makes no sense, especially to atheists, you struggle with trying to find a rational and logical explanation, you are missing out the only conclusion which makes sense, which of course you do not want to accept as it goes against what you think is right, that is the Muslim has decided to follow CHrist and reject Islam because he found out Christ is real and has entered into a realtionship with him , just as I know Christ is real.

Would you give your life up for a lie or something you just followed because it was something to do, without actually believing it real? No. However if you know something is truth, such as knowing Christ is real then yes, death is nothing to be feared.

 

[paulsfam4]

you were never a Christian to begin with........Godlessness in the Last Days But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. But they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men. 2Ti 3:1-9

 

[doseofreality]

you were never a Christian to begin with........Godlessness in the Last Days But understand this, that in the last days there will come times of difficulty. For people will be lovers of self, lovers of money, proud, arrogant, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, heartless, unappeasable, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not loving good, treacherous, reckless, swollen with conceit, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God, having the appearance of godliness, but denying its power. Avoid such people. For among them are those who creep into households and capture weak women, burdened with sins and led astray by various passions, always learning and never able to arrive at a knowledge of the truth. Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so these men also oppose the truth, men corrupted in mind and disqualified regarding the faith. But they will not get very far, for their folly will be plain to all, as was that of those two men. 2Ti 3:1-9

You can't know the motivations and beliefs of someone's past...If christianity is true it is for God to judge who was or is a christian.

As far as you quoting 2nd Timothy, I don't see the relevance to this thread. The context is so vague it could apply to many people at any given time in history. Every generation thinks they are in "The last days".

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Deadtosin, have you read 'Who Made God? Searching for a Theory of Everything' by Edgar Andrews?

Never read the book or heard of it but really just for being an atheist before I have to admit, and I am very ashamed of it that this is one of the biggest questions "Who made God?" an atheist will ask or use to attack Christians as I did.

It's an illogical argument because at the base root of the Who Made God Argument as an atheist I ignorantly be making an argument that the Creation is greater than the Creator. This of course is an absolutely absurd idea, and the idea is the enemy so don't think me attacking the human brothers that are lost in this paradox.

It's a simple question to solve really, many people in the Bible state over and over God is, was, and always shall be. I really don't understand and am even embarassed I fell into the wrong side of that atheist trap for years.

 

[doseofreality]

Never read the book or heard of it but really just for being an atheist before I have to admit, and I am very ashamed of it that this is one of the biggest questions "Who made God?" an atheist will ask or use to attack Christians as I did.

It's an illogical argument because at the base root of the Who Made God Argument as an atheist I ignorantly be making an argument that the Creation is greater than the Creator. This of course is an absolutely absurd idea, and the idea is the enemy so don't think me attacking the human brothers that are lost in this paradox.

It's a simple question to solve really, many people in the Bible state over and over God is, was, and always shall be. I really don't understand and am even embarassed I fell into the wrong side of that atheist trap for years.

I agree that question "what made God?" can become paradoxical. As an athiest/agnostic, I think a better question is, "How did god evolve?"
Have you seen or heard of this book?

 

[Deadtosin]

"Is it not possible for their to be design yet no "designer"?"-Doseofreality

Well sadly since it's the origin of the universe in question we can't use any of the many amazing designs in it. So we can only go with what we have added to the natural world. I've never seen a basket weave itself. The hammer DID NOT get up and walk away. Despite my many attempts at finding sentences in a bowl of alphabet cereal it never did tell me anything worth reading.