Steve wrote:If you have any intention of being fair-minded, and you're going to try to argue that a creator must exist because it is too unlikely that the universe and life were created without one, then you also have to ask yourself what the likelihood is of a creator existing without having a creator himself... Surely a being that can create an entire universe (and life) must be more complicated than anything he creates. So if you think the universe is too unlikely to form on its own, how can you think God can exist on his own without having a creator himself? God's creator would also need a creator and so on forever. Its a nonsensical argument.
No, your argument is nonsensical. It happens when people with no knowledge, let alone expertise, in philosophy or theology try to formulate "arguments". It happens when people try to apply their failed evolutionary teachings to God. You admitted yourself that God, if He exists, would be a creator of everything. Well, "everything" involves time as well. God is timeless in His nature, and as such, doesn't need a cause - He exists in a timeless eternity and, having created time, He exists outside of it and is not subject to it. So yes, God has always existed, but not in the sense of infinite past - He started the time itself, as seen in 1 Corinthians 2:7, 2 Timothy 1:9, and most importantly Genesis 1:1.
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/wh ... d_god.html
Furthermore, the
Kalam cosmological argument claims that whatever begins to exist has a cause. We know that the universe began to exist, but not God. He has always existed, and as such, doesn't need a cause.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kal%C4%81m ... l_argument
I also suggest checking this thread about divine simplicity:
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 22&t=37190
Steve wrote:At some point, atheists and theists have to agree that SOMETHING (either a creator or the universe/life) was either created from nothing or has always existed. So now you have to ask yourself which is more likely. That an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving being was created from nothing and hides from us,
Again, God wasn't "created from nothing", He has always existed. That's a big difference.
Steve wrote:not wanting to reveal that he exists just to "test" us
I believe that the evidence for God is solid. Unless, however, you
want to deny Him, in which case no evidence would be quite enough. If God waved at us from the sky, people like you would attribute it to a hallucination... even if hundreds of people saw the very same thing.
Steve wrote:(even though he knows the future and knows what we would do after being tested) or that the universe and life came into being without a conscious creator. Personally I think its ridiculous to think that a God can exist without a creator but to think that a human can't exist without a creator. You're really not being honest with yourself if you don't see that your argument makes no sense and actually argues against a creator.
Well personally,
I think it's ridiculous to think that the entire universe could just pop out of nowhere, along with its finely tuned laws that allow life, then randomly assemble a planet with conditions and atmosphere that would allow a cell to randomly assemble itself, then evolve over millions of years of random mutations into humans who think logically... not randomly. How do you know your thoughts aren't just a random "dance" of chemicals?
Steve wrote:Anyway, if I gave you unlimited, free chances to play the lottery with a 0.00000000000000000008 chance of winning millions, you wouldn't play? I think most people would. People play the lotto all the time, even despite the very small chances that they will win. The lottery will almost definitely not be won if only a single person plays one time, but if enough people play enough times, someone will win - that's why we have lottery winners even though the chances for a single person are extremely small. All you have to realize is that the world is very large, the solar system is even larger, the galaxy is even LARGER and the universe is incomprehensibly enormous. We're not even sure this is the only universe. Then you have to realize that the universe is at least billions of years old. That's a LOT of time and a LOT of space for those small little chances to take place. Just like the lottery...eventually someone has to win. It did take billions of years after all, even with our huge universe. I don't think its a "loophole" or a suppression of the truth to think that life could easily have formed eventually on some planet somewhere in the universe. In fact, no matter how small the chances are of life coming into being without a creator, it is an absolute CERTAINTY if the universe has been around forever (infinite time), or if there are an infinite number of universes in existence (infinite chances) or if there is an infinite cycle in our universe of big bangs and big crunches (also infinite time). No matter how small you think the chances are, if you have an infinite number of chances, you have a 100% of life eventually being created without any conscious creator. That is a pure, simple mathematical truth, not a loop hole.
If there is an infinite number of universes in existence, they must come from somewhere. There should be a random universe generator that continuously alters the "dials" i.e. cosmological constants and creates new, different universes. How do you account for it? It just popped out of nowhere, I guess?
Secondly, even if you assemble a cell from all the possible ingredients, it still won't come to life. If that was possible, we'd create new life in a lab in no time. And even if
that happened, evolution requires a net increase in genetic information, something that we have never witnessed. I already wrote about this not long ago - I suggest looking at this post:
http://discussions.godandscience.org/vi ... 90#p119137
Steve wrote:Just remember that the bible tells you to "test everything. Hold on to the good." 1 Thessalonians 5:21. The word of your "creator" commands you to think and not close off your mind. There are a lot of religions with different gods. What are the "chances" that you chose the right god?
There are no "chances". I use my reason to pick my worldview, so I choose the one with the most credibility. I understand, however, why you brought up "chance". Unlike you, I don't believe that my mind is a series of chemical reactions in my brain, because that would ruin any credibility and trustworthiness my mind would have. It would be self-refuting, just as atheistic materialism in its core is.
Steve wrote:If there is one true god, why do people worship so many different ones?
Matthew 24:24
Steve wrote:Why were the first religions polytheistic? After all, weren't those religions around closer to the beginning of the world? Wouldn't they know better about creation than we do today?
Those weren't the first religions. God's original message was corrupted, which required it to be written down so it doesn't get lost again. That's how the Bible came to be. More here:
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/authenticity.html
Regarding the "borrowing" from ancient pagan sources, there are a few articles about that as well, such as:
http://www.tektonics.org/af/babgenesis.html
http://christianthinktank.com/gilgymess.html
Steve wrote:Why are smarter people less likely to be religious?
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/re ... tupid.html
Steve wrote:Why are religious countries the most poor and the most affected by homicide, STD rates, teen pregnancy AND abortion (according to a study in the Journal of Religion and Society)?
A good standard of living makes humans more self-reliant and less in need for God, unfortunately. It's a part of the human nature.
Steve wrote:Why is god the cause of so many wars and conflicts?
Instead of copy-pasting loads of questions in order to confuse or discourage from responding, why don't you name a few recent wars in the name of Christianity? I'm not interested in other religions, I'm a Christian apologist, as other people here.
Steve wrote:How many wars have been waged to spread atheism? How many people have been killed for insulting atheism?
Good question. Atheistic regimes that killed millions of people, did very much exist. Stalin, Mao, Pol Pot... Need I say more?
http://godandscience.org/apologetics/atrocities.html
Steve wrote:How many leaders of American Atheists have molested young boys? How can only 1% of people in prison be non-religious when 16% of US citizens are non-religious? Aren't atheists evil? Shouldn't there be more than 16% atheists in prison and not less ? Why are religious people more likely to end up in prison than atheists? Why are those with psychiatric disorders more likely than sane people to become very religious as their disease manifests? Why does the DSM IV that psychiatrists use to diagnose mental illness specifically state that x, y, and z mean the patient has a mental disorder...unless these beliefs are part of a mainstream religion? Why do we give mainstream religions a free pass? Why does religion share so many traits with mental disorders?
This is just nonsense - completely unworthy of a response. I spent an hour writing this response not because it will convince you - you'll probably ignore everything I wrote and keep on repeating your same old recycled "arguments" that mean nothing to anyone even remotely familiar with philosophy and theology. The reason I wrote this is so that people who read this don't assume that your rant has any credibility whatsoever, because it most definitely doesn't. I've been a member of this forum for over a year, and whenever a know-it-all atheist like you comes here thinking that (s)he knows the truth and the rest of us are deluded, (s)he always repeats the very same arguments you brought up now, like a broken record. Don't you ask yourself why senior members of this forum, such as the moderators, didn't respond to your rant? It's because they've seen it hundreds of times and have lost the patience with repeating themselves over and over again. Everything you brought up can easily be refuted. It's a matter of, as you said, being honest with yourself. Well, I advise you to try that.
Sincere regards to everyone.
"Reactionary"