Top Ten Reasons I'm An Atheist

[Philip]

Ken: All you’ve done is explain the leap of logic you’ve made to make your claim.

Yeah, Ken, sure - it's a leap of logic to realize that stunning, massive complexity and orchestration that we scarcely understand could not assemble, design and run itself. LOL. Actually, what is stunning is that you or anyone else would believe blind, non-intelligent things could produce such wonders.

You see, I'm not saying one should blindly assume that this Intelligent Source behind the universe is the God of the Bible - that's another consideration amongst other perceived possibilities. But what you insist blind, non-intelligent things can produce - it's just stunning what you are willing to buy into - likely, because you realize that if the Universe has a Creator that it likely poses difficult questions and considerations for you to ponder.

[PaulSacramento]

Ken, do you believe that something can come from nothing?

As I've said many times before, the idea that something can come from nothing makes no sense to me. Do you believe this is possible? If so, please explain how you are defining "nothing" and how this is possible.

So, where did intelligence come from?
Since the qualities of what intelligence IS do not come from nothing, it means that those qualities that make up intelligence MUST have existed in the universe before it expanded, yes?

[Philip]

Paul: So, where did intelligence come from?
Since the qualities of what intelligence IS do not come from nothing, it means that those qualities that make up intelligence MUST have existed in the universe before it expanded, yes?

And to be clear, an INTELLIGENCE must be a thinking creature with self and otherwise awareness, capable of desiring and seeking information and advantages, that plans and considers how it might leverage whatever information, that recognizes the differences between things, and can make and act upon its own decisions per its desires and plans to capitalize / utilize / seek whatever it can or desires to possess, acquire, control or itself create. A NON-intelligence has none of these abilities or any such awareness and cognition! And as for the Source of the sophisticated things that came into existence - things immediately complex and adhering to great precision and order - that Source also had to have the ability to acquire or already had tremendous, untold power, and to utilize it per the previous attributes a great Intelligence would possess.

And, as Paul notes per his question - how can a non-intelligence BECOME so? Because it doesn't have awareness, self or otherwise, to seek out things or to see or desire advantages. And it goes without saying that the Source of all these incredible things, apparent within moments of the Big Bang's beginning, could not have created Itself (as NOTHING can do THAT!).

[Kenny]

Ken, do you believe that something can come from nothing?

As I've said many times before, the idea that something can come from nothing makes no sense to me. Do you believe this is possible? If so, please explain how you are defining "nothing" and how this is possible.

So, where did intelligence come from?
Since the qualities of what intelligence IS do not come from nothing, it means that those qualities that make up intelligence MUST have existed in the universe before it expanded, yes?

Where did intelligence come from? I don't know. It could have always existed, it could have evolved from non intelligence, or something else I can't imagine. Obviously as a Christian, you believe intelligence has always existed, but I can't make a claim either way.

[Philip]

Ken: Where did intelligence come from? I don't know.

Yes, that is the ultimate question you should be pondering.

Ken: It could have always existed, it could have evolved from non intelligence

But you certainly know that the attributes of non-intelligent things completely shut off that possibility! It's beyond delusional to think that is even possible, as there are no tangible reasons or observations to support it.

[PaulSacramento]

Ken, do you believe that something can come from nothing?

As I've said many times before, the idea that something can come from nothing makes no sense to me. Do you believe this is possible? If so, please explain how you are defining "nothing" and how this is possible.

So, where did intelligence come from?
Since the qualities of what intelligence IS do not come from nothing, it means that those qualities that make up intelligence MUST have existed in the universe before it expanded, yes?

Where did intelligence come from? I don't know. It could have always existed, it could have evolved from non intelligence, or something else I can't imagine. Obviously as a Christian, you believe intelligence has always existed, but I can't make a claim either way.

How could intelligence evolve from non-intelligence?
I mean, evolution doesn't work that way.
There MUST be something in the cells, for example, that, triggered by mutation, leads from A to B to C and so forth BUT the building blocks Must be there since they don't just "come from nowhere".
A mutation that makes it so a fish can breathe air happens because the genetic code of the fish has something there that allows for this, it isn't just "created" from nothing.
For intelligence to come into being there means that it was "always there", even if "inactive".
If it was always there it means that it was part of the building blocks of life which means it was part of the universe which means the universe had, from the very beginning, the properties of intelligence, right?

[Morny]

Regarding the topic title ...

My reason doesn't appear to have come up yet, so I'll volunteer mine. And maybe I can take some heat off Kenny.

Technically and pendantically, I'm agnostic, which means I may have as many disagreements with atheists as with religists (is that a word?). And as everyone should already know, an atheist is someone who can watch Notre Dame play Southern Methodist University without caring who wins. But I do care.

Growing up in a religious home and education, nothing has ever competed from kindergarten on with my interest in math, science, and sports. So ... my reason is that religion (and golf, the only sport I don't like) are simply boring.

Yes, I'm sure most everyone here is now leaping to their keyboards to object. And I cannot show that your objections are incorrect. I'll even admit the possibility that God is a scratch golfer without cheating, because remember I'm agnostic not atheistic.

Before you're too harsh on me, keep in mind that simply ignorance of religious theory and practice is probably not my weakness - my family and high school Jesuit teachers knew their stuff. And I paid attention, because I know you'll be impressed (not!) that when Jeopardy has a "Bible" column, I drive my wife crazy when I regularly run the table on the entire column.

But for me the conclusion is inescapable - apologetics is uninteresting.

[Philip]

Morny: But for me the conclusion is inescapable - apologetics is uninteresting.

Hmm, so there is a debate going on to sway your opinion, that aims to encourage your toward faith in Christ. And you've not made up your mind. But your description of the debate as being boring tells me that you don't think getting the answers to whether or not having faith in God truly matters. But if you saw this debate and the massive evidences Christians point to as actually resulting in being key to where and how you will spend eternity - THEN, I suspect you would have "some skin in the game." And that you would find knowing the truth of the matter to be terribly important - if for no other reason than to be certain that your lack of faith in Christ is no more consequential than a lack of having faith in Zeus, etc. Because if what Christians and Scripture assert is TRUE about God/Christ, then the eternal outcome of this issue of faith in God has astounding relevance for your life now, and for your eternity to come. And that should be a passion of great interest, if only to MAKE SURE.

But Morny, that you find the issue boring, tends to make me think that you've already decided there is no God, and thus, nothing whatsoever to worry about. Because if you truly thought there is even the slightest possibility that getting the answer correct may well be an urgent matter of great consequence, you'd not be so casual and deem the question boring or totally unimportant. So, that it's boring to you shows me you've already, at least for now, decided there's nothing whatsoever to be concerned about. I don't believe you are an agnostic! Or if you are, you don't want to move beyond that self-declared status - one way or another - meaning, you don't want to know what you don't want to know. Probably, because if you were to find out having faith is the most important thing you could ever do, that you would and could no longer be in charge as the little god of your life - well, it appears you would never want to risk giving that up.

Morny, I think a TRUE agnostic, knowing what the claims of Scripture are about eternity, that it would be exceptionally important for you to get to the bottom of it - for peace of mind, if nothing else. Remember, an agnostic supposedly means they don't know one way or another - even though they may lean this way or that. But one that has dismissed or abandoned the question and deemed it boring, as if totally unimportant - that's a person who appears to have already decided.

[Kenny]

Ken: Where did intelligence come from? I don't know.

Yes, that is the ultimate question you should be pondering.

Pondering the question does not mean you will come up with the correct answer.

Ken: It could have always existed, it could have evolved from non intelligence

But you certainly know that the attributes of non-intelligent things completely shut off that possibility!

No I don't know this and if you do, tell me how? How do you know more than all those scientists out there?

It's beyond delusional to think that is even possible, as there are no tangible reasons or observations to support it.

There are no tangible reasons or observations to support the existence of your God either! Yet that doesn't stop you from believing; so what makes you so certain that just because you haven't seen it, it's impossible?

[Kenny]

Ken, do you believe that something can come from nothing?

As I've said many times before, the idea that something can come from nothing makes no sense to me. Do you believe this is possible? If so, please explain how you are defining "nothing" and how this is possible.

So, where did intelligence come from?
Since the qualities of what intelligence IS do not come from nothing, it means that those qualities that make up intelligence MUST have existed in the universe before it expanded, yes?

Where did intelligence come from? I don't know. It could have always existed, it could have evolved from non intelligence, or something else I can't imagine. Obviously as a Christian, you believe intelligence has always existed, but I can't make a claim either way.

How could intelligence evolve from non-intelligence?
I mean, evolution doesn't work that way.
There MUST be something in the cells, for example, that, triggered by mutation, leads from A to B to C and so forth BUT the building blocks Must be there since they don't just "come from nowhere".
A mutation that makes it so a fish can breathe air happens because the genetic code of the fish has something there that allows for this, it isn't just "created" from nothing.
For intelligence to come into being there means that it was "always there", even if "inactive".
If it was always there it means that it was part of the building blocks of life which means it was part of the universe which means the universe had, from the very beginning, the properties of intelligence, right?

I agree the ingredients for intelligence could have always existed; just a matter of everything eventually coming together.

[Philip]

Philip: But you certainly know that the attributes of non-intelligent things completely shut off that possibility!

Ken: No I don't know this and if you do, tell me how? How do you know more than all those scientists out there?

Ken, now you're merely playing games - because I didn't say scientists assert God to be a necessity (although a very significant percentage of them DO believe in God). But it's what science has revealed about the complexity and organization of the universe - of how a simple cell is more complex than the most sophisticated machine ever built by man - things of this nature are so abundant that they when you put together their probability of existing by chance to mathematical probability, it is entirely unreasonable to think some great, powerful Intelligence wasn't required. So, the evidence itself is so massive and improbable, that it has immense implications. Einstein immediately grasped this, upon realizing the universe had a beginning. And so many scientists of great renown have said the same thing. Many of them are Christians, but not all.

You say NO intelligence was required and believe that non-intelligent things could produce such marvels. And THAT is a grand delusion that likewise takes enormous faith - but a faith that is anchored upon ZERO evidence and is against massive statistical improbabilities!

Ken: There are no tangible reasons or observations to support the existence of your God either!

The science of it is massive! But the facts of Scripture, the incredible accuracy of detailed and known (as to when they were made) prophecies, considerable eyewitness testimony, and many key facts from secondary, secular sources (as to the basic facts). And these things have been detailed many, many times on this forum. Yet, I've not seen you able to refute them in the slightest. You can't even point to just one clear fact asserted by Scripture that has ever been falsified. So your words are baseless!

But make no mistake, ANYONE who believes the universe that exists and functions as it does could be the result of blind, unguided and random forces truly is working exceptionally hard to not believe that there HAS to be a god or God. I'm incredulous, however, at what Ken thinks blind, non-intelligent things are capable of. It's simply laughable! The Creation's complexity and many evidences are precisely why the Apostle Paul says that no one, standing before God, will have any excuse that allows them to truthfully claim they couldn't perceive of God's existence. And the more we know, every single year, we find out more knowledge about God's massive evidences found across His creation.

BTW, one doesn't have to know of Christ or the Gospel to reject God!

[Kurieuo]

I must agree with Morny, that I find "religion" boring, at least elements to it. I was talking with my wife the other morning about defining religion. Sure you can take a dictionary definition, merely belief in God or something such, but such a definition really wouldn't cut it in a theology course/when reflecting more deeply. It's a superficial definition at best.

As I see, it is better to define religion as man's attempt to reach up to God (or some sort of spiritualisation of the unvierse). And, I tend to find man's attempt laughable whether Christian or non-Christian. It is even not simply boring, but very off-putting at times.

Jesus during his life tore into religion and the zealots of his day. He shredded the Pharisees with sharp words and publicly humiliated them. According to John, Jesus claimed to be the Temple, and that even if they destroyed him, he'd resurrect in three days. When Christ died, it is written that the thick temple curtain that separated the people from God's presence was torn in two. The Temple was also eventually destroyed, for God isn't worshipped in a place, or according to fancy religious rituals devised by humans, but in spirit and truth. Consider:

19 “Sir,” the woman said, “I can see that you are a prophet. 20 Our ancestors worshiped on this mountain, but you Jews claim that the place where we must worship is in Jerusalem.”

21 “Woman,” Jesus replied, “believe me, a time is coming when you will worship the Father neither on this mountain nor in Jerusalem. 22 You Samaritans worship what you do not know; we worship what we do know, for salvation is from the Jews. 23 Yet a time is coming and has now come when the true worshipers will worship the Father in the Spirit and in truth, for they are the kind of worshipers the Father seeks. 24 God is spirit, and his worshipers must worship in the Spirit and in truth.”

The early Christian church in what followed after Christ, a few centuries on and in large part due to Rome's influence, ended up with their own places of worship (synagogues), its own clergy, doxatic practices, its own rituals, etc -- it basically mimicked Judaism in substance. People could see and feel the religion -- they (Christians) could feel their beliefs that they had some substance to them, and even if constructed people can feel a sense of validation in such. It's well-intentioned, but leads to "religion" silly rituals and wrong-headed beliefs. Cult leaders take advantage of people, even pastors and priests, anyone in leadership even the very Church of Rome: 'As soon as the coin in the coffer rings, the soul out of purgatory springs". Don't get me wrong, religion can be used for good, and has done much good, but it also has a twin which causes much evil.

My life, belief in God, living my life fully believing in Christ, isn't something I do as a matter of religion, due to some church or as a matter of interest. It also isn't something I have to keep reminding myself of like, "oh I believe in God, so I should believe or do x or refrain from doing y." I don't believe or disbelieve in such things because of some fancy. Consider I'd prefer not to walk if I can drive a car, but its nonetheless true I have to sometimes walk places.

That said, I'd have my own religious elements to me where I'd of course reach up to God in my effort, but in my lived life my beliefs in Christ are ultimately embedded in who I am. I don't see the second as being religious anymore than in my lived life where I believe other people truly exist.

[Philip]

I took Morny's use of "religion" to mean a spiritual search for any possible gods, God, or definitive truths or directives.

Personally, I DESPISE religion - which I define as man's attempts to replace the directives of and faith in the one, true God with their own myriad of made-up, self-serving false teachings and beliefs in whatever lies that people have asserted or bought into - and cults / religions don't even have to claim any supposed deity. And in this sense of the definition, religion IS boring, in that it's always manifested and asserted in similar ways that have no examinable evidences for belief or faith.

[Kenny]

all.

You say NO intelligence was required and believe that non-intelligent things could produce such marvels. And THAT is a grand delusion that likewise takes enormous faith - but a faith that is anchored upon ZERO evidence and is against massive statistical improbabilities!

My answer was that I do not know. You are the one who said non-intelligence is impossible. I ask how do you know it is impossible? Do you call it impossible because you never heard of it happening?
BTW I did provide an example of a non intelligent sperm combining with a non intelligent egg, growing and evolving into intelligence; how do you know somewhere in the Universe two other non intelligent things can’t come together and evolve into something intelligent?

[RickD]

kenny wrote:
BTW I did provide an example of a non intelligent sperm combining with a non intelligent egg, growing and evolving into intelligence;

Kenny,

You're joking, right?