Top Ten Reasons I'm An Atheist

[Morny]

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.

I haven't decided anything for sure. I can only carefully weigh evidence against theories before making tentative judgments. Understanding that I can make mistakes is essential.

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.

Well said.

[PaulSacramento]

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.

So, you are saying that you believe that it is possible that the universe had, at the very least, the elements of intelligence in it?
If so, how did those elements come together?

[Kenny]

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.

So, you are saying that you believe that it is possible that the universe had, at the very least, the elements of intelligence in it?
If so, how did those elements come together?

If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being.

[Philip]

Ken: "If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being."

Ken, I love your casual use of the word "if." And a simple cell could not have evolved to become such. As at its most basic design and functionality, it is already MASSIVELY complex - more so than any machine man has ever built! ALL of it's components must be in place, at one time, for it to function as a cell. And, of course, as a biological component, the perfect conditions for the cell also had to pre-exist it. But the point is, a cell, the basis of all life, is already massively complex and works intelligently. And blind, random things can't produce such a thing. So, you're right back to what you believe blind, non-intelligent things can produce - or even have the potential to become - as even that first cell requires an unfathomable explanation of it not being created, designed, produced, and given just the right conditions to exist and live! That's one astounding and mathematically improbable "if."

[Kenny]

Ken: "If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being."

Ken, I love your casual use of the word "if." And a simple cell could not have evolved to become such. As at its most basic design and functionality, it is already MASSIVELY complex - more so than any machine man has ever built! ALL of it's components must be in place, at one time, for it to function as a cell. And, of course, as a biological component, the perfect conditions for the cell also had to pre-exist it. But the point is, a cell, the basis of all life, is already massively complex and works intelligently. And blind, random things can't produce such a thing. So, you're right back to what you believe blind, non-intelligent things can produce - or even have the potential to become - as even that first cell requires an unfathomable explanation of it not being created, designed, produced, and given just the right conditions to exist and live! That's one astounding and mathematically improbable "if."

Actually the "IF" I used was under the assumption of cells (plural) not cell (singular). Your response was under the assumption I was speaking of a single cell always existing.

[RickD]

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.

So, you are saying that you believe that it is possible that the universe had, at the very least, the elements of intelligence in it?
If so, how did those elements come together?

If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being.

Ken,

I'm curious...what do you think caused these eternally existing cells to change?

[Kenny]

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.

So, you are saying that you believe that it is possible that the universe had, at the very least, the elements of intelligence in it?
If so, how did those elements come together?

If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being.

Ken,

I'm curious...what do you think caused these eternally existing cells to change?

Again; all I can give you are guesses. Perhaps the expansion of the Singularity allowed them to change this way.

[Philip]

Ken, this "Mr. Singularity" you speak of - He sounds unbelievably intelligent, aware and with extraordinary abilities, does He not?

[Kenny]

Ken, this "Mr. Singularity" you speak of - He sounds unbelievably intelligent, aware and with extraordinary abilities, does He not?

I didn't speak of a Mr Singularity.

[PaulSacramento]

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

So, you are saying that you believe that it is possible that the universe had, at the very least, the elements of intelligence in it?
If so, how did those elements come together?

If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being.

Ken,

I'm curious...what do you think caused these eternally existing cells to change?

Again; all I can give you are guesses. Perhaps the expansion of the Singularity allowed them to change this way.

So, here is the thing.
You agree that the elements or properties of intelligence MUST have existed in the universe, correct?
They didn't just come from nowhere.
So the quantum singularity from which the universe expanded from, must have contained these elements, correct?
Something caused these elements to come together and "form" intelligence, correct?
That thing must, therefore, have been able to at least cause this change, correct?
That thing, then, must NOT be part of the very thing it is changing, right? I mean it isn't that thing that is changing BUT is the thing that is cause the change, right?
And if that is the case, which it must be for obvious reasons, then that thing CAN'T be IN the universe right? since it is causing the change IN the universe ( where the elements for intelligence are), right?

Now, unlike radiation that cause mutations, which are BOTH in the universe, intelligence is NOT material NOR energy, correct?

[Kenny]

So, you are saying that you believe that it is possible that the universe had, at the very least, the elements of intelligence in it?
If so, how did those elements come together?

If cells have always existed, I can see it as only a matter of time before they can join and evolve into an intelligent being.

Ken,

I'm curious...what do you think caused these eternally existing cells to change?

Again; all I can give you are guesses. Perhaps the expansion of the Singularity allowed them to change this way.

So, here is the thing.
You agree that the elements or properties of intelligence MUST have existed in the universe, correct?
They didn't just come from nowhere.
So the quantum singularity from which the universe expanded from, must have contained these elements, correct?
Something caused these elements to come together and "form" intelligence, correct?

This is where things end for me; I cannot assume something else caused these elements to come together, because then the question becomes how did this “something else” form intelligence; and being an atheist and all; I can’t presuppose it as God thus exempt from all logical rules cells and everything else must adhere to, so I have to admit to not having an answer

[Philip]

Ken: This is where things end for me; I cannot assume something else caused these elements to come together, because then the question becomes how did this “something else” form intelligence;

Good so far, Ken - because logic + ZERO observations of non-intelligent things EVER showing any capability of such occurring reveals both established limits and thus the impossibility.

Code: Select all

Ken: "... and being an atheist and all; I can’t presuppose it as God thus exempt from all logical rules cells and everything else must adhere to, so I have to admit to not having an answer"

And so you won't let pure logic take you to the necessity for some Super Intelligence behind the universe - because it then becomes a question of God. But I think you'd be fine with the idea of some impersonal god - as long as it doesn't require anything of you that you dislike (which is the genesis of all religion, btw). But you apparently don't like the God of the Bible, probably because you can't bring yourself to believe in His existence. But reality doesn't work like that!

Whenever some thing exists or happened in the past - those things are true, regardless of whether I know about them, whether I like or dislike them, and despite any denial of them I might harbor. Reality doesn't change or not exist because of what anyone knows / doesn't know, thinks, or feels about it. So, "if" there is a Presence of Intelligence with God-like abilities that built the universe, what we think about Him doesn't change whatever reality about Him that actually exists. The creature doesn't get to tell the Creator, "I prefer a different god or no god at all, rather than it be You." And that is precisely what many atheists are doing - they don't want any god or God that has authority over them, or lays out plans for living their lives that they disagree with. So they just work hard to convince themselves that such a Deity cannot possibly exist - despite the reality that, positionally, they must remain in Ken's unsatisfying, logically contradictory box! And this makes many of them terribly angry people. It also makes many of them fanatic about trying to disprove God's existence - a way of feeling comfortable in their unbelief.

Usually, atheists I encounter have great misunderstandings about or they have formed a personal caricature of the God of the Bible - having their own, mental, strawman construction of what the Christian God is like, as opposed to what Scripture tells us. And the former is easy to dismiss - while the latter is impossible to.

[Kenny]

Ken: This is where things end for me; I cannot assume something else caused these elements to come together, because then the question becomes how did this “something else” form intelligence;

Good so far, Ken - because logic + ZERO observations of non-intelligent things EVER showing any capability of such occurring reveals both established limits and thus the impossibility.

Code: Select all

Ken: "... and being an atheist and all; I can’t presuppose it as God thus exempt from all logical rules cells and everything else must adhere to, so I have to admit to not having an answer"

And so you won't let pure logic take you to the necessity for some Super Intelligence behind the universe - because it then becomes a question of God. But I think you'd be fine with the idea of some impersonal god - as long as it doesn't require anything of you that you dislike (which is the genesis of all religion, btw). But you apparently don't like the God of the Bible, probably because you can't bring yourself to believe in His existence. But reality doesn't work like that!

The problem with God is it causes more questions than it answers. In order for me to assume God, I have to use pure logic to assume:

*God Exist outside the Universe
What does that mean? By definition Universe means “all that exist” So how could something exist outside of all that exist? To accomplish this I have to again use this pure logic to believe in a spiritual world, where none of the physical world rules apply. But as vast as the Universe is, how do I know which rules apply to the physical world and which do not? To assume what I know about this little galaxy applies to the entirety of the Universe would be like going to a library, picking up a single book, read and study it, and using more of this pure logic to believe all the rest of the books in the library are like the one I just read. I don’t have that kinda faith.

*I have to assume God is not physical but has the ability to affect the physical world.
The only thing I can think of that is not physical is imagination and thoughts. So I have to use more of this pure logic to assume there is more. But then has there ever been a case when something non-physical ever had an effect on the physical world? Science has never documented such a case, but in order to assume God I would have to assume this is not only possible but happened. Perhaps I should use more of this pure logic to assume science doesn’t know about this. But if I can’t trust Science when it comes to God and the spiritual world, why would I trust science when it comes to matter and the physical world?

For me it is just easier to admit I don’t know.

[Byblos]

In order for me to assume God, I have to use pure logic to assume: ...

You have that exactly backwards. You assume logic first, then you conclude God. But you already knew that (or at least should have known).

[Philip]

Ken: God Exist outside the Universe. What does that mean? By definition Universe means “all that exist” So how could something exist outside of all that exist? To accomplish this I have to again use this pure logic to believe in a spiritual world, where none of the physical world rules apply.

God eternally exists outside all CREATED things - which whether you believe in God or not, I think you're beginning to grasp that SOMETHING had to be intelligent that created all things of which intelligence had to be applied to. There the source, and all things that the Source produced. And we know the Source could not be contingent upon anything else, nor could it have created itself. But you have alluded to something pre-existing that had to be intelligent - I think you realize this. But what WAS that - which is a different question.

Ken: But as vast as the Universe is, how do I know which rules apply to the physical world and which do not? To assume what I know about this little galaxy applies to the entirety of the Universe would be like going to a library, picking up a single book, read and study it, and using more of this pure logic to believe all the rest of the books in the library are like the one I just read. I don’t have that kinda faith.

It doesn't matter what we can't know about ALL thinks, as we do know that all things have causes and are derivative of something else - as those the only options we have - no matter what exists beyond our galaxy. And NOTHING can created itself!

Ken: *I have to assume God is not physical but has the ability to affect the physical world.

Well, as it takes a God to create the astounding physical that exists, how silly to not think He can't control it.

Ken: The only thing I can think of that is not physical is imagination and thoughts.

But the physical must exist before imagination and thoughts can. Why? Because they only exist in the mind of an already existing physical being.

Ken: So I have to use more of this pure logic to assume there is more. But then has there ever been a case when something non-physical ever had an effect on the physical world? Science has never documented such a case...

Ken, that's because science things it is incapable of measuring - as that is the realm of metaphysics. But science has shown that SOMETHING must have pre-existed the universe, because - well, that's obvious, due to their existence, and mostly due to how they are made, designed, and function with tremendous precision.

Ken: Perhaps I should use more of this pure logic to assume science doesn’t know about this.

Science has revealed astounding things about how the universe came about, how it is constructed and works. But not about WHY it does or its Source - again, science can't do metaphysics!

Ken: But if I can’t trust Science when it comes to God and the spiritual world, why would I trust science when it comes to matter and the physical world?

Perhaps, if you are looking for science to go beyond the extraordinary evidences it has uncovered for the intelligent designs, mechanizations and functions across the universe, then you are being unrealistic about A) the limits of what science can show us, and B) also in denial about the implications of what complex and astounding marvels it DOES show us - not to mention C) that science has NEVER observed ANYTHING showing absolutely no characteristics of already operating functions or abilities, suddenly beginning to develop such.

So, if science can't take you where you want to go in this important issue, and as millions of Christians claim to know God - then ultimately, your answer lies in an ADDITIONAL method of understanding. Which must start with a truly open mind and heart, and truly desiring to know the answers, no matter where they might lead. Perhaps you've been far too dependent upon science or trust in your own logic (which can certainly be faulty). You need an open heart - even to accept truth before you fully understand it. If all you search for are further reasons for your unbelief, you'll never discover the truth of God! Make sure you are being honest with yourself. ASK Him - but first make sure you are sincere in that - meaning, you ask in sincerity to be shown whatever you might not understand, and for the courage to accept it. I'm not speaking of deluding yourself - quite the opposite. God reveals Himself to the willing and sincere who truly want to know the truth - to those willing to be shown they've been wrong.

And clearly, this is not a question of one side being exceptionally logic-minded or highly intelligent and the other side not - millions of Christ followers are some of the smartest, most logic-driven people on the planet. Many of the greatest scientists whom have made some of the world's most important discoveries have been Christians. So, it's not a matter that believers aren't likely driven by logic or aren't serious about science.

When I was young, around 18, I seriously doubted my prior belief in God. And I was determined to get to the truth of the matter, to settle it once and for all. And I was truly miserable in my doubt.

Ken: For me it is just easier to admit I don’t know.

It's easy to delude oneself into remaining on that spot!

Are you scared of how finding out God exists might affect you?