Top Ten Reasons I'm An Atheist

[Kenny]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

That's a rather extraordinary claim. Please provide your extraordinary evidence to support it.

It sounds like a typical subjective claim to me; why does it sound extraordinary to you?

Ken

As opposed to what Kenny, an objective claim?

Yes! as opposed to an objective claim. Again; why does such a claim sound extraordinary to you?

Ken

[PaulSacramento]

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:33 pm
So, Would you agree, going over all that was discussed here:
Things that come into being require something to cause them or act upon them to come into being?

What do you mean by “come into being”? Do you mean created from nothing? Because that would go against the 1st law of Thermodynamics which says nothing is neither created nor destroyed; it only changes forms. If you mean something else; please explain.

The first Law refers to CLOSED systems only, of course.
What I mean is that, somethings do not exist until they come into being, correct?
Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:33 pm
Things that move/change from on state to another, require something outside themselves to act on them to do so?

You mean like when energy converts to matter, or matter converts to energy? I don’t think it is acting outside of itself when this happens.

What causes energy to convert to matter ? or matter into energy? or water to evaporate ?
Do those things happen without outside influence?
When energy is converted to matter ( Far more difficult then the reverse of course), a super collider needs to be used and electrons are collided with a high-energy laser ( theoretically of course).
In short, something would have to cause the collision.

Agreed?

[Byblos]

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.

That's a rather extraordinary claim. Please provide your extraordinary evidence to support it.

It sounds like a typical subjective claim to me; why does it sound extraordinary to you?

Ken

As opposed to what Kenny, an objective claim?

Yes! as opposed to an objective claim. Again; why does such a claim sound extraordinary to you?

Ken

Because the correct answers are most often the simplest ones, not the extraordinary kind. Did you not read further down my reply to morny? Are you not familiar with the rule of parsimony? Or do you just pick and choose your rules where they suit you?

[Philip]

Ken: So why pray? (not a thank-you type prayer, but a request type prayer

Ken, we pray because God tells us to and because He says He listens, hears and answer's prayers. So, to begin with, our effective prayers line up with His will - which we can't often know ahead of time. However, we do know there are certain things God ALWAYS wants of us. So sincere prayers desiring to know God and to answer any doubts they might have about His existence or Who Jesus is - these are prayers He will always honor - but His answers may not be instant - or they can play out over time, or in unexpected ways. And God tells us to pray humbly. He will not hear our prayers if we are determined to remain in disobedience while practicing evil things - though one sincerely praying to escape these things and desiring Him, God will answer and help them. So God ties our prayers to our obedience - are we living as He instructs us, as we pray? He also ties the effectiveness of our prayers to having faith that He has the ability to answer our prayers.

Ken: If I want “X” to happen (“X” could be my sick mother getting past her illness, a troubled person getting past his struggles, a lost person finding his way, etc. etc.) and I pray to God for help, if we assume God knows everything then logic will tell us that God has already decided if “X” is going to take place or not before we decided to pray; do you agree?

God also foreknows what we will pray for and when, and so He factors our prayers into what He has forever known - the content of our prayers and whether or not they match up with His perfect will in a given circumstance, or in the comprehensive results that impact so many others as well. And where our prayers match up with His will and how He will answer that prayer He's always known BOTH things. And so, as He wants us to pray - as it is a connecting to God in spirit and hope - He often works through our prayers. But we might pray for something outside of His will - like, a mother that isn't healed and dies, etc. Does that outcome mean we shouldn't pray? NO! Does it mean we were foolish to pray? No! Does it mean God doesn't care about one's suffering mother? NO! Does it mean that what we prayed wasn't answered with the mother and others' best interests - NO! But how could we ever know that?

Note, as also fully human, Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane: " “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” Did God not answer that prayer's ultimate desire (that God the Father's (and the Son's and Holy Spirit's) ULTIMATE will be done)? Absolutely! Did allowing and desiring Jesus still yet suffer and die mean God didn't love Him? Course not - as Jesus was equally God. But was the ultimate outcome of Jesus going through His unimaginable suffering far better than being delivered from His fate? Absolutely! So, God measures ultimate outcomes and eternal purposes, as to how He answers prayers.

Ken: ...if God has decided to allow “X” to happen before I even prayed for it, my prayer is useless. Do you agree? So why pray?

Again, God's will is one with His perfect foreknowledge of ALL things. It's not as if He is like a human that decides what He is going to do after the fact of our prayer, subsequent / new information, or whatever else. he's always know all of the factors, His will, our prayers, our hearts and minds, His will, and His future actions in response - and He knows these things all at once and has always / forever known them. And yet, His response to our prayers play out in real time - because we live in real time.

[Kenny]

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:33 pm
So, Would you agree, going over all that was discussed here:
Things that come into being require something to cause them or act upon them to come into being?

What do you mean by “come into being”? Do you mean created from nothing? Because that would go against the 1st law of Thermodynamics which says nothing is neither created nor destroyed; it only changes forms. If you mean something else; please explain.

The first Law refers to CLOSED systems only, of course.

According to my understanding, an open system Universe would mean there is something outside the Universe acting upon it, where as a closed system Universe would mean there is nothing outside the Universe to act upon it.
Obviously the observable Universe would be considered open because there is much about the Universe we cannot observe; but the entire Universe, is considered all that exists. I’ve always assumed this would be a closed system, because if it is all that exists, by definition there can be nothing outside of it acting upon it; IOW it can’t be “A” and “Not A” at the same time.

What I mean is that, somethings do not exist until they come into being, correct?

Unless they’ve always existed!

Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?

I don’t know; can you give an example of this happening outside of your theistic beliefs?

Things that move/change from on state to another, require something outside themselves to act on them to do so?

You mean like when energy converts to matter, or matter converts to energy? I don’t think it is acting outside of itself when this happens.

What causes energy to convert to matter ? or matter into energy? or water to evaporate ?
Do those things happen without outside influence?
When energy is converted to matter ( Far more difficult then the reverse of course), a super collider needs to be used and electrons are collided with a high-energy laser ( theoretically of course).
In short, something would have to cause the collision.

Agreed?

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. When you said acting outside of themselves, I thought you meant something outside the material world. If you meant “X” acting upon “Y” with them both being material; that would make sense to me.

[Kenny]

That's a rather extraordinary claim. Please provide your extraordinary evidence to support it.

It sounds like a typical subjective claim to me; why does it sound extraordinary to you?

Ken

As opposed to what Kenny, an objective claim?

Yes! as opposed to an objective claim. Again; why does such a claim sound extraordinary to you?

Ken

Because the correct answers are most often the simplest ones, not the extraordinary kind. Did you not read further down my reply to morny? Are you not familiar with the rule of parsimony? Or do you just pick and choose your rules where they suit you?

First of all; Occam’s Razor or the Rule of Parsimony (which ever you wish to call it) is not an actual scientific principle, or rule of logic, it’s just a tool to help decide which of two or more explanations is more likely to be the correct one; it’s not something written in stone.
With that said, I am the one in this conversation claiming it is NOT an extra ordinary claim; remember?

[Kenny]

Ken: So why pray? (not a thank-you type prayer, but a request type prayer

Ken, we pray because God tells us to and because He says He listens, hears and answer's prayers. So, to begin with, our effective prayers line up with His will - which we can't often know ahead of time. However, we do know there are certain things God ALWAYS wants of us. So sincere prayers desiring to know God and to answer any doubts they might have about His existence or Who Jesus is - these are prayers He will always honor - but His answers may not be instant - or they can play out over time, or in unexpected ways. And God tells us to pray humbly. He will not hear our prayers if we are determined to remain in disobedience while practicing evil things - though one sincerely praying to escape these things and desiring Him, God will answer and help them. So God ties our prayers to our obedience - are we living as He instructs us, as we pray? He also ties the effectiveness of our prayers to having faith that He has the ability to answer our prayers.

Ken: If I want “X” to happen (“X” could be my sick mother getting past her illness, a troubled person getting past his struggles, a lost person finding his way, etc. etc.) and I pray to God for help, if we assume God knows everything then logic will tell us that God has already decided if “X” is going to take place or not before we decided to pray; do you agree?

God also foreknows what we will pray for and when, and so He factors our prayers into what He has forever known - the content of our prayers and whether or not they match up with His perfect will in a given circumstance, or in the comprehensive results that impact so many others as well. And where our prayers match up with His will and how He will answer that prayer He's always known BOTH things. And so, as He wants us to pray - as it is a connecting to God in spirit and hope - He often works through our prayers. But we might pray for something outside of His will - like, a mother that isn't healed and dies, etc. Does that outcome mean we shouldn't pray? NO! Does it mean we were foolish to pray? No! Does it mean God doesn't care about one's suffering mother? NO! Does it mean that what we prayed wasn't answered with the mother and others' best interests - NO! But how could we ever know that?

Note, as also fully human, Jesus prayed in the Garden of Gethsemane: " “My Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as you will.” Did God not answer that prayer's ultimate desire (that God the Father's (and the Son's and Holy Spirit's) ULTIMATE will be done)? Absolutely! Did allowing and desiring Jesus still yet suffer and die mean God didn't love Him? Course not - as Jesus was equally God. But was the ultimate outcome of Jesus going through His unimaginable suffering far better than being delivered from His fate? Absolutely! So, God measures ultimate outcomes and eternal purposes, as to how He answers prayers.

Ken: ...if God has decided to allow “X” to happen before I even prayed for it, my prayer is useless. Do you agree? So why pray?

Again, God's will is one with His perfect foreknowledge of ALL things. It's not as if He is like a human that decides what He is going to do after the fact of our prayer, subsequent / new information, or whatever else. he's always know all of the factors, His will, our prayers, our hearts and minds, His will, and His future actions in response - and He knows these things all at once and has always / forever known them. And yet, His response to our prayers play out in real time - because we live in real time.

Ahh so if I understand you correctly; God knows all including if you were going to pray for “X” or not, and will make his decision based upon your decision to pray before you even decided to do it or not; thus if you decide to pray for “X” he would have chosen to answer your prayer before you even prayed based on his foreknowledge. Is this correct?

[Morny]

In fact, I would venture an educated guess that in most cases, the exact opposite is claimed, i.e. the law of parsimony (Occam's razor) where simpler solutions are more likely to be correct even for complex problems.

Not sure how relevant parsimony or Occam's Razor are here. The main issue is how well the evidence supports the explanation, not how simple the explanation is.


On the claim that "extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" is ordinary:

Says who? Just because it suits you to proclaim it ordinary [...]?

No. Because the claim itself is simply a clever phrasing for an observation that people have understood for thousands of years.

Tell me that the sky is blue because air scatters red (an ordinary claim), and I have no immediate reason to doubt you. Tell me that a population of Bigfoot traipses around the Oregon wilderness (an extraordinary claim), and I have justifiable doubt. My reasoning in both cases seems obvious and ordinary.

But for some reason, when it comes to the subject of theism in general and God in particular, all of a sudden parsimony be damned, it's extraordinary evidence you seek.

You may be misinterpreting my point. The mere claim of God's existence (or many aspects of theism) is not extraordinary, because the claim is untestable. So science and I don't care.

To rephrase what I said previously, my problem is with claims of testable supernatural influence on the natural world.

Claiming that the effect of prayers is real but inscrutable is untestable and ordinary. Claiming that God created the Earth 6000 years ago to look scientifically exactly the same as if the Earth is 4.6 billion years old is untestable and ordinary. The scientific response to such claims is "Meh."

But claims of prayers influencing patient outcomes beyond vast medical experience is clearly testable and extraordinary. And a claim of a 6000 year old Earth while denying the scientific evidence of a 4.6 billion year age, is testable and extraordinary. Providing extraordinary evidence for such claims is necessary to change the scientific consensus - pointing to the Grand Canyon and proclaiming that a recent global flood could have done that is inadequate.

[Morny]

The challenge with validating prayer for a scientific study, is that next to none have been done.

You volunteered several. The 1st one I checked had invalidating methodological and statistical flaws.

Again, I have no problem with anyone believing in prayer. But claiming scientific support requires more than belief and handwaving.

[...] one could never design a study that would allow an accurate measure of outcomes - not per the scientific method, anyway

Designing such a study is not difficult. Make an unambiguous and measurable claim. Set up a controlled, randomized, double-blind experiment. Follow well-established, reasoned methodological and statistical principles. Publish a positive result. Collect the Nobel Prize.

But every Christian can confirm that God has responded to some impassioned prayer, and that they realize this to be the case.

I agree that Christians believe this. So why hasn't anyone collected the Nobel Prize?

This whole idea of prayer efficacy sort of reminds me of the "Mystery Men" movie character, who has the superpower of being able to become invisible when no one is looking at him. His other "superhero" friends are sympathetic to his claim, but are clearly skeptical of his usefulness to the group.

[PaulSacramento]

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Fri Feb 15, 2019 2:33 pm
So, Would you agree, going over all that was discussed here:
Things that come into being require something to cause them or act upon them to come into being?

What do you mean by “come into being”? Do you mean created from nothing? Because that would go against the 1st law of Thermodynamics which says nothing is neither created nor destroyed; it only changes forms. If you mean something else; please explain.

The first Law refers to CLOSED systems only, of course.

According to my understanding, an open system Universe would mean there is something outside the Universe acting upon it, where as a closed system Universe would mean there is nothing outside the Universe to act upon it.
Obviously the observable Universe would be considered open because there is much about the Universe we cannot observe; but the entire Universe, is considered all that exists. I’ve always assumed this would be a closed system, because if it is all that exists, by definition there can be nothing outside of it acting upon it; IOW it can’t be “A” and “Not A” at the same time.

What I mean is that, somethings do not exist until they come into being, correct?

Unless they’ve always existed!

Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?

I don’t know; can you give an example of this happening outside of your theistic beliefs?

Things that move/change from on state to another, require something outside themselves to act on them to do so?

You mean like when energy converts to matter, or matter converts to energy? I don’t think it is acting outside of itself when this happens.

What causes energy to convert to matter ? or matter into energy? or water to evaporate ?
Do those things happen without outside influence?
When energy is converted to matter ( Far more difficult then the reverse of course), a super collider needs to be used and electrons are collided with a high-energy laser ( theoretically of course).
In short, something would have to cause the collision.

Agreed?

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. When you said acting outside of themselves, I thought you meant something outside the material world. If you meant “X” acting upon “Y” with them both being material; that would make sense to me.

Ok, so:

According to my understanding, an open system Universe would mean there is something outside the Universe acting upon it, where as a closed system Universe would mean there is nothing outside the Universe to act upon it.
Obviously the observable Universe would be considered open because there is much about the Universe we cannot observe; but the entire Universe, is considered all that exists. I’ve always assumed this would be a closed system, because if it is all that exists, by definition there can be nothing outside of it acting upon it; IOW it can’t be “A” and “Not A” at the same time.

If the universe is a closed system, how did it expand ??

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:52 pm
Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?
I don’t know; can you give an example of this happening outside of your theistic beliefs?

Life.
Life does NOT exist until something causes it to come into being, yes?

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. When you said acting outside of themselves, I thought you meant something outside the material world. If you meant “X” acting upon “Y” with them both being material; that would make sense to me.

Is energy material ?

[Philip]

Philip: one could never design a study that would allow an accurate measure of outcomes - not per the scientific method, anyway

Morny: Designing such a study is not difficult. Make an unambiguous and measurable claim. Set up a controlled, randomized, double-blind experiment. Follow well-established, reasoned methodological and statistical principles. Publish a positive result. Collect the Nobel Prize.

First place, I referenced a study for consideration that Rich Deem had posted on G&S. I don't know all the details.

But as for designing a study, the huge problems would be, as we can't clearly know in what ways God has answered a prayer, or partially answered it, or WHEN (if at all, as NO answer can still be an answer, yet not what we might expect or want) - because, again, Scripture reveals God doesn't work like a slot machine! Some prayers are answered over a considerable length of time - or differently than we might specifically desire - remember, it's GOD'S response, in HIS way, timing, and will, etc. that dictates the manner in which a specific prayer is answered. So the scientific method is almost impossible to apply to it. It is NOT a matter of: A) This prayer is prayed, and so B) there is this result, C) clearly noted during a specific timing that ties it logically to the initial prayer. Now, do we not often wish God worked like that - of course we do - but only because we are typically far more concerned with Him doing OUR will instead of HIS. He is an all-knowing Being Who knows what is ultimately / eternally best for humans here and beyond!

You simply can't apply human logic to figuring out how God uses our prayers!

[Kenny]

If the universe is a closed system, how did it expand ??

A closed system is not defined as something restricted from expansion; it’s defined as a system that has nothing outside it to act upon it.

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:52 pm
Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?
I don’t know; can you give an example of this happening outside of your theistic beliefs?

Life.
Life does NOT exist until something causes it to come into being, yes?

I don’t know if I can agree with that. Life is when part of a man and part of a woman come together and evolve into another man or woman. So though there was not a time when the parts were not alive, I guess there is a point when the parts become a person/being.

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. When you said acting outside of themselves, I thought you meant something outside the material world. If you meant “X” acting upon “Y” with them both being material; that would make sense to me.

Is energy material ?

No. Energy is not matter, though it is a part of the material world.

[Philip]

Ken: Ahh so if I understand you correctly; God knows all including if you were going to pray for “X” or not, and will make his decision based upon your decision to pray before you even decided to do it or not; thus if you decide to pray for “X” he would have chosen to answer your prayer before you even prayed based on his foreknowledge. Is this correct?

Ultimately, whether a prayer is answered or not has to do with whether it was made in alignment with God's will for a certain thing prayed for to come to pass. So, ONLY if a prayer is in alignment with His will does He answer it as prayed. Of course, He may only answer a given prayer partially, or over a period of time. Again, it's all down to His will per how He honors prayer. It also matters whether or not one is living in a desire of obedience to Him, or whether one is deliberately living in deliberate opposition as to how His Word says we are to - but that's not to say He doesn't answer prayers of sinners, as we are ALL sinners. But A) He tells us to pray, even the general approach and attitude of prayer (per the Lord's prayer and other Scriptural examples), and B) He tell us He honors the prayers and listens to our concerns. But He doesn't tell us exactly how this will play out per a specific prayer. We are to do our part (in prayer), and God does His part. But, unquestionably, He has ALWAYS known His will, our prayers, whether or not they line up with His will, and exactly how He will honor them (or not) - as He has forever and always perfectly known all of these things.

And there is no NEW information, as far as God is concerned, to which He subsequently decides His actions. ALL of His knowledge stands outside of time. We are to trust God as to the outcome of our prayers. Many people pray just to get stuff or whatever superficial thing - often which are not things He considers good for us. And NO answer may merely mean the answer is "NO!" Or it could mean He'll bring it about, but in His timing - so it might also mean we are to wait with patience - and in trust. And we must pray in faith - not that our prayers will be answered as we gave them - but are to have faith that He has the power to answer them, that He has our best interests at heart, and that He will do what is best for us - which is not necessarily all about what might seem best to US in the present - which is where our trust comes in.

So, to the unbeliever, prayer doesn't likely make much sense. And even to the Believer, it is often a mystery as to how God honors and uses prayer. One way is, it draws us to Him in contemplation and reverence - a pursuit of relationship. God does not think or operate with a man's logic - which makes Him sometimes hard to understand.

[PaulSacramento]

If the universe is a closed system, how did it expand ??

A closed system is not defined as something restricted from expansion; it’s defined as a system that has nothing outside it to act upon it.

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:52 pm
Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?
I don’t know; can you give an example of this happening outside of your theistic beliefs?

Life.
Life does NOT exist until something causes it to come into being, yes?

I don’t know if I can agree with that. Life is when part of a man and part of a woman come together and evolve into another man or woman. So though there was not a time when the parts were not alive, I guess there is a point when the parts become a person/being.

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. When you said acting outside of themselves, I thought you meant something outside the material world. If you meant “X” acting upon “Y” with them both being material; that would make sense to me.

Is energy material ?

No. Energy is not matter, though it is a part of the material world.

If the universe is a closed system, what caused the expansion? why did it expand?
Please define "material world".

[RickD]

If the universe is a closed system, how did it expand ??

A closed system is not defined as something restricted from expansion; it’s defined as a system that has nothing outside it to act upon it.

PaulSacramento wrote: ↑Tue Feb 19, 2019 1:52 pm
Do you agree that something cause things that do not exist to come into being?
I don’t know; can you give an example of this happening outside of your theistic beliefs?

Life.
Life does NOT exist until something causes it to come into being, yes?

I don’t know if I can agree with that. Life is when part of a man and part of a woman come together and evolve into another man or woman. So though there was not a time when the parts were not alive, I guess there is a point when the parts become a person/being.

Perhaps I’ve misunderstood you. When you said acting outside of themselves, I thought you meant something outside the material world. If you meant “X” acting upon “Y” with them both being material; that would make sense to me.

Is energy material ?

No. Energy is not matter, though it is a part of the material world.

If the universe is a closed system, what caused the expansion? why did it expand?
Please define "material world".

Isn't the (entire) universe an isolated system? Since the (entire) universe is literally everything that exists, there is nothing "outside" the universe.