Changing the Goalposts

by braincleaned 88 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Jeffro

  tec:

  What came FROM God had a beginning. But God, Himself, always WAS.

  You've moved the goalposts so much that the original goal is far over the horizon.

  The claim that 'God' (and the redundantly capitalised 'Himself') 'always existed' relies on belief in stories written by primitive tribesmen, which have been subsequently retconned by modern believers. Belief in the god of the Bible - a complex vindictive magical alien who requires worship - isn't even a reasonable alternative to the universe arising from nothing.

  Positing the God of the Bible as the only possible alternative to the universe arising from 'nothing' is also a pathetic false dichotomy that ignores other scenarios, such as that the universe always* existed (for example, multiple big bang - big crunch scenarios), or that our universe is one in a larger multiverse, or even that there was a 'creator' (sentient or not) that may or may not still exist and that doesn't care about selfish human desires for 'worship'.
  *The more widely accepted theories about the beginning of the universe indicate that time didn't exist independently from the start of the universe, so there actually was no 'before'.
• 

  MadGiant

  People just have to start looking at the universe to realize that a god, any god it's impossible.

  http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Ultra-Deep_Field Ismael
• 

  Jeffro

  MadGiant's link (modified for standard webpage instead of mobile layout):

  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble_Ultra-Deep_Field
• 

  snare&racket

  It is actually far more complex than that....

  What is nothing? This is a hige topic in itself! Did you know that according to the physics definition of nothing, the activity within is still suffice to produce the big bang according to latest evidence and theories? It is not like humans have no answers or no ideas....

  Can something come from nothing? Yes! Science has long acknowledged this, for example e=mc^2

  The net sum of energy in the universe or 'e' is actually zero, yet from nothing we have mass and the constant that is the speed of light.

  Science is always proving that what we feel is illogical or unintuitive is useless in predicting truths. We can only rely on evidence.

  Dr Lawrence Krauss has a new book 'A Universe from Nothing.' I assume everyone commenting here has an interest in really knowing the truth of the matter. It would be interesting to know how many bother to go and buy such a scientific book to see what the scientists are currently exploring in an attempt to examine what happened to initiate the big bang. It would also be interesting how many assume reading geneis will suffice yet still feel qualified to comment on such topics...

  Remember also that 'what was before the big bang?' is not likely a question that makes sense. We know time changes depending on where and when you are experiencing time. Space and time are interwoven and space is affected by gravity. We have proven that time passes slower whenu you travel away from a source of gravity, for example people in space experience a slower time than people on earth. Does that sound logical or believable? Either way it is true! We even proved it with atomic clocks.

  As time likely began after the big bang, there is no before the big bang. If you feel this is counter intuitive, then try to suggest something that is intuitive...... The universe being infinite in all direction? Time being infinite both behind and ahead? A being of unknown origin who always existed and had no beginning or end and is made of no matter? This May be your conclusion, but this too in neither logical or intuitive or in accordance to what we know of existence .... Further to that we have no evidence at all for such a conclusion. Because of how we evolved, with a brain that has been moulded to survive and comprehend the plains of Africa, everything is beyond our comprehension, however evidence is something we can pin answers to. This brings us back to reading the latest experiments and data before throwing our opinion in. Even after reading sll the data, we are not qualified to even pretend to know what we are talking about...

  snare x
• 

  Jeffro

  snare&racket:

  It is actually far more complex than that....

  True. But getting into detail about legitimate theories about the beginning of the universe is far more than is deserved by those who posit the only alternative as being 'God'.

  Theists seem to expect atheists to have very detailed ideas about how the universe could begin without God, but at the same time, theists imagine that 'an intelligent omnipotent God always existed' is somehow a satisfying explanation .
• 

  snare&racket

  Jeffro,

  If there was an award for biggest atheist, I'd have that trophy on my fireplace already. The converted and the choir are being preached to ;)

  If I asked any of the big bang deniers here to explain how making a cup of tea alters the whole universe around you I am sure they would look at me puzzled or simply laugh. If i gave them a clue, that it happens due to the restrictions on electron energy level states in quantum physics , I am sure they would simply just nod...maybe. Having been forced to learn physics (to enter medicine) and then go on and read physics out of an unexpected interest, such a notion eventually made sense to me, having learned about energy states in organic chemistry (again in order to study medicine). But as much as it is counterintuitive, it is true that when introducing any energy to a system, whether it be a beaker in a lab or the universe, all energy states have to alter around it, hence making a cup of tea forces all energy states to shift.

  My point is, it is naieve to think one could or should be able to comprehend and discuss such a topic without years of reading and education. It is not about being smart, it is not about the informed looking down on the uninformed, it is simply the case that science is HIGHLY complex and requires years of studying to appreciate. Sadly this is not appreciated due to ignorance and forums and threads such as this are full of people that do not understand things they are denouncing, because, for obvious reasons, it does not make sense to them. Any suggestion to go and read specific books or examine certain evidence is taken as an insult and patronising. I am confident due to the same people making the same arguments for some years now, that despite involving themselves in such conversations....NEVER make the effort to read any evidence. None of us our born with this knowledge, until we read and study it, sometimes for years, we are all ignorant. Being ignorant is not an insult, it is a state of unknowing. We are all ignorant of most things. Thankfully on this site we are fortunate to have people who have knowledge in many areas of life and so can comment on them without ignorance. Yet some feel that their uninformed opinion is of equal value. It isnt that the comments are not wanted or worthy, it is just that there is no negotiation in evidence, just some people know the relevant data some don't. Sadly third party readers looking at such threads see nothing but muddy waters, again because it takes years of studying to become informed and appreciate certai scientific data. Then there are those that sadly do not have the mental means to comprehend the evidence even if it was presented to them, purely due to how complex it is.

  Just because it is very hard to understand, does not make it untrue.

  Because genesis is so easy to read and understand.... 'There is a god, he made everything'..... There is a denial from many, including the old me, of anything with a more complex explanation. Why teach myself physics over 3 or 4 years to prove my belief in Genesis maybe wrong? Where does the motivation to even do that come from for most peoole? It doesnt and so it doesnt happen. It is a laborious and complex process. But...Guess what, the universe is very complex! But despite that we have learned enough to recognise that it is possible to all come about without the ancient jewish genesis explanation..... If this is where you chirp in with No it doesnt! Or Well it doesnt seem likely to me! Maybe some humility and honesty about what you actually do comprehend and how much effort have you put into learning the big bang theory? The red shift? The singularity?Abiogenesis? Evolutiin?

  Do people here know that the big bang (i.e, a singularity that resulted in the formstion of our universe) is not a theory? We have even mapped out AND photographed the resultant radiation. In europe via the large hadron collider at CERN we are recreating the very first billionth of a second into the big bang to see what was taking place, that is how far back we have taken the story of our universe!

  How lazy and innapropriate it would be to shout STOP! There is no need! For MY God did it all! Even if we did that, it makes something we don't yet understand more complex! Right now we can explain how the universe coould come into existence from nothing! Throw in a deity and things get a million times more complicated not easier!
• 

  braincleaned

  Thank you for your kind response, Tec.

  //But believing that God to be the God and Father of Christ... that is from the truth I heard from Christ, as stated above. I loved Him for these, and followed Him. Now, I hear Him... His voice, speaking. So I can hear the truth FROM Him. So I can KNOW Him, and not just 'guess' or hope that He exists. I know He exists, and I put faith IN Him.//

  As you know, there is no way I can dispute your experience, nor do I wish to question it.
  I do believe that you have felt these experiences, and that they have a profound influence on your life.

  I'm not sure I even want to argue any further, as I wish to respect your feelings.

  Maybe I can refer to my own journey to explain my conversion to atheism.
  In doing so, I am honoring your own journey — while sharing mine.

  At first, my issue was not the existence of God, but his character. I swam in my cognitive dissonance for decades, grasping at anything that would confirm my bias for Him. But the evidence grew thin.
  I studied in depth — ironically rationalizing the Biblical statement that God is Love. I went to concordances to understand Hebrew and Greek semantics… oh I really worked hard. But the more I read my Bible, the more YHWH became a monster to me. Later, even the Son, Jesus, condoned and even lauded the Mosaic Law, which is a horrid mountain of about 600 laws, more cruel one than the other. It was no surprise that Jesus warned in Mathew 10: 34-39 that he did not come to bring peace, but a sword. Also that anyone who loves their father or mother more than Him was not worthy of Him; anyone who loves their son or daughter more than Him is not worthy of Him… not the most concern for family unity. Not to mention the Church that followed his War cry literally, through crusades and Inquisition…

  Still, I found Jesus relatively harmless compared to the Father, YHWH.
  Jehovah boasts jealousy, vengeance, genocide, and leglistated slavery, and other niceties.
  He never used his almighty power with love — as illustrated for example in the Flood story. He is said to have the power to do anything he wanted — yet, he destroyed whole families; women (pregnant and not) and children, to the horrors of slow drowning, while if he was love, he could have just made them drop dead painlessly and/or disintegrate (I won't even try to talk about the logic fallacies this whole tale)!
  There is this sick idea of vengeance He has — as if torturing his "enemies" could serve them a lesson. There is no lesson to be learned if dead or in Hell!

  Did I really think the God who dislikes abortion was consistent when He ordered his armies to kill "by the sword; their little ones will be dashed to the ground, their pregnant women ripped open???" (Hosea 13:16)
  Nooo...

  I haven't even scratched the surface here… but I gather you will understand my point.

  I concluded that Jesus is a smooth talker, and that some people are easily swooned by him. Of course, I say this because I also believe this is a delusion derived from our brains in need of bliss at all cost, and confirmation bias.
  This is why so many of us have a hard time with the God idea. That humanity is conned (often by self) into believing the particular god of their culture, or preferred folklore. It seems so convenient…

  This is also why I encourage to learn other religions. Other have the same experience than you but with other gods. My personal quest is truth. Not MY Truth, but THE Truth...

  I will conclude with a quote from my favorite writer, Bertrand Russell:
  "There can’t be a practical reason for believing what isn’t true. That’s quite... at least, I rule it out as impossible.
  Either the thing is true, or it isn’t. If it is true, you should believe it, and if it isn’t, you shouldn’t. And if you can’t find out whether it’s true or whether it isn’t, you should suspend judgment.
  But you can’t... it seems to me a fundamental dishonesty and a fundamental treachery to intellectual integrity to hold a belief because you think it’s useful, and not because you think it’s true."

  Peace. :)
• 

  braincleaned

  //My point is, it is naieve to think one could or should be able to comprehend and discuss such a topic without years of reading and education.//

  I am 54 and although I'm a layman, my life has been spent studying these things. But we cannot be elitist, not even the scientists can. There is a measure of common sense, and needed humility.

  No one here is claiming to 'know' these ideas that are more theoretical than not. To claim that the Big Bang is not a subject of dispute and philosophical debate anymore is proof that you are not a serious reader snare&racket! Even the idea of it being a singularity is debated. The jury is still out on the origins of the Big Bang — and I'm not talking about the religious.

  I have this double advantage of having argued for Creationism for years, until my quest led me here, laughing at my biased discourse of past, while defending Evolution today. Am I now convinced that it all stops here, that no further information will ever rock my boat again? Nope. I am, and will continue to be open to changing my view if need be.
• 

  braincleaned

  Also " Just because it is very hard to understand, does not make it untrue."

  Yes... but, Just because it is simple to understand, it does not make it untrue either.
  
  Just sayin'...
• 

  snare&racket

  Yes braincleaned...... The most honest answer any of us can say is.... WE DON'T YET KNOW! This beautiful sentence is what fuels science amd human exploration. Yet sadly I found that as a religious person I could never admit that truth for it negates faith in the unprovable i.e. God.

  The religious like to agrue what is known and not known, they 'catch us out' for we say with honesty 'we dont know yet' but when it is there turn to be honest, they say 'I JUST KNOW' as if they have experiences unknown to us. (It can't be evidence as we would all know it) Even if they did make their stand based on such experiences we have not had that experience, so their argument is of no Vslue to us, they are saying 'believe us , we have more knowledge than you, honestly!'

  Having fallen for this once already, I shall be putting all my chips on evidence and never sgain the word of a human being.

  when I meet a religious person willing to be honest and say 'I Know we can't know but I think...." I will find time for them And their thoughts.