Today, as I was browsing and answering questions on Yahoo! Answers, my lifeline, I uncovered one question I found particularly interesting. The credit for this question goes to aspiring writer, and believe me, he deserves it. This question, I must admit, caused me to do a little happy dance as I added another Roman numeral for "one" on the metaphorical T-chart for believers, and non-believers. Anyway, even if you do believe in God, I would still like your feedback on the question in the comments.
Sorry, for some reason my computer is not letting me paste the question, but I will provide you with the link.
http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index;_ylt=ArsYGCIwtGDBEc1hijQi9Vrd7BR.;_ylv=3?qid=20091108125252AA4RDK5
[新しいコレクション] 毛じらみの卵 画像 134239
4 years ago
21 comments:
"1. Actually, the existence of dark matter is not universally accepted, partially because it's not been found. Dark matter has been suggested as an answer to why the expansion of the universe is speeding up, but other ideas are out there, as well.
2. If the universe requires a Creator, why doesn't the Creator require a Creator? Occam's Razor would actually favor a universe that always existed (although this, too, isn't quite right).
3. Religion has been shown to have beneficial psychological effects (to an extent); however, that does not make God real.
4. If there was nothing, you wouldn't be here asking this question."
I'm done.
You didn't write that though, someone else did. Also, why do I get the feeling that the person who wrote it is Micah?
I know someone else did, hence the quotation marks. I'm just saying it sums everything up rather nicely.
Because it pretty much cancels that entire essay out.
I like the points, and Micah does seem to be in that...
Question, Jessica: Why can't the creator have a creator?
I wonder the same thing, why Jess?
I thought the person who wrote that was Jessica for a second. Then I read the second comment.
And how many people who actually regularly attend Ghazal's blog are athiests?
And I think I'll try and answerr those, even though I'm going to spoof up eventually.
1. The existance of dark matter is just an example. What if, for example, that person wrote gravity, or black holes? It is, of course, still a theory, but it's solid enough that people freely teach it without heasitation.
2. I guess it technically could, but then it'd be like one of those russain dolls, with another doll inside it and another inside that one. And that'd only work if each god above the other was stronger than the one below it.
3. No, it doesn't. But that does mean that religion can cause something to happen.
4. I was totally lost there.
Wait.
I said the Creator would need a creator. So what in the world are you guys asking me?
1. You're confusing me here, because you're basically agreeing.
2. Well, you see, that's the thing. God(if there is one) didn't just show up out of nowhere. And for anyone about to say "well neither did the universe!" I happen to believe in this theory I've read that the universe is basically a part of a series of universal "experiments," that is to say there are new universes created all the time, some fail and some don't.
3. Religion causes things to happen...well, that was a given. That doesn't make it true. Mr Burnett saying fish evaporate caused things to happen.
4. The person in the Q basically said that there's no proof that anything exists, and, well, that's just a fail.
3.
WTH happened with the extra 3?
Also, random complaint, where are my fellow agnostics/atheists?!?!?!
they left u with us >:D
Yes they did. Anyway, I think some of that was a little faulty (the questions, not your answers) but the person made some good points.
Dev and i would be Jess's fellow atheists.
i'm not going to argue over this bcs i would only flame those who would disagree and such, so Dev and i are gonna be out dirking some tea ;) adios
@Caulin you could at least leave Dev with me! :(
Poor Jess... You must feel outnumbered.
What? I feel outnumbered.
1. How? Isn't he trying to make the point that there are in fact, new things being discovered every day, so the proof for existance of God may be far off into the future?
2. But those experiments had to have a start. And we're sure as heck not God, so how would we know God hasn't always existed? Isn't it hypothetically possible that God could be outside bounds of time and space?
3. ...Umm, ignoring the fish thing, I'm trying to say that there ARE people who swear they've been changed because they've converted to some religion, and they do? But what is it that caused it? Why would religion change anything?
4. And then I guess that pretty much fails. I think that person does have good points, but could just word that better.
Bye.
I am outnumbered! I am the only nonreligious person here(though there are a lot of Enhanced atheists...as I realised today)
1. OH! I get it! I think what I meant to say is that we have proof for a lot of things.
2.Well then, explain to me how that happened. He can't just "show up." If he did, when did he? And no "timeless" answers. Time is continuous and not just a property of this dimension, the way I see it. He had to show up at some point.
3.Because religion provides a moral code which people(especially people who've just converted) adhere to. Mostly. You've got to remember that religion works both ways, it creates terrorists and extremists, as well as total saints. Neither are good, the way I see it.
4. I think we're done here.
Weird how that works...
1. Yeah, but so do we. I mean, your proof is subjective, and so is ours, so technically, we aren't really getting anywhere in this debate and should just learn to accept each other's decisions.
2. Well, it's possible that he showed up at the beginning of time, or he is simply an abstract concept, and could very well be time.
3. I can't disagree with that, but I think he means what Jameson said. A lot of people claim their lives have changed because of God, and I have to agree.
4. Yes, we can just forget about this one.
1. I agree mostly.
2. Define "beginning of time."
3. So? A lot of people claim their lives have changed due to LACK of god. I read once about a kid who believed in god and had the crappiest situation. Became atheist/agnostic(I forget which) and things got better.
4. OK, good.
I'm pretty sure I'm the only Christian here...
There are. It's sort of scary.
1. You guys confused me again.
2. Time can't be continuous. What happened before the Big Bang? And God showing up at the beginning of the Big Bang still doesn't answer how something came to exist from nothing.
3. Yay! Ghazal agrees! And those people would have never converted if there wasn't something appealing for them. I mean, for example, forbidding sex before marriage isn't quite appealing to many people. I've heard so many people say that religion is just a bunch of forbidding rules, and yet there are people converting every day.
Update:
2. Big Bang.
3.Why? And which religion?
1) To therefore prove that God exists, we have to allow ourselves time.
- That goes against the whole definition of "God". If there was an omnipotent, omnipresent and all powerful, supernatural, invisible, floating being, he/she/it would have the powers to prove to us that he/she/it exists. Science is not a living thing, and dark matter is not a living thing. Therefore it cannot prove itself into existence. We have to discover it, and to do that, obviously it will take years and years of research. God on the other hand is supposed to have all the awesome powers, and yet he/she/it still can't prove that he/she/it exists. What's up with that? We don't need to prove that God exists, God needs to prove to us.
2) BUT, that still does not answer the question, WHO started the whole movement.
- First of all, beginning the argument with the fact that you think someone or something pointed some magical fingers and "bang", the universe was created is foolish and retarded. If you start by saying, "how" was the universe created, we can start talking. And, no, we don't know yet, but we are trying to figure it out - LHC anyone? So on both sides, magical-invisible-dude believers and atheists, we don't have answers. However, it's better to have doubt and keep putting new theories to test rather than just blatantly believing something/someone created everything. o.O
3)The reasonable explanation than, is that the spiritual experience is a link of sorts to God. The closest example would be of a certain sixth sense, some invisible organ that is triggered.
- BEEP, wrong. Again, if God existed, what with all his insane cool powers and shit, why would it take such vague and weak connections for us to get close to him/her/it? The whole "standing on a mountain" argument - it's weak and retarded. Of course people would feel amazed when standing on top of a mountain. Durr. It has nothing to do with feeling "spiritual", it's called being "amazed" at the beauty of what you are seeing. Assuming that it's something spiritual and you are being linked to God is naive and downright moronic. Hell, in that case, every-time someone smokes weed, they will instantly be connected to God's private line. Seriously. Lame.
4) Why is there something except for nothing?
- The two beakers argument lacked substance. We ARE alien, to this planet. And there is not "special" formula to create humans, which was concocted at the beginning of time, right after which magical dude said, "let there be light fo shizzle". No, it's called coincidence. It's purely by chance that we are here, in this form, and in this time. And there is nothing special about us. You do not need a "correct" balance of elements to create us - this is because there is no "correct" balance. We weren't "created" either. We evolved.
I'm sorry but this dude, all of his arguments are extremely weak. =[
Post a Comment