Re-asking this question to atheists for more answers. Anyone who wants the other answers please see other ques

Question

You cant prove love exsists except that you feel it. You cant prove hate exsists except that you feel it. You cant prove time exsists except that you feel it. You cant prove pain exsists except that you feel it. God is something that cant be proven by sight (to most anyway), but by how you feel. To get even deeper. The human body itself is mechanical. Anything that runs in a mechanical fashion was created by an intelligent design. The question is then, what was the intelligent designer?? Or who?? Did it just come out of nothing?? That big explosion?? What caused the big explosion quote unquote?? If there was nothing there to cause it, how can it be caused?? There must have been something and i want to know what atheists think that something was. Or does the answer "It just happened work for you?? Its not to be swamry or condecending, I can accept that. Please only serious answers, leave the believer bashing out, I want serious information please.

Additional Details

22 minutes ago
BTW, this is NOT a conversion question. Im not trying to sway opinions. Im trying to get insight and information, so please only REAL answers.

20 minutes ago
Ok then to all those gazoos out there, show me pain, love, or any of the other concepts I've mentioned as a tangible, and I'll turn atheist myself!! Especially if seeing is believing. I want a handful of pain. Not looking at brainwaves or mechanical pulses. I want to see pain, pure and simple. (i know i just set myself up for a joke...)

3 minutes ago
Kudos to deke for having one of the more "mature" answers. I feel the same way because some people say they cant feel love or pain etc. But most of our rules, laws and facts are based on uniformity, consistancy, and majority rule. Even if they are not Christian, a majority of the population of this planet feel something that is greater than us in our universe. If nthing else, can majority rule be the proof of at least A "God"?? We all agree that the sky is blue because we all agree that the word blue is an appropriate word for the color to describe it. But if i went around saying that the sky is blafnork, you'd look at me like an idiot. In THAT respect, I can see an atheists point of view. There is no proof that the sky is blue except that we all agree to call it "blue" (and i mean the color for all you layman scientists, not the reflection of water etc.) Shouldnt that be enough to make God real?? Just coming in from different sides is all...

0 seconds ago
What we see are brain waves and senapses CAUSED by pain. I said i want to see PAIN not a RESULT of pain. Thats like saying because you see marriages there has to be love. Come on yall, do better than that...

Please only real answers. If you came in here to get mad, just dont answer. Im looking for an intelligent comparison, not a judgement on what i believe. I am content either way in way you believe. Its like asking if you like pepperoni or sausage on your pizza. But i dont judge you if you like pepperoni. I dont want to hear how much you hate God, i wanna hear why your life is contented without Him. Think of it as IM trying to convert myself to an atheist and your trying to convince me WITHOUT making me feel like your bashing my skull in.

I didnt say majority rule made it right, i said it made it ACCEPTED. But i like your answers, very insightful...

Answer 1

OK I will try to tackle this one example at a time.

Love, it is an emotion, we can feel it, but we can also see the results of love, through selfless acts and emotional displays. All humans experience love in similar ways, through family, friends etc...

Hate, once again it is an emotion, we can feel it and can also see the results of hate, where people are killed, imprisoned and ridiculed as a result. All humans experience hate in similar ways through enemies, perceived wrongs, racism etc...

Time, it is a progression of physical occurrences. We can see time. The sun moves across the sky we call it a day, that is time. People age, we see it happening, that is time. We all experience time in a similar fashion, each human understands the concept of a day because of the movement of the sun.

God, behaves as many emotions, some people 'feel' him as a loving being who envelops them in safety and caring. Others 'feel' him as a vengeful being, who wants them to lay down the Law on non believers. Others feel as though he is an all powerful being with no interest or emotions in the human race. Others don't feel him at all. There are not standard reactions/feelings when it comes to God, it varies depending on teaching. This is not true for Love and Hate, children are sometimes taught not to hate, but the emotion can appear when a wrong occurs naturally. The concept of God is different, people are taught about God, and will 'feel' he is a certain way depending on those teachings. Muslims and born again Christians, have completely different 'feelings' about God, based on teaching.

The results of the God emotion can be seen, but vary greatly depending on the teaching. In many cases though, they tend to be detrimental to society, in the form of religious oppression, war, conquest and stifling of science and understanding. Because these results vary with teaching, they really aren't a result of God, they are a result of humans belief in God. Therefor if someone helps an old lady because they think Jesus would do it. It isn't a result of God, it is a result of their understanding of God. The same applies to someone who flies a plane into a building, it is a result of their understanding of God. Therefore God isn't responsible for either.

Many religious people like to point to nature as proof of God, unfortunately this doesn't work either, because there are too many scientific discoveries that are starting to teach us about the origins of life that point to a secular beginning, granted we don't have that information yet, but we also didn't know about gravity until recently in human history, and if we relied on religious beliefs, we never would have discovered it. The same applies to most scientific findings, religion and religious people tend to fight against human understanding.

The fact that a majority of the world believes in some concept of a God is not proof for God. There was a time when a majority of the world believed that the world was flat, and that black people were inferior to whites. These 'understandings' are now obviously false. The fact that a bushman in New Guinea doesn't realize that the earth is rotating and thinks that the Sun rotates around the earth, doesn't make it fact. Truthfully, human understanding of God is something that has been handed down for thousands of years through oral stories, texts and traditions. The all come from a time when mankind did not have the ability to understand basic scientific principals.

We don't rely on ancient Jewish teachings to build houses, treat disease, create computers, cars, airplanes etc... We also don't rely on ancient Jewish teachings for our current morality in society, despite what we are told. One honest read of exodus, Leviticus and Deuteronomy shows how much mankind has progressed from those days. We don't stone prostitutes, sacrifice sheep or force menstruating women to stay home any longer.

There are many however who are still holding on to the concept of God through tradition and emotion. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, until it starts to impede progress, both scientifically and socially. Christians will say that it doesn't but a realistic view of Christianity through the past 2000 years will show a consistent theme of both social and scientific stunting.

Religious people that attempt to position God as an unseen reality have to ignore the fact that he must not care about what form humans place him in. Why else would so many religions exist. God clearly wouldn't be concerned with how mankind worships him and doesn't have any constant rules for them to follow, because there are so many different interpretations of God. If He did care, why allow so many people to be deceived? If he doesn't care, why allow so many of his followers to fight over doctrine and understanding. Scientists will fight, verbally over disagreements and understandings, but there have never been groups of scientists razing villages in the name of theory. There have never been groups of scientists who picket churches and yell obscenities at members because of their lack of scientific understanding. Christians, however have done this throughout their history. This leads me to the conclusion that the results of having an understanding of God can create violence and definitely isn't good for society.

If God exists, science will one day, prove it. Until then, and unless God tangibly appears, there is only one reasonable understanding of God. He is tradition, emotion and an understanding of the unknown that was created thousands of years ago. That is all.

Answer 2

Then how do you explain the millions of other people who claim to "feel" a DIFFERENT god? Right now there are over a billion people on this planet who agree with everything you just said, but they worship the God of Islam, not the God of Christianity. And the millions of people following some of those Asian religions and belief systems would probably claim to experience and "feel" tons of things that totally go against the Bible. Who's right? If there's something there to be "felt", why are there thousands and thousands and thousands of different (and conflicting) interpretations?

And Richard Dawkins said this better than I'm going to, but the Big Bang makes more sense than the God explanation because the Big Bang is a simple beginning, and simple beginnings are a lot easier to accept than complex beginnings. What creationism essentially says is that the most advanced, complex, intelligent being in the history of the universe was ALREADY THERE at the beginning of time. One moment, there was absolutely nothing; the next moment, infinitely complex intelligence. How does that make sense? The Big Bang may be hard to accept because you naturally always want to know what came before, but it's a lot easier to accept than the idea of a supreme creator suddenly appearing.

Answer 3

And I'll re-answer, since apparently you're too immature and willfully ignorant to address the answers already given to you.

I don't "feel" any of the things you listed above... you listed abstract concepts that have some correlation to tangible things. All of those things can be proven to exist in some way.

Your god cannot unless you were to redefine the word "God" into nothing more than an abstract concept.... and in doing that, you've proven your god to be worthless.

"Anything that runs in a mechanical fashion was created by an intelligent design. "
False. Just because I have a machine, doesn't mean it works. Intelligent design? Please. Intelligent design is a farce and is the laughingstock of the scientific community. Do a little research before bringing up arguments that have been refuted a million times over.

You say that God is the "intelligent designer".... so who created God? You said it yourself... "If there was nothing there to cause it, how can it be caused?? "
Are you going to turn on your own argument and say that your god is uncaused? You can't possibly expect me to believe that, can you?

"If nthing else, can majority rule be the proof of at least A "God"?? "
No. Argumentum ad Populum.
1. Many people believe X.
2. Therefore, X is true.
False... in 1, X could be false.

Answer 4

This reminds me of a situation that occurred about a year ago in the factory where I'm employed... Our factory processes many, many truckloads of lumber each day. The primary machine for doing this is an automated saw system that uses a visual scanner to create a detailed 3D image of each piece of wood that is then sent to a computer that uses neural network algorithms to compute the most cost/waste effective cutting solution for that individual piece of wood. As time went on, the VP of manufacturing kept unrelenting pressure on the floor engineer for more and more throughput, higher yields, and increased cutting accuracy. Eventually, the VP began to question the integrity and qualifications of the engineer because the cuts were not accurate enough. Said VP felt sure the engineer was either holding out on him (he was somewhat paranoid) or totally incompetent. One day, the engineer, the guy who knew the machine the best, left the company for other employment and operation of the machine went to almost total crap. It almost shut down the entire factory on several occasions. The way the VP managed this entire situation greatly contributed to the loss of his 6-figure salary and his job of 24 years. Moral: The VP really had a good thing, but didn't realize it until the person, whom he disrespected and constantly berated, left the company for greener pastures. In other words, "proof" of the high competency of the floor engineer was in front of the VP's face the whole time. He just refused, because of his own biases and personal resentments, to open his eyes and see. By the time he got his proof, it was already too late for him.

Answer 5

No one said an intelligent designer had to be a deity of some sort. It could have been some aliens, screwing with our development. That could explain the "missing link" thing.

And many people cannot feel God. Many people feel the touch of their gods, which may have nothing to do with your "God." I would be willing to agree that there is some sort of supernatural being, but I would not go so far as to say what it is or what it wants. I wouldn't even say that it necessarily cares what we do, or even likes humans, or if it can do anything but observe us.

But then again, I'm a pagan animist/spiritual agnostic. Not really an atheist. I'm willing to believe there is something out there, but until you show me proof, I will argue against it.

Answer 6

First off, you are comparing all feelings (with the exception of time that is not felt but seen by the way) with a being that is supposedly, by religious standards, a real living spiritual being (which has never been proven either). I, being alive, am not felt emotionally but seen physically. My hand can also be felt when touched. Atheists know the truth as much as people of religion do. That means no one really knows how we came about. There is more than just a scientific explanation, however, it cannot be explained by a ficticious being either. There is evidence somewhere but we spend too much time trying to be 'right' than we are looking for answers. Some of us either except what's fed to us or are just too damned lazy to search.

Answer 7

In physical cosmology, the Big Bang is the scientific theory that the universe emerged from a tremendously dense and hot state about 13.7 billion years ago. The theory is based on the observations indicating the expansion of space in accord with the Robertson-Walker model of general relativity, as indicated by the Hubble redshift of distant galaxies taken together with the cosmological principle.

Extrapolated into the past, these observations show that the universe has expanded from a state in which all the matter and energy in the universe was at an immense temperature and density. Physicists do not widely agree on what happened before this, although general relativity predicts a gravitational singularity.

The term Big Bang is used both in a narrow sense to refer to a point in time when the observed expansion of the universe (Hubble's law) began — calculated to be 13.7 billion (1.37 × 1010) years ago (± 2%) — and in a more general sense to refer to the prevailing cosmological paradigm explaining the origin and expansion of the universe, as well as the composition of primordial matter through nucleosynthesis as predicted by the Alpher-Bethe-Gamow theory.

From this model, George Gamow was able to predict in 1948 the existence of cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB).The CMB was discovered in 1964 and corroborated the Big Bang theory, giving it more credence over its chief rival, the steady state theory

Answer 8

" I said i want to see PAIN not a RESULT of pain. " Since people respond differently to pain stressors, perhaps it is more believable to posit that the stressors themselves only cause a pain response if they are allowed by that being to do so. This would be a better argument for the illusory nature of suffering and would argue more for the Buddhist world view.

Just the same, perhaps the "God" idea is Man pulling the wool over his own eyes and creating another illusion for himself. Just as the cause of pain and suffering may be elusive to the seeker, so the idea of God would only yield itself to those who let it in as a concept. Just as the cause of pain can't be measured (only the response), so God cannot be measured (only Man's response to what he perceives as God.)

This is one reason why I have always maintained more of an agnostic stance on the matter. There is no way to prove or disprove the existence of God. Of course, you could expand this theoretically to the existence of everything and say "there is no spoon," but there's really no point to doing that unless you do not wish to interact with the world that most of us agree upon. I am all for an individual perspective, and I wouldn't deny anyone's right to see reality as he or she wishes.

Answer 9

If you were looking for an intelligent answer you could at least post an intelligent question.

1) Love, hate, pain are all emotions and are based on chemical reactions within our bodies. You just said yourself that the body is a machine.

2) Time can be observed. Its effects can be witness and not just "felt".

3) "Anything that is mechanical requires a designer" - faulty logic. This is the main presumption (or at least false statement) of Intelligent Design and is the main reason it is easily discounted as pseudo-science.

The fact that you're posting this twice just proves your ignorance to the reality here.

Answer 10

You are wrong. First, you can see love, in the way you are treated and in the way you treat others. Second, you can see hate, just watch the news. And third, you can't see god. If you talk about the trees, water, animals...... etc. that can be contributed to nature and science. God, the bible and religion are myths made up to keep the savages in line. How can one believe there is a being somewhere that is controlling our lives and doing a bad job at that. If God could split the water for Moses, why can't he strike down a pedophile before he ruins a child's life? The child is an innocent and deserves to be saved.

Answer 11

So what you're saying is that because emotion itself can't be experienced through our senses that it doesn't exist? Our emotions can be seen through physical embodiments which trigger chemical (not just electrical) responses in the brain. It may not be the answer you want, but those responses are tangible and can be measured. That is the only proof I need.