Atheists: This might get asked alot but?

Question

It amazes me that you do not know how the universe began but think that the concept of a god(s) is insane.

I understand how you do not want to believe in certain G(g)od(s) but is the idea of a supreme being really that far fecthed?

I guess that you could equally say that since we do not know it amazes you that we put a G(g)od(s) there, but that is not the answer that i want please

It does explain the purpose and the meaning behind why life is here and tells us how... it does complicate things but i just am amazed that you tell Christians, and other religious groups that they are wrong when none have the answer....

and the same goes for us

The Big Bang is more credible?

Last time i read my textbook, the idea that it gave me and the teacher that was nothing the size of the period at the end of the sentence exploded. I am not sure if that is much more credible.

I can tell by the answers that i am not getting the point across.... better luck next time

Answer 1

Why does that amaze you?

Adding a "god" to the equation explains nothing - it only makes it harder to explain.

Let's see if this helps you to understand. You currently believe that God created the universe. Let's suppose I said "God couldn't do that, because He's not a physical being. He must have created a special physical 'creation god' to do it for him".

Does that really sound like it helps to explain the existence of the universe? Doesn't it sound like it just complicates matters unnecessarily? Well, so does the first "god", and for the same reason.
=====================
"It does explain the purpose and the meaning behind why life is here and tells us how..."

No, it doesn't. I know that believers like to say that, and that you all nod in agreement when you hear it, but it's simply false. "God" doesn't explain anything at all.

And yes, the big bang is obviously more credible. The only reason it seems otherwise to you is because you're accepting the "god" non-explanation instead of insisting on a real explanation. Once you explain where god came from - if you ever bother trying - you'll see how much more credible the big bang is, as I've illustrated above.

Your point was perfectly clear. It's not that we didn't understand you, it's that you're not thinking clearly about the problem. As someone else pointed out, your assumption that a "god" created the universe is getting in the way of your thinking about how the universe was created.

Answer 2

I know I'm not exactly an Atheist (I'm Agnostic which means I don't claim that there IS no god, I just don't KNOW if a god exists).

But as far as the Big Bang/Evolution versus Creationism? Well, Creationism is extremely far fetched with next to no facts to support it,whereas scientists have facts to back up evolution and The Big Bang. I don't profess to know how the world began but the point is, we know for a fact that the world did not begin 6,000 years ago. Glacier layers prove that the world is far, far, far older than that. Carbon dating has found minerals that are millions of years old. So the Big Bang is the best guess we have.

The point is, if god can be proven, if the bible could be proven correct, I'd have no problem believing it. But it's ridiculous. Who would believe man was created out of clay and his rib was used to make a woman and a talking snake tempted the woman to eat an APPLE which caused all of the sin in the world? For pete's sake, that's ridiculous that evil and sin came about that easily. It's not just Adam and Eve, it's everything from people living several hundred years to talking donkeys, a sea parting, cramming hundreds of thousands of animals onto a boat (including the ones from the arctic circle and Australia and etc.) and a Tower creating all the languages of the world? Come on, give me a break. That's insulting someone's intelligence if you ask them to believe that.

I don't think god (if he/she/it) exists is so egotistical to think that we MUST belong to a certain religion and that we MUST worship him or we'll be burnt up in hell forever. If that's true, then I'm better than God because I would never EVER do that to my children not matter HOW bad they were.

Answer 3

Given a lack of evidence, it is not surprising to say we don't know how the universe began.

Given a lack of evidence, it doesn't make sense to say a supreme being did it.

Lack of knowledge doesn't demonstrate the existence of any gods. So, to say that something exists based on a lack of evidence is far fetched.

The Big Bang is more credible because it explains existing observation. It even predicted further observation we should see, if true, and we did see it. We have mapped out the background radiation in the universe and it does match what we would expect from a Big Bang.

On the other hand, we still have no evidence that any god did it. We do have much evidence that all gods are man-made. We can look to the history of each religion for that.

Answer 4

You're getting your point across, but people aren't going to accept a God without evidence. We have gathered information and, for a time, at least, the Big Bang has been the best explanation for that information. This does not mean it is true.

Furthermore, most of us don't know enough about physics and so on to truly discuss things like the Big Bang. I have heard that something can actually come from nothing, though I don't know much about this, either. Quantum physics and so on, I guess... and these do not make any "logical" sense to us. Science is constantly learning more and developing real conclusions, so I look to that for answers much of the time.

Answer 5

I really just don't believe in magic...

bible... whatever the jews think (there the same to me except christians are extremely stupid) and the koran...

I just know there not true because they both say they are the word of god and they both include magic and fairy tales that would only seem posible at the time they were written. Obviously now we have so much more knowlegde and we can conclude that evolution does infact exist and therefore, we can exclude the bible and jewey belief and koran and hindu and bhudism...

whatever.

Im sure something had to spark the universe but it sure wasn't jesus and his dad and satan in the mix

and im sure if there was something I wouldn't be afraid of it, so i wouldn't warship it because when things die they die. they dont end up anywhere. whatever sparked it couldn't be alive, it would be too complex and then we would need more origins for that... so realy the best explanation is Occam's Razor, i mean what makes more sense, the universe is eternity or an incredibely complex god with magic sparked a universe with eternity.

obviously you must HAVE to agree with us that the universe was all at one point at some time, because of the messuring and all that we can do with the whole revolving around the sun and that stuff, and evolution for sure you must believe because of the outstanding amount of evidence present. I mean come on... what more do you want????

listen. We KNOW that evolution exists. we KNOW how the earth began and we KNOW that the universe was all at one point at one place in tiny matter. we can PREDICT that a massive explosion had created all of this and you know what... whatever. belive in jesus or whatever.. .just dont draft me into your wars.

Answer 6

I believe you.
Scientists use the big bang model because there is quite a bit of evidence, which can be independently repeated and verified by other scientists, that suggest that's what happened.
But deeper, it seems you are asking an impossible question: What happened at the *instant* before the big bang? Do I have that right?
I'm not a cosmologist, but to my understanding, such a question doesn't make any sense. You are asking for a physical description of an event (for lack of a better word) that occurred before time or physical properties existed. Do you see the trouble with that?
Not that scientists aren't pushing those boundaries....but there may be some boundaries that simply cannot be pushed.

Answer 7

I have doubts in his existance, and if he DOES exist....I really don't think I have any interest in a supreme being to creates a group of creatures weaker than himself and commands that they must obey his rules or perish.
I think that is a tad egotistic and psychopathical. I have no interest in serving such a being.
If I die for that, then at least I died doing what I believed to be the right thing, and did not just blindly follow out of fear.
As for how the universe began...I dont know! I am here, I am happy, I will do my utmost to be a good person.
I don't believe in looking a gift horse in the mouth.

Answer 8

What do the two have in common?

A creator need not be a supreme being. A supreme being need not be a creator. Both of these concepts have come from various religions who believe in one, the other, or both. They are also logical possibilities you should consider.

Beyond that, why do you feel that lack of knowledge requires the creation of a god to explain it. Certainly primitive man created gods of storms and gods of the harvest, gods of the sun and gods of the moon, a whole pantheon of gods to explain what they could not. I would hope in the millennia since man first tried to understand, we would have become comfortable with not knowing, secure in the belief that things were knowable with no need for god's mysterious ways.

Answer 9

i'm no longer asserting all atheists are in this camp, yet there beneficial look the vocal ones who're actually beneficial they have been given it ideal. i do no longer think of that it particularly is plenty distinctive than the Christians who're the two as beneficial. The ailment is the comparable. this is that could desire to have a definite, nicely defined international. The atheists use words like "data" and "shown", which shows they do no longer understand plenty approximately technology, and the Christians ingredient to the Bible as though it have been basically distinctive from the different e book and written by capacity of God. i've got faith a number of it particularly is narcissism and a few of it particularly is protection. i think of a few human beings have faith that in the event that they do no longer come from a place of absoluteness they are going to be attacked and destroyed, and could then be compelled to accept as true with the attacker. If my view isn't appropriate then this is all incorrect. it particularly is the shielding area. Then there is the narcissistic area that proclaims I could desire to be ideal have been others are incorrect. i could desire to confirm. and that i'm no longer able to work out that merely because of the fact it particularly is sensible to me would not advise that the enitre universe could desire to work out it this form too. i'm no longer able to, or refuse to work out that i could have some issues incorrect. because of the fact to be incorrect capacity I 'm a foul guy or woman. 2 forms of folk in this international, those interior the understand and walk with the Gods, and the pathetic loosers(heathens or lost sheep interior the Christian international) who do merely no longer see the gentle or are not getting it. i think of the assaults the two come from the choose for narcissistic grant(choose for consistent validation), and probably there replaced into an opressive Christian guy or woman of their existence, who they're afraid to tell them what they think of or are lifeless, and that they displace the anger onto you.

Answer 10

The universe was condensed into one atom. when the pressure got high enough it exploded. it's called the big bang theory, simplified for creationists. As for abiogenesis, there was a lot of turbulence going around with Everything becoming bigger, and thus a germ was born. Even an evangelist should understand when I say "the rest is history."