Atheists, can you prove this site wrong?

Question

http://www.proofgodexists.org/anthropic_principle.htm

A few of you are making complaints because this is where you fall short - proof laid before you that the entire universe was created by a deity just drives you insane - simply because you can't stand the truth.

Skaggy - There's no frickin place to write a response, see, evolutionists just make up a bunch of technobabble to hide their uncertainity, for fear that they may be proved wrong by the millions of very intelligent Christians. Albert Einstein, for example, was Jewish, and clearly understood the laws of the universe better than any evolutionist could ever do.

The UnPope - Keyword: Analogies Game is used as an example, and guess what? Game boards were made by manufacturers, the designer. The universe is quite like it.

desdinova - Atheists are lazy. Christians work hard and diligently because it says to do so in the Bible, which is why the world needs more nice, caring Christians in the work force.

Indeed I have used prayer and its worked every time. Sometimes God may choose to say No, Yes, or a Not now, but later.

My Questions is, when God reveals himself, will it be too late for Atheists to change their mind so they can go to heaven?

Answer 1

i checked the website and i can not find any inconsistency. i put my signature and seal on it.

Answer 2

There are a few assumptions built into the article.

The first is: the big bang happened and that is how the universe got here. (eg a stronger nuclear force can only be shown to prevent the formation of atoms by assuming the current model of how atoms form)

The second is a conflation of the universe, or the purpose of the universe, with God. God = Nature and Nature = God. This is rather an argument IN FAVOUR of a naturalistic description of how life on earth came to be how it is: ie it supports evolution (by God nature) and argues AGAINST creation by intervention.

Now the conflation of God = Nature brings you to Einstein's religion. We can use the term "God", but what this means is limited. It does not establish:
a. A source of ethics
b. An afterlife
c. An entity worthy of praise
d. A personal God
e. An interventionist God
f. That any of the Holy Books of the world have anything to do with this God.

Furthermore to mix this use of "God" (the traditional) with the article's (the deist) in the way you have is fundamentally dishonest. It akin to me promising an American child a trip to the "football" when I mean soccer and yet I know he thinks I mean gridiron.

Answer 3

It supposes that you can just change your belief, which is a fallacy.

Consider this statement: "A few words of warning; you must be willing to commit to allowing this Presence to change you into the Being He wants you to be. If you perform it half heartedly, or with no real intention of changing, you will get nowhere. Not everyone is up to performing this experiment, Are you?"

This statement is impossible for the atheist. An atheist cannot commit himself to what he feels is patently false, just like a Christian is incapable of committing himself to open himself up to Allah or Vishnu.

It's nice to make assumptions that people can drop everything and believe what you believe, but that simply does not happen. People "change" beliefs because they are inclined toward that belief to begin with. You don't just flip it like a switch.

And then there's the issue that in a world of near-infinite combinations, there is bound to be a combination that generates what we see around us. When you consider the number of combinations that did not produce life, this combination is not so astounding after all.

Answer 4

There is no proof that God exists or doesn't exist. Until it has been PROVEN we can only have beliefs. If God came down and did some weird things, Atheists would believe because then they would KNOW. Until that day comes all we can do is have our own personal beliefs and respect the individuals for the reasons which they live for.

Answer 5

Well odds of something not being true doesn't translate into something else WITH NO EVIDENCE is right. So their entire case is moot.

But if M Theory is correct then there are an infinite number of universes. So it doesn't matter how unlikely something is, its still going to happen.

There really isn't any need to argue against the delusional substance of it because it doesn't matter anyhow.

Answer 6

In truth, there aren't as many as 100 conditions; its more like 10.
Either way, those conditions weren't free to change in the first place, just like how the ratio of a circle's diameter to its circumference is 3.14; it can't be changed, and it's always been like that.

Answer 7

In the middle of a lot of other bullshit, the site says

"Survival of the fittest also favors One who doesn't do too much for His children. ".

Bzzt. Cluelessness abounds.

Whoever cut and pasted that site together doesn't know much about, well, anything at all. I wouldn't tie my reputation to that kind of crap if I were you.

Answer 8

I stopped reading at "anthropic principle" as I am not interested in educating the terminally stupid. I bet the next thing they come up with has something to do with their misunderstanding the second law of thermodynamics.

Answer 9

So what makes you think 'God' did all that? We've got something for that, it's called evolution.

Question time! Were did God come from?
Then, answer at least 5 of these. http://godisimaginary.com/

Answer 10

You are the one saying that this is a real fact. You must prove it. The same with the existence of god. You must prove it.


Well?

Answer 11

Total crap!

In the end, you're going to be lured to an experiment - prayer!

~barf~