So atheists need proof? What proof to you have regarding....?

Question

the origin of the universe. The big bang theory is one that aethists most gravitate towards. If this is your theory, then where did the original object (cell, nucleus, atom, proton, whatever) come from? If "matter" is your proof source, where did the orignal "matter" come from?

Answer 1

The way I see it, neither God nor the physical universe simply materialized out of nothing. Conceding the possibility of God means one of three things:

1. God has always existed and is the creator of the universe
2. The physical universe has always existed but God is imaginary
3. Both God and the physical universe has always existed

As difficult as it is to imagine an eternal ANYTHING, imagining two of them is more difficult. We know and can prove the physical universe exists . . . but we don't know nor can we prove that God exists. Options 1 and 3 are more complex than option 2 because we would need to explain God as well as the physical universe -- we would have two mysteries instead of one. Injecting God into the question unnecessarily complicates it: particularly when there's no evidence for him in the first place. None of this explains where ANYTHING came from; that question is not answerable (yet).

Now, consider that, fading back into prehistory, mankind, no matter where it established itself, has created countless gods. This is an indisputable fact, so we KNOW that man creates gods and that he does so prolifically and with ease. Next, consider the opposite, that a creator God created man. There is no direct evidence of ANY kind for this proposition. Modern man has more reasonable and logical explanations for our existence and they don't include God. We've proven evolution is a fact but haven't yet proven abiogenesis. However, there's mounting evidence pointing to abiogenesis as the electro-chemical origin of life on earth. Contrast this to the evidence for the existence of God, which, after thousands of years, still stands at zero.

This raises the problem of the supernatural. Man was never able to explain the natural world, so he invented the supernatural world to provide answers that were otherwise beyond his grasp. These answers evolved into self-reinforcing systems called “religions”. Nobody disputes the power of the human imagination: it has filled the void for us as long as we’ve existed. Religions held us together and got us through dark and treacherous times. But we don’t need them any more. The purpose they served has evaporated – at least for many of us.

Human knowledge and understanding has grown from nothing to its current state. We may be a long way from knowing everything but we’ve made enough progress to abandon superstitious beliefs in the supernatural. We’re on the verge of unifying the laws of the physical universe. We’ve decoded the human genome; cloned various animals; put man on the moon, rovers on Mars and sent probes throughout the solar system and beyond. Knowledge is pushing imagination out of the void at an exponential rate.

If there is a God, who says he needs or wants to be worshiped? If he did, wouldn’t there only be one religion . . . and wouldn’t that religion be pure and incorruptible? The world has seen enough of religion to know something has to be amiss. Just turn on the news for crying out loud! Our world’s religions are not the creation of any God.

Answer 2

Here goes as a christian who believes in big bang theory.

Modern theory does not state that the universe did not exist before the big bang. That is only what brought about the universe in its present form. Before the big bang, if string theory is correct, the universe existed in 21 dimmensions in perfect symetry, but the symetry broke and the big bang happened. Nothing is availabe to describe how matter is created, as the Law of Conservation says that matter cannot be created or destroyed.

Answer 3

what the **** are you talking about? before you start challenging theories about the universe and facts about matter, make sure you know what you're talking about. and by the way, ALL MATTER IS ORIGINAL MATTER. nobody knows for sure where it came from. these "objects" you are talking about were discovered by scientests who base their knowledge on research and facts not scriptures written 2000 years ago, that are backed up by nothing.

Where do you get the idea that the world was created in 7 days from? a story in a book that wasnt ment to be taken literally? seriously, I am sick of you type of christians that keep asking questions on yahoo answers opposing science.

Most christians now take science as fact, it is just you nutcases that annoys me. I am a christian.

Answer 4

The so-called "Big Bang Theory" is a description of the origin and early history of the Universe. It makes no attempt to say "why" this phenomenon occurred.

I don't know why there's a Universe with us in it, I just don't see why I should fill that knowledge void with a dubious tale about some god doing it.

Answer 5

The problem with the god hypothesis is that it cannot explain the origin of complexity. Presupposing a prior greater complexity only makes a bigger problem or leads to infinite regression.

Personally I believe reality is ultimately mathematics (necessary logical truth) . It only looks like space and time because we see so little of it. Nothing is ever really created. The key here is a powerful selection effect (our existence ) which selects the portion of reality we find ourselves in. Only in very interesting portions (ones that appear as rapidly expanding space-time) of this vast infinite reality could we evolve.

Our understanding of reality is layered. You see the world in terms of large physical objects. But you are aware that those are illusions made up of atoms, and atoms in turn are made of smaller particles. Many believe that these so called "fundamental" particles are not fundamental but are built on a layer of mathematical objects called strings. My belief is that all reality including space-time itself is built upon mathematics and mathematics is what is truly fundamental.

The reason why we see top layers instead of lower layers is due to our inability to see all of the the details in the lower layers.

The reasons for my belief are way too involved to cover here so I will just post a link to something simple enough that you might understand it. I fear my actual reasons are likely to be well beyond your comprehension unless you have a very advanced graduate physics background.

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0704/0704.0646v1.pdf

As mathematics ( necessary logical truth ) is fundamental and necessary it is not created. Existence simply equals necessary truth. Mathematics "just is" because it is necessary and tautologically simple ( Zero complexity ). But Mathematics does not create reality. Mathematics is reality.

The problem with the design hypothesis is your god needs to be more complex and hence more unlikely than the reality you are attempting to explain. Saying your god just is, still leaves a much bigger question than you had to begin with.

As most people are aware total mass/energy are thought to be conserved.

However most people do not know Gravitational potential energy is negative.

Rapid inflation results in large amounts of both normal mass/energy and gravitational potential energy which are thought to exactly balance each other.

The mass/energy you observe today formed in the first few milliseconds after the big bang as a direct result of the extremely rapid inflation which produces normal energy balanced with gravitational potential energy summing up to zero.

Answer 6

Oh please. Big Bang, Big Smang.

Everyone knows that the world came from the giant planet-making machine in the galaxy of Sputulon. I mean, look around at all the things on Earth! Cells, life, intelligence...it's so obvious. Humans could never have done it, and we can't explain every last detail about where it came from...so the explanation is clear. Planet-making machine, Sputulon, etc.

Case closed.

Answer 7

'In a courtroom of regulation, if 2 or greater say they witness something, then all human beings and his cousin accepts it as genuine' in no way is that genuine. 'although, while it is composed of the Bible and God, without warning that's not solid sufficient' human beings even have very own info of Vishnu, are there 2 Gods? till one god gets greater beneficial info than the others, that is existence want to anticipate that each and one and all or none exist. 'have only have been given off the telephone with my perfect chum and lawyer and that i've got regularly occurring a $50,000 reward ' mendacity for Jesus remains mendacity. 'deliver me info effective that God does not exist' that is logically impossible to teach a unfavorable. 'It won't be able to contain any theories in view that they are not shown as fact' learn what a scientific concept is, then attempt lower back. in basic terms severe replies desire be made here. I watch for your info that God/Odin/Vishnu/Zeus/Ra is fictitious.

Answer 8

You know, quite frankly, I don't care how the heck
we got here. We already have proof that man as
well as animal has evolved over time. We see how
plants have evolved in our own lifetimes. Things adapt
to nature. It's not rocket science.

We know we are here, we know we
get but one life to live and so I'm living mine well.

You are free to spend your entire life trying to force
others to believe you are going to float on a cloud
when all is said and done. Feel free to argue your
life away insisting a magic dude poofed everything you
now know as life.

As for me, I'm just living what we have.
You might give it a try, too.

Answer 9

I have no idea. I don't need the big bang or evolution to be an atheist. I just don't believe the bible or any other religious doctrine. Just because we don't know the origin of life and the universe does not make it supernatural.

Answer 10

So what you are saying is that we should just believe in this god because we just should do that?
Sorry I do not accept that.

First, it is clear that you have no understanding of science let alone understand something called observation and scientific research.

So perhaps it is best for you to read with an open mind a science book, some how I do not think that it would be possible with you.