Like ... Energy Poping
Out Of Know Where
Reproduced in <PRE>Formatted Text</PRE> to show exactly how we received it.
From: Dan To: Positive Atheism Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 Subject: PA-via_Positive_Atheism_Index
Hey, I read the some pages where you argued against the existence of God. Here are some very important fundamental questions which were not addressed. Like.... If there is no God than where did the universe come from?? now wait.... It may seem like a stupid question but think about it for a while. What actualy caused billions upon billions of atoms to exist in the first place??? to say that the univers was just always there would contradict the concept of time itself. There had to be a beginning because it is a mesured quantity and theoredicaly canot be infinate. Did this incredible cluster of matter and energy just suddenly appear? Yes, scientists say that matter can be created, but hold on a sec. Out of what?? nothing???? I think not. Out of energy. Then where does the energy come from? Nothing? hmmm energy poping out of know where, prepetual motion!... that would be the day! Or...... could it be some sort of external force we call God? Which leads us to.... If God created the universe, then who created God??? You must first examen who God is. To answer that let's look at some of God's characteristics as described in the Bible. He's Omnipresent. Omnipotent, the all seeing, the eternal. One verse even sais that to God, 1000 year's is like a day and a day is like 1000 years! All these characteristics describe properties contradictory to that which matter can posses. agreed? Therefor God has no time constraint like matter, which explains how he can be everywhere at the same TIME. It seems that the element of time is negligible when describing who God is. So to ask such a question involving time would be contradictory to who God is according to the bible. You know what this means. If our definition of a day is different than God's then the age of this earth may very well be as old as old as science says. especially considering biblicaly that the sun wasn't created untill after the first day! -*Conclusive question*- Can a universe just suddenly exitst??? In other words... How can God not exist? any comments or questions? I look forward to your reply..... If you don't have any, forward this to someone who does. Dan (Christian down to the core)
From: Positive Atheism Magazine
Subject: Re: PA-via_Positive_Atheism_Index
Date: Tuesday, September 21, 1999
You haven't read much of our site. This question is covered extensively in our Letters section and briefly in our FAQ.
You presuppose that the universe "came" from "somewhere"; the possibility exists that it has always been here. Since Einstein, the possibility has existed that time is not what we previously thought it was; since Schrödinger, causality is not what it appears -- to a brain that has spent 99 percent of its existence adapting to life on the African Savannah.
Also, if you require a creator to explain the existence of the universe, then you must be consistent and ask what caused the creator's existence. Can a god just suddenly "pope out of know where"? You ask what caused the universe's existence, and posit the existence of a god as your explanation. I now ask you what caused your god's existence? (Be sure to show your work.)
If you don't like my question, you might understand why I think your question is dishonest: they're both the same question. If you rightly ask yours, I rightly ask mine.
Stephen Hawking talks about the Big Bang being "boundariless" and explains that it is erroneous to think in terms of the universe having a "beginning."
This explanation is an improvement over earlier Big Bang models because it does not have the problem of seeming to contradict the First Law of Thermodynamics.
It also lacks the monumental problem of positing the existence of a creator who is more complex than the universe is, and more powerful than the universe is big. If the universe is big and complex enough to require an outside "cause" to explain its existence, then a creator would, all the more, require that its existence be explained. It is much less likely that something much more complex and powerful than the universe would exist, than it is that something as complex and powerful as the universe would exist.
Your "proof" of the existence of a creator is flimsy in that you flat-out deny the First Law of Thermodynamics and then show the dishonesty of placing that false opinion into the mouths of scientists. From your flawed "proof" of the existence of a creator, you jump to the Bible. Wait a minute! How did we get there? Even if you could prove that the universe was created (you can't), how does it follow that the Bible god did it? Every argument from design holds equally true for any and all god-claims. You cannot use the argument from design to prove the validity of one god-claim over another.
The only way you can even talk about creation is first to reveal a creator. If you can show that a creator exists, then we can talk about "creation"; otherwise, the universe exists and that's all we know right now.
Show us your god, and then we can talk.
Nevertheless, I cannot go to school for you. It is not my responsibility to teach science or English to you. If you want to live in your little delusion, that's fine with me. Please, though, leave the rest of us out of it.
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
From: Dan To: Positive Atheism Subject: Me again Date: Wednesday, September 22, 1999 Hi there, it's me again - the Christian to the core. You have some very good arguments but..... Did you really think about the concepts which I had proposed. You've seemed to have made assumptions of what I was saying before even thinking about it. Note: When I say "you" I'm speaking of atheists in general, not you specifically. My comments towards atheists are all derived from what I currently understand. and if I am wrong, than please correct me. I don't intend to put words in anyones mouth. I am not using the bible as "proof" for the existence of God or as a standard of truth but I am using it only to clarify an age old concept of God. I guess I should have been more clear. Ok let's do this one more time. Question - "WHAT CAUSED THE EXISTENCE OF THE UNIVERSE?" First of all to ask this question you must imply a beginning. I say there had to be a beginning because time is a measured quantity and practically can not be infinite. Was it simply there "Expanding and collapsing, Expanding and collapsing, Expanding and collapsing" an infinite number of times without a beginning? You quote Stephan Hawking as though he had the answer. Does it really pose an argument if it cannot be explained. OK fine, let's say it was always there. That completely dismisses the last question and leaves us with a whole new question. WHY DOES THE UNIVERSE EXIST? You can go on and on about how the universe expands and colapses and explain every law in which it abides by while getting absulutly nowhere. You've completly missed the question. WHY does the universe exist? Not HOW does the universe operate? Unless you can aswer that, let's stick with the first Question and asume that there was a cause for it's existance. you say - This whole thing just went "Bang!" without an external force. Can energy just appear out of nowhere? Does this not disobey the first law of thermodynamics? I say - It hase to be an omnipresent uncreated invisible God. you say - "I now ask you what caused your god's existence?" I say - The question "Where did God come from?" contradicts itself by changing the very concept of God which is understood as an uncreated omnipresant being; A concept with I didn't make up but as the Bible testifies has been around for thousands of years. A creator could not have a begining because sujesting a point in time of it's creation would make the creator a creation itself. Therefore to answer "Where did God come from?" you must change the deffinition of God. this would no longer describe a God at all but something which was created leading us back to square one. In otherwords the concept of an omnipresent uncreated and invisible God as it is defined in the bible must be the only logical explination. To say "well how come we can't see him, wouldn't he be biger than the univers if he created it." would imply that he is a detectable form of energy which exists in space and time as we know it. Again, wouldn't this make him a part of the creation, contradicting God's very definition and leading us back to the very first question. This is what it boils down to... logicaly Explain to me HOW a universe can create itself. If you can't do that, then explain WHY the universe exists. If eather one can be answered, then I will listen. Is there any way to tell me in plain english why my argument or at least my method of argument is invalid? (Don't wory I can take it) Perhapes you just don't see it the way I do. Dan (A Christian down to the core still in the learning process)
From: Positive Atheism
Subject: Re: Me again
Date: Thursday, September 23, 1999
No. I point out that Stephen Hawking has an explanation. Because he
has an explanation, this means that the option you give is not the only
one: there are other possibilities and we are not stuck with having to accept yours (as if having only one explanation forces us to believe that explanation). Before we can ask "Where did the
universe come from?" or "What caused the universe to exist?"
we must verify that the universe did, indeed, have a beginning and was,
in fact, caused.
The universe exists. That's all I know about that question.
I doubt the universe has a purpose for existing, because the universe
is not a sentient being.
You say that I say that, but I do not think that at all. I don't know
anybody who does.
How do you know it was a god?
How do you know the god was omnipresent? (How can a god be anything-present? Without matter there is no "where" for a god to be!)
How do you know the god was invisible? (How do you know if the god even exists if it is invisible?)
How can you tell? (Please show your work!)
If the question "Where did the universe come from?" is answered by saying "God" then the question "Where did God come from?" is a valid question. Thus, I ask it: Where did your creator come from? If you expect me to believe that the universe was created by a god, then I expect you to tell me who or what created your god?
Again: If the universe is so vast and complex that it couldn't simply
"pope out of know where" then the god that you say created the
universe must be that much more vast and complex than is the universe.
If the creator is that much more complex than the universe, then it is
that much more important for you to explain to me how the creator came
into existence. Should I believe that the creator just "poped out
of know where"? You tell me that I cannot believe this about the universe,
yet you seem to expect me to believe it about your god!
Yes. Your argument is based upon what is known as the "straw man" ploy. You describe your opposition's argument inaccurately in order to make our position sound very stupid (by stating that we believe things that we don't actually believe). In other words, you lie to us about what we do and do not believe. After this, you proceed to "knock down" the "straw man" that you have built up. You don't refute what we say, but instead you refute what you (falsely) claim we say. You refute your own (false) understanding of our position without ever describing our actualx position.
Another game you play is called the "false dilemma." With this, you present exactly two courses for the argument to take. Since one of these options is your false "straw man" representation of our position, it is only reasonable (according to the "false dilemma" ploy) to accept the other alternative -- your position.
I have yet to engage with a creationist who did not utilize these forms of falsehood in making his or her case for Christianity. This is the very reason I left the Christian church: I could not handle the fact that I had to lie in order to to defend the faith, and that I had to call other deliberate liars my "brothers" and "sisters." I could not reconcile this with what the man who supposedly said "I am the truth" is also alleged to have said: "By their fruits you shall know them." Truth then became more important to me than even Jesus; and I decided to follow truth wherever it may lead. I followed truth and it led me to atheism: I cannot tell you that a god exists without getting that filthy feeling that I have just told you a lie.
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
From: Dan To: Positive Atheism Subject: Re: Me again Date: Thursday, September 23, 1999 arrrrr! the older I get the more unanswered questions I encounter. Man this sucks!!. OK so we agree on one thing - "The universe exists" About the last thing you said,"I followed truth and it led me to atheism". Isn't that being a little unfair. Is truth comprised of what our minds are capable of precieving? (Yes I know.......I'm being Hypocritical but I guess ya gota make your mind up about something.) God is what I believe, for far more reasons than were discussed, and telling someone what I believe Is not a lie. Anyways, thanks for being patient with me. regards Dan (Still Christian to the core)
From: Positive Atheism
Subject: Re: Me again
Date: Thursday, September 23, 1999
These questions are invalid, because they are based upon false premises. If you want them answered, find somebody who is willing to lie to you.
Finally, I agree with you that I have nothing to say to whether or not you believe something. The only thing I can rightly speak to (and the only thing I'm really interested in when discussing something) is whether or not a claim is factual or falsehood. Right now, I have been given no reason to think that the claim "a god exists" is truthful.
"Positive Atheism" Magazine
Material by Cliff Walker (including unsigned editorial commentary) is copyright ©1995-2009 by Cliff Walker. Each submission is copyrighted by its writer, who retains control of the work except that by submitting it to Positive Atheism, permission has been granted to Positive Atheism to use the material or an edited version: (1) on the Positive Atheism web site; (2) in Positive Atheism Magazine; (3) in subsequent works controlled by Cliff Walker or Positive Atheism Magazine (including published or posted compilations). Excerpts not exceeding 500 words are allowed provided the proper copyright notice is affixed. Other use requires permission; Positive Atheism will work to protect the rights of all who submit their writings to us.