Question for atheists here;
The Big Bang, created time, matter and space.
>If something exists outside of time, it is eternal.
>If something exists outside of matter, it is immaterial.
>If something exists outside of space, it is omnipresent.
>The state of being Eternal + Immaterial + Omnipresent = Omnipotence.
>"Omnipotence", is the literal definition of God.
How do you reconcile these rudimentary principles of the Big Bang Theory with identifying as an “Atheist”?
Other urls found in this thread:
youtube.com
youtube.com
twitter.com
Shut the fuck up nerd.
None of those things are true
No.
Time is a measure of causality so nothing exists out of time
Those are all the literal definitions of the words, and the basic principles the Big Bang Theory demands you accept if you believe it to be the foundation of the universe.
>Time is a measure of causality so nothing exists out of time
Not according to M-Theory.
Even so, why was the singularity which spawned the Big Bang there to begin with?
But they aren't.
Eternal: lasting or existing forever; without end.
Immaterial: spiritual, rather than physical
Omnipresent: present everywhere at the same time
Omnipotence: the quality of having unlimited or very great power
God: the creator and ruler of the universe and source of all moral authority; the supreme being
None of the things you said were true
I thought m theory was an explanation of how matter and energy interacts along a timeline
Sorry in space and on a timeline
>if something is outside of time and space it is non-existent
FTFY
Yes. But as a theist you are assuming something beyond what is known must be sentient which is a pretty big assumption with no evidence. I do no assume that I am a 100% right because anything can be fallible, even the most logical claims backed by evidence. in b4 someone accuses me of being a lizard because I am a libertarian
You're phrasing the definitions slightly differently.
Part of it, yes. How to you explain the M-Branes?
A god is also defined as a sentientbeing with its own will, your definition is incomplete and wrong
I refuse to worship an omnipotent deity because if one exists, it is absurd and obscene and if it doesn't, why should I worship something that isn't real?
Science doesn't really factor into it for me but hey, that's just a personal opinion.
The BIg Bang Theory is falling apart, only hardliners are still pushing that bullshit theory
Then how did the Big Bang happen? as the matter required for it to occur would have to exist outside space and time
guys need to look up Nassim Haramein
if the universe is expanding, then what is contracting?
You can't anthropomorphize God.
>if one exists, it is absurd and obscene
How so?
Different dimensional space we can't perceive
Your mom's pussy last night m8
Nothing
How/Why do they exist?
If the thing you describe doesn't have its own sentience or will then its not a deity. Its just a thing that exists without any purpose or influence on anything and cannot be considered a god.
the big bang was just space time expanding, and matter by definition cannot exist outside of space.
matter space and time existed for a very short time and in an unfathomably small space before the big bang. the big bang was just the expansion of space-time
Once Stephen Hawking is dead, science will slowly walk away from the absurdities that the big bang theory pushes. If there was one counter productive theory in science, it was the big bang . If a scientist speaks against it they are academically crucified ,thanks in large part to the special needs wheelchair retard hawking
Look at the universe in its known entirety and everything that we know of existence and then tell me why it isn't.
Well there's no proof they do... They fill in mathematical inconsistencies we have no other explanation for and there is no why to the universe... it is
Who says it's not sentient?
If it's basically omnipotent, then it's almost certainly omniscient by implication.
Ethernal Inflation, Scarla Fields.
Next question...
Where did that space come from?
>inb4 it always existed
Why was it there? How could it have always been there?
You're dodging the question.
>If something exists outside of time, it is eternal.
nothing lives outside of time, time isn't a area it is the decay of matter
>If something exists outside of matter, it is immaterial.
>If something exists outside of space, it is omnipresent.
everything ever is space, if it isn't in space it doesn't exist
>>The state of being Eternal + Immaterial + Omnipresent = Omnipotence.
>>"Omnipotence", is the literal definition of God.
what do you even mean here, you are defiing a word, that isn't a rgument
Nothing was there ,it was devoid of anything at all
The 'Word' has always existed.
Explain
Then how did the singularity which sparked the big bang get there.
An omnipotent deity is absurd and obscene because it allows the universe to exist in its present state.
I thought that was obvious from my previous response but if you needed me to spell it out, here you go.
OK, well first you have some misconceptions of the "Big Bang". The BB theory was never supposed to explain what/who created our universe, it is merely an explanation of the STATE of the universe many billions of years ago, as we perceive "years". Therefore, belief in the BB is not a rejection of God, it's a rejection of the idea that the universe has always appeared and functioned as it does now.
The next major problem with your understanding of the BB, is that you suppose that the singularity state of the universe existed outside of space and time; that is incorrect. The universe IS space/time. The singularity did not exist outside the universe, it IS the universe. Therefore, God could be capable of creating massive points of energy (singularity-state universes), storing them in his pantry, and then just snapping his finger and making them expand at will. I am an agnostic, and don't prescribe to any faith that was written down for me to follow, but the idea that the Big Bang theory and religion are mutually exclusive is demonstrably wrong. You don't have to subscribe to an anti-scientific world view to believe in God.
I would also like to comment on this:
>If something exists outside of time, it is eternal.
>If something exists outside of matter, it is immaterial.
>If something exists outside of space, it is omnipresent.
I see what you're trying to get across, but your definitions are wrong. You have not presented a logical argument with these statements, because most that understand the gist of more advanced subatomic particle theories would never say that something which exists outside of matter is "immaterial". We have evidence to say that is not true, so that statement is just wordplay with no real meaning.
By that same token, it is also not a fact that something which exists outside of space is omnipresent, but merely an assumption. If there were multiple universes, each universe would live OUTSIDE our space/time but not able to interfere.
It hasn't spacetime as we know it was created at a finite point but not understanding where it comes from is one of the many mysteries of science the only way we get smarter is accepting we don't know everything
>An omnipotent deity is absurd and obscene because it allows the universe to exist in its present state.
So if God exists, you're passing judgement on God?
It was never there and always there
>why was it there?
that question is flawed because no one knows nor claims to know where space is. also where did the god come from?
>inb4 it always existed
why was it there how could it have always been there
>The Big Bang, created time, matter and space.
This has nothing to do with not believing in a god.
Back to with you.
>the universe is hard to understand and sometimes doesn't even fit our human notions of cause and effect
>therefore god
wtf i hate atheism now
The real question is, Who mad this god dude he is speaking of? Where did he come from
>inb4 always there
Yes. An omnipotent deity that allows the universe to exist in its present state does not deserve my worship.
but you can quantify God.
The gates at solomons temple were gold plated capacitors and the building functioned like a giant ark of the covennant, with the higher charged air giving the clerics euphoria and better psychical connection.
Reciting the greatest name of god, a 144 character ullulation based on kyballyonic numerology in the gates of Solomon temple, would instantly give a well meditated and spiritually pure Priest his ability to ascend to a Chrystal bodhi of light and be temporally present in the astral realm.
Failure to properly speak gods' name or be an unclean patron would make you spontaneously combust, being that you weren't capable to contain the immense amount of energy it requires to move all your molecules up an entire periodic elemental octave.
That's retarded.
>If something is outside of space, it's on all the space at the same time
Find a better explanation
thats the same explanation you would have for god, always existed unless he didn't
>also where did the god come from?
>why was it there how could it have always been there
If God required an explanation for how he came to be, he wouldn't be God. The singularity, however does.
You're moving goalposts. No one is claiming anything about where the singularity came from. BB theory doesn't suggest why it was there, it only suggests that the state of the universe was a singularity at one point. It doesn't seek to answer where the singularity came from.
I like this guy. not even arguing with the retard.
you contradict yourself here, in essence you believe god and the singularity to be the same thing or at least to have done the same thing , they both require a time before their existence to explain their presence
the best thing i've heard is this from Freeman Dyson
>Science and religion are two windows that people look through, trying to understand the big universe outside, trying to understand why we are here. The two windows give different views, but they look out at the same universe. Both views are one-sided, neither is complete. Both leave out essential features of the real world. And both are worthy of respect.
>Trouble arises when either science or religion claims universal jurisdiction, when either religious or scientific dogma claims to be infallible. Religious creationists and scientific materialists are equally dogmatic and insensitive. By their arrogance they bring both science and religion into disrepute. The media exaggerate their numbers and importance. The media rarely mention the fact that the great majority of religious people belong to moderate denominations that treat science with respect, or the fact that the great majority of scientists treat religion with respect so long as religion does not claim jurisdiction over scientific questions
it opened my mind more to the idea of some kind of sentient creator than anything else and confirmed in my mind that being an agnostic is the only sensible position
The big bang doesn't imply that anything existed before time or outside of space or "outside of matter" (whatever that means).
If you talk about a multiverse theory you might have a point, but even then, a multiverse proponent would simply argue that the definition of the words you're using are different than his.
If he doesn't know why he's wrong then he'll never stop being retarded
The big bang didn't create time. Nor space?
>the idea that the Big Bang theory and religion are mutually exclusive is demonstrably wrong
I never claimed they were. I believe in the Big Bang Theory, and God.
>I see what you're trying to get across, but your definitions are wrong
>would never say that something which exists outside of matter is "immaterial"
The state prior the the Big Bang, was still one of heat. That's still energy I suppose, but I'm arguing that "matter" as we know it had to come from somewhere. Or at the very least, posses a plausible explanation for how it could have always been there.
>if i had to explain how the great wumpus created everything he wouldn't be the great wumpus now would he
what a copout
I know you disbelieve in God, but assuming he exists, he is by definition omniscient. You're claiming to know better than an "all knowing" being.
hey why dose god not need an explanation?
>but you can quantify God.
How can you quantify something that's infinite?
>I know you disbelieve in God, but assuming he exists, he is by definition omniscient. You're claiming to know better than an "all knowing" being.
so you worship some thing that knowingly deceives people into not believing him simply because he can then? doesn't seem all good to me
∞
hey why dose god not need an explanation?
Why do children get cancer? Why do wasps exist? Why would an omnipotent being want to be worshipped? Why is op a fag? Seeing problems with the world isn't knowing better
>You're claiming to know better than an "all knowing" being.
You're claiming to know better than an all knowing being as well. You certainly don't worship EVERY possible god. I can describe one that you don't believe in that you would refuse to worship.
No, because the singularity, requires a scientific explanation. God, does not. He wouldn't be "God" if he did.
Yeah he would
>God, does not. He wouldn't be "God" if he did.
explain how a all powerful entity doesn't need a explanation
>the idea that the Big Bang theory and religion are mutually exclusive is demonstrably wrong
>I never claimed they were. I believe in the Big Bang Theory, and God.
Gotcha.
>The state prior the the Big Bang, was still one of heat. That's still energy I suppose, but I'm arguing that "matter" as we know it had to come from somewhere. Or at the very least, posses a plausible explanation for how it could have always been there.
Heat is energy. Matter is the manifestation of energy. All matter, technically, is raw energy that has manifested due to a loss of potential energy.
E2=(mc2)2+(pc)2
By smashing two particles together, you create a larger, more energetic particle. The mass of the particle created is directly related to the energy input used to create it.
hey why dose god not need an explanation?
This omnipotent deity allows me to be capable of stupidity and doubt him. Why should I worship something that designed me to be stupid and allows me to continue to be stupid?
>so you worship some thing that knowingly deceives people
No, Satan is the one who deceives.
Take this for example;
When I take my dog to the vet, he pisses himself and panics. Does the dog understand he's getting shots to prevent him from getting sick? No, he just think's I'm getting him tortured because of his limited mind.
Maybe there are things beyond our comprehension as well.
Wouldn't you prefer to have your dog not piss himself in panic? Wouldn't you make him smart enough to not piss himself and recognize you're helping him if you could?
I'm not claiming I can prove my faith is the one true faith. But rather, that a state of omnipotence (which is the definition of God) predated the Big Bang.
Same reason I can't explain algebra to my dog. It's beyond our comprehension.
>No, Satan is the one who deceives.
so a all powerful being knowingly allows his bastard creation to deceive people when it is well within his power to stop and even destroy said creation simply because said all powerful being doesn't feel like it? not all good
That's not the definition of God that's an attribute of a god that's like saying skin is the definition of human
omnipotence is self-contradictory. if an impossible trial can be made then omnipotence cannot exist. if an impossible trial cannot be made omnipotence cannot exist.
>it's just to complicated man,you wouldn't get it, you just gotta take my word for it
wow two grade-school level cop outs in a row
see
Just using that as an analogy. Is it that difficult to accept that there may be concepts we cannot understand? Does a dog understand what planning for the next day is like? Can you teach an insect to read a book?
so your argument is that nobody can comprehend god? this isn't an argument that is a cop out and you know it
What's the origin of the earliest state of heat?
>atheist here
I stopped caring about this god exists or not debates after Sup Forums. I really dont care anymore.
Now I just to send muslims and leftists to the gas chambers.
Praise kek.
there wasn't a earliest form of heat, it is like time as in it is a property of existence.
But an omnipotent deity can make it so that we can comprehend. What advantage does it gain from us not comprehending? Why would you not make an insect able to read books? Why would you not make a dog understand planning for the next day is like, if you could?
Call it what you will. An explanation for the singularity always existing, is still required, since it shouldn't be beyond our comprehension as opposed to God.
elaborate, please.
the torus/taurus/torahs model
essentially marko rodin's understand of the fractal toroid IS the mathematical celebration of god's name, in the Bahai faith is Baha and it's reciprocal ahba
(pi^2)(r^3)
baha-ahba-baha-ahba... reciting a resonating toroid.
Consider Ahba, or abbah
the temple of abbados, where the seed of life is imprinted as a glyph on the temple wall. Abbados is the city honored to Abbadon, the giant bull headed demigod, daan, from which the horn headed daanites were concieved. Dan was Pan, in ancient greecian symbolism
Abba is referring to a bull headed diety.
Now consider Baha
Baha is name of the biblical bahamut or behemoth, which is the dragon.
The bahai faith worships the bahamoth, shenlong, shin, djinn (666).
god is a trinity (r^3) hidden behind a duality (pi^2)
>What advantage does it gain from us not comprehending?
You'll have to ask him.
Religion is always a bullshit explaination of the world around us bundled with morality and philosophy. It was created before we know what we know today through science and as a meme it still exists to this day as there's no satisfying scientific answer that can fill in the void of why the world exist.
Honestly, all religions are laughable. The reason they exist is that people find "spiritual" solace in them and they have very deep social ties. Hell people are still auto-born into the church here in sweden and our school has loads of events forced in the church. Without all of this lube religion would just fall off in the same way as people believing in ghosts n trolls and shit.
But there is no real reason to aggressively deprogram you crazy religious people. The world will slowly turn more secular as more education is available and the communities of religious memesters die out.
You can have conceptual perfections in the realm of mathematics, but they will never exist in the physical realm. Just like you can't have God in the physical realm, nor prove it.
But I won't understand any answer an omnipotent deity gives, because I can't comprehend it.
So I'll stick to not worshiping it because as you're proving, any omnipotent deity out there is absurd.
Maybe understanding is the reward in heaven.
that is torture knowing everything and yet having no use for any of it. i'd say that is more an accurate depiction of hell