Atheists unironically believe this

Thread on theism. What religion are you guys and what reasons do you have for your beliefs? What evidence does your faith have reinforcing it?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wng6c0oLkQE
space.com/31192-what-triggered-the-big-bang.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I believe we're in a simulation and time dilates as objects move faster in order to save on processor power. This is why photons do not experience time.

I'm agnostic master race, even though I do lean towards the idea that there is a God, I just don't really know what his nature or goals (if any) are.

So you don't believe in physics? Why are you living in a house or using the internet then?
If you really don't believe in science at all then why are you using these lies to your advantage?
Wouldn't that be heretical in most religious beliefs?

Atheists believe that the big bang happened at a moment in time, and that galaxies did not form immediately but over millions of years.

And the belief that there was just nothing is wrong. Science is about recognizing ignorance as much as it is about discovery. We don't know what things were like before the big bang, we don't. But recognizing that we don't know is noticeably better than

>we don't know what was going on, oh no there goes my biological need for purpose, we'll make some asinine shit up to fill the gap!

Negro please.

I do prefer logical reasoning. For example; what is eminating the faint hawking radiation from all around us?

Our reality is rather mysterious, but denying evidense is just not smart.

Also, believing anyone is retarded. If you want to know something look up the base for the claim.

Another example: hell does not exist in the jewish testament. The concept arouse in the new testament, and relies heavily on concepts of Hades. That is why Virgillius is your guide in Dantes inferno, and why Homerus is in hell.

>So you don't believe in physics?
Physics says there was a point were there was nothing in the universe at all. How could you superpose that matter cannot be created or destroyed with the fact that the universe has a defined beginning in existence.

Religious logic

Nothing > a being that can make all of that on purpose

>Atheists believe that the big bang happened at a moment in time, and that galaxies did not form immediately but over millions of years.
What did I mean by:
>time passes

See my problems with the big bang theory as a be all end all here:
Better than nothing making nothing. It had to be something. Things don't make themselves.

Better legit desu

Don't say "atheists believe", you are giving retards like him ammo, not all scientists are atheists and the ones that aren't are not fundamentalists.

>Atheists believe that the big bang happened at a moment in time, and that galaxies did not form immediately but over millions of years.
What did I mean by:
>time passes

See my problems with the big bang theory as a be all end all here:
Better than nothing making nothing. It had to be something. Things just don't make themselves.

>guys obviously your answer is dumb, a sky wizard made everything is the only true answer
>t. Faithcuck

fugg

Australian internet, everyone
sorry cunts

theists just switch the nothing at all with god.
its actually the same.

Can you explain to me first how you deal with the fact that you don't believe in physics but use them to your advantage every single day of your life?
Explain that and then the converstation can continue

Also unrelated but, is posting fucked for anyone else?

>Atheists are nihilists
Why would they believe in nothing?

>its actually the same

Only if the universe is eternal, mate. Otherwise the beginning is just pushed further back.

Answer my question please

>Nothing in the universe
No.The big bang is the scientific theory that before the universe came to be in its current form,it was concentrated in an area of very high density and high temperature state.
Try harder next time

Both atheists and theists believe the universe was created from nothing

The only difference is that theists make it more complicated by saying that in addition to all that, there's also this God.

>the fact that you don't believe in physics
I do believe in fucking physics, you cunt. I'm just wondering how atheists get around the fact that they both think that a universe which isn't eternal can have a beginning but nothing to create it. Things don't self actualize.

It's not just you
It takes me like 5 minutes per post

>No.The big bang is the scientific theory that before the universe came to be in its current form,it was concentrated in an area of very high density and high temperature state.
What made the things in that state? Do atheists believe that the universe is eternal?

>The only difference is that theists make it more complicated by saying that in addition to all that, there's also this God.
It makes more sense than everything making itself, when particles can't even be created by other particles.

Scientists don't believe there was nothing, they don't know and they accept the fact that they don't know because there is literally no proof to say there was or there wasn't anything. In addition they are trying to understand how can that be possible
What it is known is that there is noise and heat and the universe is expanding, which supports the idea of a big bang.

>It makes more sense than everything making itself, when particles can't even be created by other particles.

Particles can destroy other particles, why do you think the reverse is impossible?

Things are eternal. Change is also an illusion.

Time is an operator. Just a way to describe physical system but without any deeper "reality".
Just because in macro level everything has a beginning and an end does not justify generalizing it to ultra-small and ultra-large levels. It may still be true, but this has to be established by scientific investigation, not simply be declaring that "in my neighborhood everything is such way, so it has to be such way across the whole universe".

So anwer me this if there was nothing how was god created? And no I don't believe this either but I believe there is a scientifical answer

>centuries of scientific research says that energy cannot be created or destroyed
>christfags and mudslimes believe it can because a book said so

>I'm just wondering how atheists get around the fact that they both think that a universe which isn't eternal can have a beginning but nothing to create it. Things don't self actualize.
youtube.com/watch?v=wng6c0oLkQE
22:50+

There was no time prior to the big bang.

Really activates my mangoes.

>not understanding the concept of random effects ans that everything that physically can happen, happens at some point of time
I am sure there is a mental cap and that people that cannot grasp the concept of evolution should be gassed

>digits confirm big bang

Just three words:
>zero energy universe

Christcuck logic:
>Nothing at all
>God
>The entire universe

"Nothing" -> Big Bang -> Stuff

Hah that's ridiculous.

Nothing -> God 1 week of magic -> Stuff

Makes sense.

...

The Kalam Cosmological Argument.
>atheism btfo

What is nothing? Define it.
ESSENTIALLY nothing in the universe. Big difference. There may have been something, we just don't know what it is or isn't or was. What most people fail to realize is that the laws of physics and time are only constants AFTER the Big bang. Before it they could have been anything. There might have even been more or less of them. No one knows, and anyone who says they know is selling something.

...

Incorrect.
>God
>The heaven and earth and everything in them.

>based digits

So if its so radical that atheists and agnostics believe that maybe that the universe merely came from nothing. Where did god come from? It rather some being created him or he came from nothing.

>Nothing at all
>Time
>Suddenly there's God

Fuck off moron and saged. What made God then? Hard mode: No "always been" or "eternal" or "Muh virgin Mary" bullshit answers

>implying God isn't the entire universe and the set of all possible universes

The funnier bit about how stupid it is is time didn't exist either
So, when could it have happened in timelessness?
Jews are stupid go back to maxwell and steinmetz for accuracy or eric dollards books but those are pricey

That's not atheist logic, "nothing" doesn't exist.
Religious people should really stop talking about things like the big bang, evolution, etc. you don't understand those subjects well enough.

> Physics says there was a point were there was nothing in the universe at all.
Physics doesn't say that.

>People still take the Kalamazoo Cosmological Principle seriously
Pic related
>special pleading


There is nothing about the phrase "in the beginning, there was nothing" that is correct. The "beginning" is somewhere out of our reach spatially, and beginning suggests progression one way. The laws of cause and effect do not have to apply before the big bang. There is no "there" because there may not even be any vectors to define a point, or too many vectors for us to understand. The term "was" also suggests that time existed as it does now, for which there is no evidence, and "nothing" is yet to be defined.

ftfy. see, isn't that more compelling?

Finally someone with sense.

>just time
A. There was no such thing as time
B. You're retarded

"This arises from the conflict in the idea of causality-- if every single thing must have a cause, then all causality is in time under the law of nature; but if all things have a cause, there must be a cause which is not an event in time under the law of nature. Each of these is essential if we are to give absolute validity to the causal principle; yet both of them, it seems, cannot be true.

The resolution is this: The thesis, which asserts the reality of causes not subsumed under the law of nature, and the antithesis, which asserts that all causation is under the laws of nature now known or yet to be discovered, may each be true if their respective scopes are distinguished....

...

Your argument is THAT it's magic. You can't just say "it's magic therefore it's magic," and not look profoundly retarded.

If God exists, why there's niggers?

Checkmate theist cucks

I'm sorry, I appear to be ignorant on the subject of spontaneous creation of life via the mechanisms of a God that existed before everything else. Please, enlighten me. What would you call such a mechanism?

>Hard mode: No "always been" or "eternal" or "Muh virgin Mary" bullshit answers
Challenge accepted.

Irrelevant. It can't be inferred from the necessity of a creator that there is no creator. Surely you can find someone just a little bit smarter than dawkins to parrot?

Where did time come from? Or any of natures laws? Dit they form over millions of years or spontaneously.

I would incorrectly infer there is no such 'mechanism' because I don't know how it works, like a fucking caveman concluding smartphones are magic.

>fucking captcha better stop giving me like 8 puzzles to solve

The field of application of each is defined by the nature of the argument supporting it, and neither can be validly employed beyond the area to which the respective proofs extend. The proof of the thesis presents the interest of reason, which requires a sufficient cause for each and every phenomenon. The sufficient cause cannot be found within, phenomena, because every phenomenal cause is itself the product of prior causes and hence not, by itself, a sufficent explanation of subsequent phenomena. The proof of the antithesis, on the other hand presents the claim of the understanding in applying the law of natural causation to all members of a series of events in space and time. The argument shows that the assumption of a free cause (i.e the cause that is not itself an effect) within phenomena would disrupt the reign of law required by our conception of nature. The counterargument, however shows that if we do not assume a free cause, we cannot assume a first cause, and therefore that we cannot give a complete causal explanation of anything, regardless of how much progress we may make in knowledge...

Well the theists must explain it somehow. Otherwise they couldn't believe it happened, could they?

Atheists lie about hitting post twice. See it here; blaming the system.

>challenge accepted
>ignores the question

Not a valid answer. Something had to create God otherwise you believe that god comes from nothingness, ridiculous. Reject the jewish dogmas, the universe is god. Everywhere and nowhere, this is the meaning

>this is what theists believe
Reading too much pop atheist hits on the nyt best seller list son

so just
>the entire universe
> :)

"The antimony is resolved by showing that the thesis can be app;lied to the relationship between Noumea (things in themselves ) and phenomena. and the antithesis is restricted to relations among phenomena. These separate and distinct but compatible applications are all that is legitimized by the two proofs. The solution is attained by a distinction between the world of appearance (phenomena) and a noumenal world."

You just don't understand the answer, brainiac.

Just because you don't want to call it (((MAGIC))) doesnt mean it's not one. It's all semantics at this point

>you don't understand the answer
You didn't understand the question. He asked what made God and don't five him some infinity bullshit. Your answer is basically
>it's irrelevant, you can't create something without a creator :^)
Which is both a shitty answer and not really an answer at all.

we define God as something so great that it is beyond comprehension. you can see this in most scripture: God generally has to bring himself down a level to avoid killing everyone he goes near.

we just use God as a narrative tool to explain that which we can't understand. if we can (according to you people) understand the mechanisms of the entire universe, then God just moves up a step and becomes the entire universe. how can you understand something that you are inside?

do you have a better answer?

I've lately come to think of myself as a Deist. That there's some sort of god/gods/goddesses out there that MUST have created everything, but that they don't interfere with the universe in appreciable ways anymore.
I come from an a-religious background. Not going to say atheist, because I've always had disdain for militant anti-christians, which is what that word brings to mind.

It's a relatively recent development for me, springing from the undeniable fact that according to Science, matter cannot be created or destroyed, and yet all of the universe was created at some point. It's an extremely simple point, but one I find most atheists haven't even thought about. I pressed one on this the other week, and he could only sputter and say "The universe just started one day".

An Australian doesn't shitpost for once and says a reasonable thing. A Miracle of God?

But then who created this Universe-God combo?

Why?
The implicit conclusion is "God needs a cause therefore He 'almost certainly doesn't exist.'" My answer is the refutation of this conclusion, stripping the question of its purpose and rendering it moot. If you won't accept that as an answer because you want to whine about something, then I guess challenge not accepted and yet your ill-conceived, oft-thoughtlessly-regurgitated contention is proven irrelevant and your implicit conclusion false.
As is true the converse.

The "Why does anything exist?" question is the final destination of all of these enquiries. The answer is impossible to know, but it is possible to experience (on a good dose of LSD/DMT)

Here's how it is
>shit we don't understand == God
Don't bother trying to understand. Just shut the fuck up and accept that you can't know everything.

How many Christians have actually read up on the Big Bang Theory?
It"s not "nothing -> something"
Neither time, nor space existed before the big bang, so it doesn't fit into a chronology like that. It's more like "singularity that starts time and space -> expansion into current universe -> this is why the universe is currently expanding."

what does this have to do with sneakers?

Does calling the nothing a singularity really solve the problem?

Deist. That is all.

>The implicit conclusion is "God needs a cause therefore He 'almost certainly doesn't exist.'" My answer is the refutation of this conclusion, stripping the question of its purpose and rendering it moot. If you won't accept that as an answer because you want to whine about something, then I guess challenge not accepted and yet your ill-conceived, oft-thoughtlessly-regurgitated contention is proven irrelevant and your implicit conclusion false.
...And the meme is that atheists are pretentious.

Kind of, since otherwise you're saying that time and space existed before the universe. Saying "before the big bang" is the same as saying "before time existed as a concept."

But I don't think the question is "What came before the big bang?" as much as it's "What caused the big bang?" If by "singularity," you mean an infinitesimal point, I don't see how that's any more rational than nothing causing the big bang.

...

So basically, literally nothing, even time itself. Well then, a conceptless world cannot create physics, the human mind, time, etc. Only God can.

You do understand how gravity works right?

There's a couple of theories, but they're just that theory. Some think that new universes are a result of other universes colliding. Something with that much energy (literally all the energy in the universe) colliding with something else of that much mass would be so catastrophic that we couldn't possibly imagine the amount of energy released. Again, it would be equal to all of the mass and energy in this universe, plus all of the mass and energy of another universe. Of course, this just begs the question 'what started the very first universe' and the answer is 'we don't know.' None of us were around to witness it, so we can't say for sure what caused it.

All theories of the bith of the iniverse are
ridiculous.
Come on some all mighty entity just creating everything is not much better. Lets just agree that Christianity is important for us because of the values it teaches and the peaceful attitute
(although a new crusade against Islam would be good.)

I mean I can link you answers like space.com/31192-what-triggered-the-big-bang.html
I'm not here to represent the scientific side, I'm just curious how many people in this thread who say "durr nothing and then SOMETHING haha atheists BTFO" have actually tried to understand the full theory.

No, fuck you and your kike God. Abrahamic religions were the worst thing to happen to this planet. People had morals before 'god' told them to behave.

It's like you imagine universes as solid billiards balls, rather than the fuck ton of empty space that they are.

God damnit I hate what "$cience" has done to our younger generations, mine included.

Ok, so disregard mass. One explosive force acting on another explosive force still has a redirect of energy.

God its something.
Nothing can not come from something.

completely retarded, cannot be proven or disproven

you might as well be making statements about the paintings on the wall of a dark room

Yeah, no shit. Just like this ENTIRE fucking discussion about God or any other theories about the origins of the universe. Any type of philosophical discussion about the origins of the universe cannot be proven it disproven, so what the fuck is your point?

>science
>Big Bang
Pick fucking one; threaded reminder of the bare minimum for science:
>observable
>testable
>repeatable
Your secular fucking religion is not and never will be science.

it's a debate about what is more probable, and it's probable that superintelligences have evolved before our species emerged. Meaning that our section of space is likely curated by one of them

Why are they exploding you dumb fucking nigger?
There isn't even a reason to believe in a second UNIverse, much less whatever retarded shit you are imagining.