movement to atheism

@kellyjay said
Have you ever seen a perpetual motion machine in life?

Suggesting the universe is an unending cycle, and not a linear path where it has
a beginning and ending you are assuming a cycle wouldn't share the same laws
of a linear path would, because what is still true all things wind down.

You seem to introducing things with no backing such as, "...no beginning or end..." ...[text shortened]... follows it. (Just as order emerges out of chaos).

There is no beginning or end, merely cycles."

Your very God sir has 'no backing' and is in stark violation of the laws of the universe.

Again, why is an eternal deity not an issue, but an eternal universe BS?

And as an aside, why is it cool for you to call my beliefs BS? (Seriously).

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Your very God sir has 'no backing' and is in stark violation of the laws of the universe.

Again, why is an eternal deity not an issue, but an eternal universe BS?

And as an aside, why is it cool for you to call my beliefs BS? (Seriously).

The answer I gave you was the reason for the "BS" a linear universe with a set start
and ending would also share the same laws that govern the universe if it were a
cycle. There isn’t a perpetual motion machine because the laws of the universe
would wind it down, an eternal universe would have been winding down eternally
regardless of the force applied to start it.

We see the universe in both theology and science has a beginning, the
ramifications of that point to something outside of the universe itself, since the
universe itself cannot start itself. The laws that govern the universe can keep it
functioning, they have nothing to do with the beginning or where everything came
from.

"The planets and comets will constantly pursue their revolu-tions in orbits given in kind and position, according to the laws above explained; but though these bodies may, indeed, continue in their orbits by the mere laws of gravity, yet they could by no means have at first derived the regular position of the orbits themselves from those laws" (Principia, “General Scholium,” 1713). Newton

Eternal God is defined eternal.

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Your very God sir has 'no backing' and is in stark violation of the laws of the universe.

Again, why is an eternal deity not an issue, but an eternal universe BS?

And as an aside, why is it cool for you to call my beliefs BS? (Seriously).

Sorry for the "BS" my bad!

@fmf said
Do you see yourself as an implicit atheist or an explicit atheist?

Seems to me that sentence was declarative, so the he should be termed a declarative atheist, right?

@fmf said
OK. You think the words "implicit" and "explicit" are "intellectual" words, presumably.

That's hardly fair.
I would imagine all (or most) of us know what implicit and explicit mean.
But I certainly do not know what is meant by "implicit atheist" or "explicit atheist"
and even if one did know those terms presumably one could be undecided?

@kellyjay said

Eternal God is defined eternal.

You give your god attributes by preceding god with an adjective?

Then say it must be so by definition?

LOL
And you reckon Man did not create gods!

@mister-moggy said
bapized catholic, raised nazarene, raised my children fundamental baptists and found myself an agnostic by fifty and in my last years, an atheist.


there are only two certain things i know.

creation precedes destruction.
order precedes chaos.

all things written on paper by man extolling a religion are just words on paper penned by man, for man and about a subjective experience.

Did you come here to "prove" all of those statements?

If so, have at it.

Or did you just come here to argue about them, based upon you own subjective views?

@wolfgang59 said
You give your god attributes by preceding god with an adjective?

Then say it must be so by definition?

LOL
And you reckon Man did not create gods!

We give our universe a limit of time it could possibly be here due to the things
we see in it. Where God on the other hand who created it and holds it together
has to be able create it all, hold it all together, and maintain the forces that were
used to cause it to run. The scope of God's handy work lets us see that He is much
more than the universe itself. So His attributes make Him far beyond the natural
world and all the material and energy in it.

@dj2becker said
Order tends to emerge from chaos by means of intelligent intervention.

Grow up and educate yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization

Ever seen a snow-flake?
Ever seen crystals grow?
Ever seen a murmuration of starlings at dusk?
Ever seen the double-slit experiment?

@wolfgang59 said
You give your god attributes by preceding god with an adjective?

Then say it must be so by definition?

LOL
And you reckon Man did not create gods!

Obviously, man is perfectly capable of creating gods in his head.

In fact, assuming there is a God, you have probably prefabricated a false idea of what that God actually is about even though he is real.

As for myself, a God that does not have both ancient and modern roots in the affairs of man may as well be dead due to his indifference to the affairs of men.

Looking at world religions this significantly decreases the number of potential gods. Off the top of my head, there is the God of the Bible and the god of the Hindus. Subtract gods such as the Greek and Roman gods where who were birthed over night and died about as fast.

Then there is prophecy and other evidence, but the real draw is the love one attains for such a God that would lay down his life for unworthy people like myself.

And love is at the core of our belief. What we love we believe in, people we love we believe in. We can't provide the proof, yet the very feeling inside us is enough proof for us to lay all our money down on and let it ride.

To be honest, I don't see this love for God in other religions, just fear and submission.

@kellyjay said
Sorry for the "BS" my bad!

Apology accepted.

I find most of what theists post here fanciful and without substance, but if I responded to it all as BS I would quickly morph into SonHouse. 😆

@ghost-of-a-duke said
Apology accepted.

I find most of what theists post here fanciful and without substance, but if I responded to it all as BS I would quickly morph into SonHouse. 😆

I wish I was a better man, you didn't deserve that sorry!

@wolfgang59 said
Grow up and educate yourself.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-organization

Ever seen a snow-flake?
Ever seen crystals grow?
Ever seen a murmuration of starlings at dusk?
Ever seen the double-slit experiment?

Ever seen God in creation?
Ever seen the beginning of time?
Ever seen the Big Bang?
Ever seen something come from nothing?
Ever seen the back side of the moon? Oh, scratch that one! 🙃

a murmer of starllings

a murder of crows

a parliment of owls

( wonderful phrases )

@wolfgang59 said
That's hardly fair.
I would imagine all (or most) of us know what implicit and explicit mean.
But I certainly do not know what is meant by "implicit atheist" or "explicit atheist"
and even if one did know those terms presumably one could be undecided?

If "looking something up" is how being "intellectual" is defined, then the word "intellectual" pretty much loses its meaning.