Arguments against atheists

KieranKennedy · 03-02-2009 3:26pm #1

Hello, I am new to boards.ie so bear with me! I am a practicing Catholic, and I have a strong belief in God. Religion is a very important part of my life and it is something that I have often fallen back on during hard times. I do not proselytize, and I rarely bring the subject of my religious beliefs up in conversation, however on many occasions non believers have challenged my beliefs, and I don’t have any problem with them doing that. The issue that arises for me in this situation is that I am not comfortable questioning their position. This is because I have always felt that before one attempts to argue against somebody, one must first fully understand the position of the person they intend to argue against. I am relatively ignorant of most atheists positions on a number of points, and to that end, I will outline these points here, feel free to offer your rebuttal to any one of them. This can serve the dual purpose of educating myself and others who don’t understand both sides of the debate, as well as allowing for more productive debate on these matters.

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

I myself do not accept all of these arguments, I am simply interesting in hearing responses to them. Thanks.

toiletduck · 03-02-2009 3:34pm

Welcome to boards!

KieranKennedy wrote: »

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

You need to understand what theory means in science.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

What was the "prime mover" behind him? If you assert everything must have a cause, then why stop at him?

I could go on, but these topics are often brought up here and there are far more detailed and well written responses about.

Incidentally as a Catholic, you do know the Church's stance is that evolution happens.

Feelgood · 03-02-2009 3:35pm

Hi Kiernan, All are valid points I suppose...

My thoughts would be that you get possibly 60-70 very very short years (if your lucky) on this earth then your dead and that is it.

Are you going on to eternal peace in God's paradise, who knows, maybe so or maybe not. For that reason I think that any argument on whos beliefs are right or wrong are just a waste of time, because you can never conclude any right or wrong answer when it comes to religion.

So you can spend your life questioning it all or you can go and live your life and enjoy it and worry about these sort of things when the time comes.

Maybe God created this earth or maybe science has proven right, if I am wrong about God then I will ask him all these questions if I meet him.

biko · 03-02-2009 3:44pm

I will address some of these from my own viewpoint.

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

The difference between evolution and faith is that evolution can be replicated. We can see mutation happen and also manipulate it, e.g breeding for certain characteristics in dogs/cats.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

We don't know what happened before the Big Bang but there are theories than the universe as we know has been expanding and contracting for eons. Our start (Big Bang) could be the last in a series.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

Again see above, the matter we are all made of comes from Big Bang.

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. We are taught what is beautiful, and what's not. The perception of what's beautiful also changes over time.

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

Read about Rousseau, the social contract. It's pretty close to the Golden Rule, which without there'd be anarchy. A without order we cannot evolve.

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

The Pirahã Indians of the Amazon are a very peculiar people. They number fewer than 400 now and have no myths, rituals or history. No gods.

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

Evolution shows us that several spieces has failed because they didn't adapt to outside circumstance and became extinct.

MatthewVII · 03-02-2009 3:52pm

Whilst not the most intelligent or articulate member of these boards, I might as well outline what I think of these

KieranKennedy wrote: »

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

Evolution is as much a theory as the Theory of Gravitation - it is a model based on research and observation which holds up to in depth scrutiny and is supported by fossil evidence of transformational forms. Add into this the observable evolution from a microbiological point of view (e.g. Citrate +ve e.coli, bacteria which develop antimicrobial resistance etc) and you have a theory which explains everything with a fair amount of weight behind it. This is in complete contrast to blind faith, which has no real evidence or supportive basis.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

To assume something started it all is the same as assuming everything was there - absolutely pointless. We have no idea how the mechanics of the universe work so there is no point in jumping to any conclusions about how it came about. It's easy to assume God did it, but that brings all sorts of questions such as the origins of God into focus.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

Again you assume it must have come from nothing without assuming the possibility that it might always have been there. Again our knowledge in this area is lacking. That does not mean that God is behind anything

KieranKennedy wrote: »

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

Flowers are beautiful because colours attract bees. The setting sun is just a massive ball of thermal reactions which we rotate around. Beauty is not any evidence of anything. There is plenty of ugliness in the world, from certain insects (like the Japanese Hornet - ugh) to rotting carcasses and maggot-infested wormholes. Things don't develop to be beautiful or not, things just happen and humans can subjectively view them as beautiful or not.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

Human goodness can be explained by societal dynamics. Humans progressively band together because a tribal unit is stronger than individual effort. To ensure the survival of the societal unit, traits such as selfishness, greed and personal gain at the expense of others became less desirable and detrimental to a population's survival. Interdependence is an important aspect of why we are still here and it is not due to an instilled sense of goodness but rather centuries of realising that the interests of society are in the interests of the individual

KieranKennedy wrote: »

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

Miracles can easily be explained by their non-existence. Miracles such as Medjugorje have already been rejected by the Catholic Church as false (IIRC). I believe most can be explained by natural phenomena interpreted as miracles because people believe in God and can find him anywhere. As for Lourdes, I seem to remember reading that the vision was of "a little woman" which the Church jumped in on and claimed was Mary. If I see an objectively provable miracle I might consider them, but as it is so called "miracles" are merely interpreted so because people want to find God in things, even random occurrences

KieranKennedy wrote: »

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

As above, religious people firmly believe God exists. This means they are inclined to attribute feelings and life events directly to God's intervention. A typical case of this I would see frequently would be people thanking God for healing them, instead of realising they had been in ICU for 6 weeks on cardiorespiratory support, intravenous antibiotics, monitored by skilled doctors and receiving treatment supported by up to date medical literature

KieranKennedy wrote: »

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

People want to believe there is a God. The ubiquity of horoscopes, tarot readers and crystal-balleers can be similarly explained.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

We only think it looks organised because we try to look at the whole picture as it is now and compare it to nothingness. In reality, the universe shaped itself over billions of years, constantly reforming, dying and being remade. The universe could have taken any number of different paths in its formation and ended up completely different, yet people would still hold it up as evidence of organisation

KieranKennedy wrote: »

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

The universe is terribly tuned to suit life, with only a tiny percentage of planets capable of supporting it.

Dades · 03-02-2009 3:58pm

Hi, and welcome!

I'll jump in with my two cents.

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

Evolution is a lot more than a theory. It is pretty much accepted as fact by those who understand anything about it - including, I might add, the Catholic Church.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

Who are you to say how the universe "had" to have started? You appear to have just reached the edge of human understanding and inserted "God", rather than keeping an open mind as what science may yet discover.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

See 2. above.

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

What's beautiful about an organism that burrows into a childs eyeball? Or a setting sun over a parched land that hasn't seen rain in months? Wild animals are the prime example of the brutality of life; most creatures die slowly of disease or starvation, or in the jaws of some other animal. Beauty is a human perception, and a luxury at that.

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

Is that why you are good? To avoid punishment from God? Doesn't sound very compassionate to me. Morality has evolved to allow large societies of people to co-exist. You have it inside you and it wasn't put there by a God nobody had ever head of a few thousand years ago.

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

Amputees. How come God has never healed one? UFO's. Do you believe the thousands of accounts of them? Miracles are too easily faked or imagined.

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

Odd then that so many people have religious experiences with different gods. What does that tell you? The brain is a very complicated organ. But we know it is more than capable of it's own brand of trickery when it's owner allows it.

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

One word I would never associate with religion is "ubiquity". Every bloody type of god imaginable is said to exist!

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

That's where you need to do some reading on natural selection, and so on.

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

Our planet is finely tuned to suit life in the same way a hole in the ground is tuned to fit the puddle that sits in it. What's living elsewhere in the universe we can only speculate.

One last thought... even if there was doubt on any of the answers above - none of it would shed any light on why the God of the catholic church was behind any of it. That requires an enormous leap of thinking.

EDIT: Never saw the other responses - looking forward to comparing now...

cavedave · 03-02-2009 3:58pm

KieranKennedy

I do not proselytize,

Why not? If i thought i could save someone from an eternity of torture by persuading them to get baptised I'd at least mention Jesus to them.

Penn Gillette has a similar point here.

death1234567 · 03-02-2009 4:00pm

I am afraid you lost me at 1. Evolution is a theory. Its a theory in name only, just like the theory of gravity.

My Troll sense is tingling.

cavedave · 03-02-2009 4:08pm

or a best guess as to the origin of life

Also the theory of evolution does not deal with the origin of life.

death1234567

My Troll sense is tingling.

How do the people of Gotham call "internet forum protection man"? Shine lol smiley man onto the clouds?

seamus · 03-02-2009 4:23pm

Just for the sake of this, I haven't read anyone else's replies. So it might help you to get a number of answers from different sources.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

The term "evolutionist" implies a direct opposite to "creationist", when that doesn't accurately represent the view point. Anyone who supports the theory of evolution and understands the concept of a theory, doesn't say that in all universes and in all circumstances it is the only possible explanation. The door is always open for another explanation, but at the moment evolution is the front runner and there is no viable competing theory which even comes close. A creationist believes that the creation story is the literal truth and there is no possibility that they are wrong, ever.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

That's a big leap. Our understanding of the universe says that something must have "been" before our universe came into existence, but I see no reason why that something must be "God".

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

How can God have come from nothing? Who is God's God?

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

What is "beauty", but our own opinion? The notion of beauty varies from person to person, so if this was a "gift" from God, surely we would all agree on what constitutes beauty?

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

I am a good person because it makes me feel good to be a nice person and I want others to be happy in my presence. It has nothing to with God or any notion of perceived punishment. People are not inherently evil.

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

One would first have to detail these miracles and allow them to be scrutinised before they could be accepted as miracles. The only "miracles" which occur can be attributed to random chance and as yet unknown medical effects caused by our own bodies.

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

Embellishment, mental problems, tricks of the brain/eye/hand, random chance.

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

We yearn to explain and define the world around us. In the absence of sufficient information and the means to obtain any more information, all we can say is "God". The "before the universe" question illustrates this perfectly; It's unlikely we will ever have the means to find out what, if anything, existed before our universe, so it's very tempting and easy to just say "God", because it fills in the blank perfectly.

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

Entropy.

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

Only if we can prove that there is no other set of circumstances, no other universe in which life could have existed. Even then, all we've proven is that we exist in a very unlikely set of circumstances - it doesn't prove that there was a God. This could be the 153 trillionth "attempt" at a universe and it just happened to be spot on. Probability's a bitch.

CerebralCortex · 03-02-2009 4:24pm

cavedave wrote: »

Also the theory of evolution does not deal with the origin of life.

Really? Not what I've read.

MrPudding · 03-02-2009 4:27pm

Multivac did it.*

MrP

*I am fed up with god did it.

cavedave · 03-02-2009 4:30pm

CerebralCortex

Also the theory of evolution does not deal with the origin of life.
Really? Not what I've read.

Do you have any refereneces?
As far as i know the theory of the origin of life is called Abiogenesis

"In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, or origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth began from inanimate matter. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how living things have changed over time"

"The origin of life is a necessary precursor for biological evolution, but understanding that evolution occurred once organisms appeared and investigating how this happens does not depend on understanding exactly how life began"

partyguinness · 03-02-2009 4:42pm

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

The Theory of Evolution has a sound scientific basis with sound deductions based on discovery and the study of life. Religion has no such basis.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

We do not know what "started the ball rolling" and in my opinion, we never will know. We do not understand and may never undersatnd but I do not accept that some sort of supernatural being is responsible.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

Again same answer as above.

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

Touching.

So he is equally responsible for the hate and evil and suffering?

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

...ergo God must be responsible for human badness. People do good because they are afraid of an almightly supernatural spirit?

God is not doing a very good job is he?

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

What miracles at Lourdes and Fatima? The same as the Moving Statutes? Drugs, optical illusions who knows what these people are supposed to have seen.

If a person claims to have seen a giant bread monster in a cave they will be locked up and heavily seduced. Why is the same treatment of a religious icon revered?

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

Again see reply above

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

Some people need to believe in something. Religion thrives where there is ignorance, poverty and fear.

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

Again I do not accept there is some almighty supernatural being responsible. We do not understand and we prob will never know. God is just one convenient way to explain it.

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

Evolution. Surely you mean earth as opposed to the universe? Again see my previous replies.

There is no proof of God. Life is not God.

Just my 2 cents.

I do not believe in God. If find the idea hilarious. But maybe I am wrong but until such time as I am proved otherwise I will not believe for one second there is a God.

IMO God/religion is for the superstitiuous and superstition is for the ignorant.

CodeMonkey · 03-02-2009 4:42pm

KieranKennedy wrote: »

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

This is what David Attenborough has to say when presented with the same question:

I always reply by saying that I think of a little child in east Africa with a worm burrowing through his eyeball. The worm cannot live in any other way, except by burrowing through eyeballs.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gfa88SeNohY

CerebralCortex · 03-02-2009 4:56pm

cavedave wrote: »

Do you have any refereneces?
As far as i know the theory of the origin of life is called Abiogenesis

"In the natural sciences, abiogenesis, or origin of life, is the study of how life on Earth began from inanimate matter. It should not be confused with evolution, which is the study of how living things have changed over time"

"The origin of life is a necessary precursor for biological evolution, but understanding that evolution occurred once organisms appeared and investigating how this happens does not depend on understanding exactly how life began"

Yes I've heard of abiogenesis. Sorry my bad. My source was The selfish gene but I may have read it wrong.

20goto10 · 03-02-2009 5:08pm

The universe is so much more beautiful when perceived in its raw form. Granted we barely know anything about it but what we do know is beautiful and for someone to tell me its all been created by a superior being who I must bow before to gain entrance into his kingdom is....well its an insult and I genuinely feel sorry for people who are trapped into that farce. They are victims of psychological child abuse.

In fact that is my reply to everything you have said. "If God doesn't exist then how come XY and Z". Its simple. You've been brainwashed. God will be the answer to everything because your brain has been conditioned to seek that as the answer to everything.

I cannot understand how a Catholic can laugh at Scientologists, or at religious cults etc without making the same connection to their own religion.

CerebralCortex · 03-02-2009 5:14pm

20goto10 wrote: »

The universe is so much more beautiful when perceived in its raw form. Granted we barely know anything about it but what we do know is beautiful and for someone to tell me its all been created by a superior being who I must bow before to gain entrance into his kingdom is....well its an insult and I genuinely feel sorry for people who are trapped into that farce. They are victims of psychological child abuse.

I guess I've been, from experience with Christians on this forum, reluctant to look at theist claims that simply. But in all honesty I whole heartedly agree with your post (well except for the psychological child abuse part).

sink · 03-02-2009 5:51pm

KieranKennedy wrote: »

Hello, I am new to boards.ie so bear with me! I am a practicing Catholic, and I have a strong belief in God. Religion is a very important part of my life and it is something that I have often fallen back on during hard times. I do not proselytize, and I rarely bring the subject of my religious beliefs up in conversation, however on many occasions non believers have challenged my beliefs, and I don’t have any problem with them doing that. The issue that arises for me in this situation is that I am not comfortable questioning their position. This is because I have always felt that before one attempts to argue against somebody, one must first fully understand the position of the person they intend to argue against. I am relatively ignorant of most atheists positions on a number of points, and to that end, I will outline these points here, feel free to offer your rebuttal to any one of them. This can serve the dual purpose of educating myself and others who don’t understand both sides of the debate, as well as allowing for more productive debate on these matters.

Hi Kieran, welcome to boards.

I usually don't 'challenge' the beliefs of others, but since you asked I will attempt to shed light on my point of view. You have asked some very big questions which will take time to answer adequately.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

This is a fundamental error made by many people make who are not scientifically literate. In science there are three levels of certainty and at the same time these levels offer different levels of understanding/explanations and complexity through which we can make better predictions. The levels are fact, hypothesis and theory.

Here is a clear explanation of the differences between them by the Biologista aka AtomicHorror who is a fellow boards member and a real life biologist.
http://thebiologista.blogspot.com/2008/07/first-assumptions.html
http://thebiologista.blogspot.com/2008/12/hypothesis-theory-and-fact-first.html

Arbitrarily dismissing evolution as a theory shows a fundamental lack of scientific literacy and anyone arguing from this point of view has lost before they have even begun. The largest Christian denomination Catholicism accepts the theory of evolution as the best and only explanation of the complexity of life on earth. My understanding of their pov is that they simply believe god wrote the rules by which evolution works and pre-determined that mankind would be the result.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

While I accept that the universe did not spring out of nothing I don't claim to have any knowledge of how it began. I reject the claim that 'god made it' based on lack of supporting empirical evidence. Quantum mechanics a field of theoretical physiscs is revealing that the universe is far weirder than anyone could have imagined and whatever the truth it is not going to be a simple one line explanation that we can intuitively grasp like 'god did it'. Like quantum mechanics it is going to be mind bendingly complex and will probably be counter intuitive.

One of the most interesting hypotheses springs from the controversial field of string theory (which is itself actually more of a hypotheses than a theory). The universe itself creates more universes which in turn created our universe in a positive feedback loop. This could be possible as time is a feature purely of our universe and has no presence outside of our universe.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

While there is much beauty in the universe there is also ugliness, especially in biology. Parasites, Viruses and harmful bacteria as well as the desperate struggle for survival that all creatures must go through including our ancestors are examples of this. There is nothing pretty about a parasitic worm burrowing into they eye of a child. If you accept that god created everything that means everything ugly and all.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

Human goodness can be explained as part of our evolution and we are not the only species to display altruism. The great apes particularly Bonobos can be seen caring for one another, even if they are not related and they even help other animals of separate species. The leading evolutionary psychologists hypothesise that morality evolved in primate societies as a method of restraining individual selfishness and building more cooperative groups.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_morality

KieranKennedy wrote: »

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

Mass hysteria.

Many atheists are like myself 'naturalists'. We hold the position that the natural world is everything that exists and all event's that take place have a natural cause. We reject the supernatural including miracles and spirits, based on the fact that there is no empirical evidence and the fact that personal experience and individual/collective testimony are subject to human cognition which is deeply flawed as any Illusionist can attest. So the only way truth about existence can be revealed is through the scientific method which has inbuilt safeguards to protect against such human flaws.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scientific_method

KieranKennedy wrote: »

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

Much like the evolution of morality it is believed that religion evolved by a similar process or even part of the same process.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution_of_religion

KieranKennedy wrote: »

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

Complexity arises through a process known as emergence. Complex systems arise out of a multiplicity of relatively simple interactions. Evolution is the most well understood example of emergence, but it is believed that the entire complexity of the universe arose through similar processes. For a more detailed explanation see this youtube video.

http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=gdQgoNitl1g
http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=S5NRNG1r_jI

KieranKennedy wrote: »

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

You are looking at it the wrong way round if the property of emergence is true then life evolved to suit the universe not the other way round.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

I myself do not accept all of these arguments, I am simply interesting in hearing responses to them. Thanks.

If you want more detail on any of the answers given I will gladly provide.

03-02-2009 6:59pm

I didn't read any other responses, so, I'm sorry if I repeat anything.

KieranKennedy wrote: »

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life.

You don't understand the word theory in a scientific context - not many people do, really. Theory is pretty much as good as it gets with science - it's a way to explain certain principles and laws. How about these other theories:

- The special and general theories of relativity (extremely accurate).
- Quantum theory - probably the single most accurate gathering of scientific knowledge there is: experiments agree with predictions to within billionths of a percentile.
- Atomic theory.
- Cell theory in biology (all you learn in school about cells, yes, that's just a theory).
- Germ theory. Just because it's a theory you wouldn't believe that germs don't exist, would you?
- Theory of climate change.
- Plate tectonics - yes, that's just another theory.

I could stay going on, but, I think you get the point. Are you going to deny all of these theories any credibility just because they're that, theories? Learn what theory means in a scientific context.

Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

No, we're not. I've explained why in my previous point.

2. There has to have been something which started it all: The universe can’t have just come about by random chance, there must have been a prime mover that started the ball rolling, and that prime mover is God.

Why must there have been? What are you basing this chain of causality on? Physical laws? But, they didn't exist before the big bang - there wasn't even a before. Causality might not have to have been conserved. Indeed, at the quantum level, it isn't - particles pop in and out of existance without any explicit cause. We don't know that something had to have caused the big bang.

3. Similar to the above, something can’t be made from nothing: There must have been nothing before the universe can into existence. How can something be made from nothing without God.

A current theory is that there is a net total of nothing in the universe. Matter may balance off with anti - matter (if it could be found); energy with dark energy etc. There might very well be nothing, as a net total, in the universe.

Anyway, not one single scientific theory, not one, speculates that the universe came from nothing. Another common misconception.

4. How can all the beauty of the world be explained without God. If the universe is indifferent to our existence, why is there such beauty in the setting sun, a field of flowers, the falling snow. A loving God is the reason for this beauty.

This is a stupid argument, I don't feel that it even deserves an answer.

The universe doesn't owe us a reason for its beauty. It wasn't created so we could look upon it with wonder and awe. And besides, beauty is in the high of the beholder - there is no objective beauty. What we consider beautiful (a collective subjective feeling among humankind) may not actually be beautiful - because there is no objective scale for beauty.

Perhaps we just evolved to appreciate beauty, I don't know. But, I do know that the universe doesn't owe us a reason for it.

5. How can human goodness be explained without God? People are good because God will punish them if they do evil or because God makes them good.

Human goodness, or morality, can be explained quite well with the theory of evolution. I'm not getting into it now, but, it isn't very difficult to explain. I'm sure somebody else has - if they haven't, I will.

6. Miracles. How can one explain the miracles at places like Lourdes and Fatima without God?

There have been 66 or so, I think, "confirmed" miracles at Lourdes in the last 150 years or so. How many million people have visited it looking for a miracle? In excess of 100 million I would guess. So, you say that 66 out of 100 million people have been cured by miracle? That figure is statistically insignificant.

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

People want to believe in a god. They do, so willfully, that I'm sure they can trick themselves into percieving wonderful experiences.

This is a null point. What about the experience you gain from reading a great novel, say, War and Peace? Is there a god over that book, one which instills that wonderful feeling? I doubt it.

8. How can the ubiquity of religion be explained if there is no God?

Humans, no doubt, in the past at some stage started wondering where did all of this come from. Now, take the events in a human life, everything is caused, every object has a creator. It doesn't take huge leaps of logic to conclude that humans would, at some stage, of applied this logic to the universe.

And besides, humans need to believe in something greater. They need to believe in a god, if they don't, they feel vunerable. Believing in god probably instills a similar feeling to having a ubiquitous parent figure.

9. How can the complexity and organised appearance of the universe exist without a God to design it?

That's an extremely vague question. In simple, everything in the universe can be, or is close to being, explained by a model. Complexity in life can be explained by evolution by natural selection. Completexity in star formation can be explained by various models etc. etc.

10. Why does the universe appear to be finely tuned to suit life as it is, surely this requires a God?

The universe doesn't appear to be finely tuned to life, far from. Earth doesn't even appear to be finely[/] tuned to life. And anyway, whatever life does seem to fit to a particular environment can be explained by evolution - adaptation.

It would take far to long to answer each question in the detail it deserves, I've no doubt that most have already been answered on this board, anyway.

fitz0 · 03-02-2009 9:25pm

partyguinness wrote: »

If a person claims to have seen a giant bread monster in a cave they will be locked up and heavily seduced. Why is the same treatment of a religious icon revered?

Awww yeah...

Anyway these questions have been posed time and time again on this board (sometimes trollingly, sometimes not) and have been answered each time.
One thing that constantly suprises me is how often evolution comes up. Back in the day when I was a Catholic I never thought twice about evolution. Is it the emergence of folks like Dawkins et al that has brought evolution into the limelight, is it the internet and the freedom to voice your views (however uninformed or biased) or was it always there and I just didnt think hard enough to connect it with god?

The Mad Hatter · 03-02-2009 9:48pm

fitz0 wrote: »

Anyway these questions have been posed time and time again on this board (sometimes trollingly, sometimes not) and have been answered each time.
One thing that constantly suprises me is how often evolution comes up. Back in the day when I was a Catholic I never thought twice about evolution. Is it the emergence of folks like Dawkins et al that has brought evolution into the limelight, is it the internet and the freedom to voice your views (however uninformed or biased) or was it always there and I just didnt think hard enough to connect it with god?

Don't think that's true. I can't imagine Dawkins would ever have bothered writing The God Delusion if it wasn't for the sustained attacks on his field of study by morons and charlatans.

Húrin · 03-02-2009 10:57pm

20goto10 wrote: »

Granted we barely know anything about it but what we do know is beautiful and for someone to tell me its all been created by a superior being

That's theism (which includes deism).

who I must bow before to gain entrance into his kingdom is.

That's part of the narratives of it called Christianity, Islam, Judaism and probably others.

They're not the same thing.

Phototoxin · 03-02-2009 11:10pm

- The special and general theories of relativity (extremely accurate).
- Quantum theory - probably the single most accurate gathering of scientific knowledge there is: experiments agree with predictions to within billionths of a percentile.
- Atomic theory.
- Cell theory in biology (all you learn in school about cells, yes, that's just a theory).
- Germ theory. Just because it's a theory you wouldn't believe that germs don't exist, would you?
- Theory of climate change.
- Plate tectonics - yes, that's just another theory.

therefore they are not actual truths
therefore they are not true
therefore they dont happen/exist
Q.E.D

Religion wins
End of

/sarc

AtomicHorror · 03-02-2009 11:28pm

Phototoxin wrote: »

therefore they are not actual truths
therefore they are not true
therefore they dont happen/exist
Q.E.D

Religion wins
End of

/sarc

Bizarrely enough, I have on occasion entered into debate with people who question the veracity of atomic theory and cell theory. The argument goes that when you assume these things are false (reasons not given) embryogenesis is too unlikely to occur and therefore God exists. It logically follows that this God is the Judeo-Christian God and therefore the existence of an afterlife is "proven". I often wonder if creationists know how close they stray to this sort of total basketcase crazy.

AtomicHorror · 03-02-2009 11:37pm

sink wrote: »

This is a fundamental error made by many people make who are not scientifically literate. In science there are three levels of certainty and at the same time these levels offer different levels of understanding/explanations and complexity through which we can make better predictions. The levels are fact, hypothesis and theory.

Here is a clear explanation of the differences between them by the Biologista aka AtomicHorror who is a fellow boards member and a real life biologist.
http://thebiologista.blogspot.com/2008/07/first-assumptions.html
http://thebiologista.blogspot.com/2008/12/hypothesis-theory-and-fact-first.html

Why thank you for the plug :pac:. I would say that the relationship between fact and theory is that any sufficiently tested unit of evidence is termed fact and that theory is a model used to explain these facts and predict more facts by extension of the model. As you've indicated, we rarely use the term "theory" unless we consider the model to be an accurate representation and predictor of fact.

Of course there's some semantic debate as to what "fact" really means in science. So we typically just say evidence instead.

The Mad Hatter · 04-02-2009 12:03am

AtomicHorror wrote: »

Bizarrely enough, I have on occasion entered into debate with people who question the veracity of atomic theory and cell theory. The argument goes that when you assume these things are false (reasons not given) embryogenesis is too unlikely to occur and therefore God exists. It logically follows that this God is the Judeo-Christian God and therefore the existence of an afterlife is "proven". I often wonder if creationists know how close they stray to this sort of total basketcase crazy.

I thought creationists were that sort of total basketcase crazy.

WooPeeA · 04-02-2009 12:58am

KieranKennedy wrote: »

1. The theory of evolution is just a theory: Evolution is nothing more than a theory, or a best guess as to the origin of life. Therefore atheistic evolutionists who criticise the religious for blind faith are guilty of that very same “sin”.

In 1950, pope Pirus XVI published encyclical informing that Catholic Church will not deny the theory of evolution anymore. Although he mentioned that it is required to believe that world has been created by God.

In 1996 pope John Paul II said that theory of evolution is something more than just an interesting theory.

Catholic Church itself doesn't deny evolution. If you deny evolution you call yourself a catholic anymore.

AtomicHorror · 04-02-2009 2:03am

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

I thought creationists were that sort of total basketcase crazy.

Perhaps a bit worse. Just sane enough to deliberately kid themselves. Scary.

seamus · 04-02-2009 8:57am

KieranKennedy wrote: »

7. The experiences of religious people: How can one explain all the religious experiences of people which require God if God does not exist?

Sorry to requote, but I thought this was particularly relevant to this question:
http://www.breakingnews.ie/archives/2009/0203/ireland/mhsnqlojkfau/

How can one say that all "good" religious experiences must be an act of God, and all "bad" religious experiences must be an act of insanity? In order to use "religious experiences" as proof of the existence of a God, you must start out assuming that all religious experiences are equal, regardless of outcome. Therefore, God must inspire those to commit heinous acts in his name (and the bible is rife with these).
Either that, or *all* religious experiences are the result of psychological issues or a flaw in our cognitive processing.

CiDeRmAn · 04-02-2009 9:10am

Deary Deary Me.......

Talk about looking through the telescope at the wrong end.

Still, at least you are honourable enough to post your thoughts on a thread that will offer honest debate, rather than on the Christianity thread, where all you'll get is a bunch of folk agreeing with you, blindly.

I would say that, as shown by most other posts here, that each and every point you make has been refuted on every level, undeniable by pretty much everyone that is logical of mind.

Where does that leave the OP?

Has he packed in the rosary, bought The Selfish Gene and gone Creationist bashing?

Arguments against atheists

Comments