Jump to content

Why you don't believe?


Randolpin
 Share

Recommended Posts

As a Christian, I want to ask those who don't believe in God, why they don't believe, what encourages or pushes them to not believe? What is the exact reason why they don;t believe?

Are their reasons completely enough to firmly hold their positions?

Before holding their position, did they think first?

Did they balance things first?

Are they able to check their own selves or hear their own inner selves before deciding to hold their postions?

 

I am curious about this....

Feedbacks are very much appreciated. Thank You...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why should I believe?

 

This answer is a escaping answer. What is the reason, why you should not believe?

Suppose you believe in god. Do you have any evidence to show His presence? By evidence I mean scientific evidence.

 

The evidence so far is the beginning of the universe where the pre-bigbang moment is a complete nothingness

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

This answer is a escaping answer. What is the reason, why you should not believe?

 

No evidence. Not a shred that suggests a supernatural explanation is needed, ever.

 

That, and the fact that over 9000 versions of Christianity alone exist, each claiming to be true. That kind of con game is easily recognized.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe there's nothing to lost instead there is something added to your life. As I study science, I don't see science contradicted the existence of God, instead it shouts out that there is a God.

 

Is this directed at me or Phi?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you believe there's nothing to lost instead there is something added to your life. As I study science, I don't see science contradicted the existence of God, instead it shouts out that there is a God.

 

Science doesn't contradict the existence of your god because it's unobservable. That precludes science from being a tool that can help in these instances. Can you understand that? Science needs to deal with reality or it's not effective.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Probe your own body thru a microscope and you will see cells with complexities. Little machineries which defies evolution. As well in the universe. Infinitude of stars you will see at night, where you could probably wonder what is the source of their unfaltering energy.

Edited by Randolpin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Little machineries which defies evolution.

No, it doesn't defy evolution.

 

Infinitude of stars you will see at night, where you could probably wonder what is the source of their unfaltering energy.

No, we have a good understanding of the source of the energy.

 

The evidence so far is the beginning of the universe where the pre-bigbang moment is a complete nothingness

We seem to have a pattern here. Perhaps you need to study science a bit more. It might help you better understand why many atheists here take the position they do.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many revised theories had been proposed in the pre-bigbang moment, Vilenkin's model have flaws and other competing models. For example the multiverse theory of Alan Guth. The problem of this theory is where is the source of the energy fueling the multiverse came from? And if it is only from nothingness, how come nothingness produce something?

Edited by Randolpin
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

Why should belief be the default?

I'm asking you what is the reason it is not the default?

I don't believe in god(s) for the same reason I don't believe in the tooth fairy or in santa claus. There's really no simpler way for me to explain it.

 

Do you ever listen to your own self when you are alone and solitary?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The problem of this theory is where is the source of the energy fueling the multiverse came from?

I don't know.

 

 

And if it is only from nothingness, how come nothingness produce something?

I don't know. And neither do you. We can only guess.

 

But...

 

You seem to be implying that our lack of knowledge must be filled by God.

No different than when we didn't understand how lightening worked we also assumed it must be from Thor.

This is one of the reasons I am an atheist. You are jumping to the exact same conclusions that people have made for thousands of years, and like them, you believe that THIS TIME you got it right.

I have yet to see any compelling reason to believe.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do you ever listen to your own self when you are alone and solitary?

Of course, and rather frequently, but I'm also intelligent enough to know that there is almost certainly no actual "god" there in that space. It's basically me talking to myself, much like you and other theists are when you "think" you're talking to "god(s)."
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many revised theories had been proposed in the pre-bigbang moment, Vilenkin's model have flaws and other competing models. For example the multiverse theory of Alan Guth. The problem of this theory is where is the source of the energy fueling the multiverse came from? And if it is only from nothingness, how come nothingness produce something?

Firstly, evidence against the big bang is not evidence of a Christian God or any God at all. Secondly, I find the "the source of energy" argument against specific theories contradictory to the notion of God because if God exists what is its "source of energy".

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.