Sorry, you need to continue the video. It will open your eyes. He quotes some of the most renowned atheists in history and digs into the science argument for existence. Furthermore, there is moral law, and if there is a moral law.... there must be a "moral law-giver".
Having no hope of heaven must be a melancholy way to live...... You die and then that's it?...... very sad.
Oh yeah,.... what do we really know for sure????? What initiated the big-bang? Evolution doesn't explain how life started. Rule #1, every living thing that exists today owes it's existence to some other form of life. What's a bigger stretch, is to think that life just spontaneously happened. This is more of an impossibility than you or I can even calculate through statistics. Now, I say again What do you think you know for sure?
It gets into the debate of whether or not there is "evil" in this world. What is evil? What does someone have to do to be evil? Was Stalin, Hitler and Judas evil? That's where moral law comes into play.... see the difference? Now, if you believe in evil, there has to be good in the world as well. Where did they come from? There had to be a "law giver"(someone to tell us what is right and wrong). Otherwise, there would be no remorse for wrong and no reward for good.
en.wikipedia.org
Atheism is pretty sweet in that it tries to stand above faith by grounding itself in the "realities" of science and hard evidence", rather than the "fantasies of some man-made religious construct". But the really cool thing is that it requires at least as much faith as Christianity and other religions. The faith is placed in a different object; that's all. Plus, you get to live free from any moral boundaries, absolving you from any consequences of anything you ever do, as long as you don't get caught.I disagree there were literally millions/billions of years of trial and error before life began to evolve to single cell much less beyond a single cell....it didn't spontaneously happen. this notion that life just began out of nothing is a false narrative pushed by Christians.....there were a incalculable number of cells dividing and I would argue that over millions and even billions of years the chances that out of those untold number of splits etc would eventually evolve into higher life...
The cool thing about science is its ok to say we dont know.....so we dont know what initiated the big bang or if the big bang even happened like is theorized, I guarantee that as man progresses new understanding changes the current theories quite a bit. However not knowing does not mean that suddenly believing a magic sky daddy created everything makes any more sense......how can you on one hand have disbelief that the universe just popped into existence or that however improbable the chance may seem that life actually did evolved from the primordial soup, but then turn around and literally believe that some all powerful god that has always somehow existed created it. To me that sounds way more improbable.....
.Abiogenesis - Wikipedia
Who says they were religious, religion evolved like everything else, early man was not religious and as religion evolved no one was a christian.....I guess though my point is that people dont default to believe in the christian god or any other god......you are not born knowing who jesus/buddha/muhammad etc is.....the concept of religion is something that grew and evolved with early man....
Evolutionary origin of religion - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
"Such mechanisms may include the ability to infer the presence of organisms that might do harm (agent detection), the ability to come up with causal narratives for natural events (etiology), and the ability to recognize that other people have minds of their own with their own beliefs, desires and intentions (theory of mind). These three adaptations (among others) allow human beings to imagine purposeful agents behind many observations that could not readily be explained otherwise, e.g. thunder, lightning, movement of planets, complexity of life.[32] The emergence of collective religious belief identified the agents as deities that standardized the explanation.[33] "
I'm not saying you are a bad person and that you are going to choose to murder and steal and so forth. But you'd certainly have no reason not to do those things if you wanted to...as long as you could avoid getting caught. If we don't have any sort of universal framework that guides us, then we rely on the collective/prevailing ideology of the day to provide that guidance. Just because more people think a certain way doesn't mean, as an atheist, you should be held to subscribe to that notion. Who is anyone, who has no basis in higher authority, to tell you how to live or act, just because they think the way they think is better? The very example of same sex marriage bears that out. Many atheists are advocates of that in the face of a majority of opposition. Abortion is the same way. Atheism has many fundamental contradictions and leaps of faith.
I was not talking about evolution...... I said the beginning of life. Where did the cells come from, that supposedly divided? Can't believe you are entertaining the theory that atoms just randomly came together and formed a living cell. As much as we know about the laws of nature, you do realize how absurdly impossible that is, right? However, if you believe that garbage, you have more faith than most Christians do. The Bible tells us a more believable account of what really happened.I disagree there were literally millions/billions of years of trial and error before life began to evolve to single cell much less beyond a single cell....it didn't spontaneously happen. this notion that life just began out of nothing is a false narrative pushed by Christians.....there were a incalculable number of cells dividing and I would argue that over millions and even billions of years the chances that out of those untold number of splits etc would eventually evolve into higher life...
The cool thing about science is its ok to say we dont know.....so we dont know what initiated the big bang or if the big bang even happened like is theorized, I guarantee that as man progresses new understanding changes the current theories quite a bit. However not knowing does not mean that suddenly believing a magic sky daddy created everything makes any more sense......how can you on one hand have disbelief that the universe just popped into existence or that however improbable the chance may seem that life actually did evolved from the primordial soup, but then turn around and literally believe that some all powerful god that has always somehow existed created it. To me that sounds way more improbable.....
.Abiogenesis - Wikipedia
Oh it most definitely was not magic. It was done by a being that has trillions of times more brainpower than the cumulative total of every human ever born, including you
A question I wonder about atheists. Do you believe in adultery or polygamy? I am asking to learn because adultery comes from the 10 commandments as do many other rules or laws whatever we shall call them. I often wonder without the 10 commandments where would be. Would murder be something acceptable and stealing. Like if no God then why is adultery wrong and murder? Why have rules if really no God. Everyone can believe what they believe is right. Such as someone might believe murder or stealing is right while another feels it’s wrong. Taking the 10 commandments out of the equation who says what is right and wrong.
The counter to your question is always that society as a whole sets the rules. Except the rules change as society changes. It's a floating system. But there are never any absolutes. And it creates a situation where it subsumes one group under another, who has no superseding authority. They just decided to make it so. So it was so. At least until they decide it is no longer so.
I appreciate your input. I’m just wondering where did the word adultery come from. Like who decided being married and seeing other ladies also is cheating? I am not asking to sound like a jerk at all. I ask for all of us. If no God or rules who decided adultery is adultery. If take away the 10 commandments where it mentioned it then I think we never see adultery as cheating nor stealing as stealing. It would have never been taught it was wrong if it had never been mentioned in bible. Same with murder I believe. What made us believe certain things are bad or wrong? Polygamy is legal in some areas of world. To me it’s an interesting conversation. Thinking we go by rules or laws that are biblically based. If they are man made then should they not be voted on? Sounds crazy I know but what makes atheists believe adultery is wrong? I guess some atheists believe it’s not? I don’t know. If it’s proven one day God is not real will the world descend into chaos? Because you have to figure people will say those are man made laws and rules that were never voted on by all. Their argument could be why should a non existent God make rules. When their beliefs are there should be no rules because I don’t believe it’s wrong.
Also I do agree. Christianity or believing in a higher power has been the reason for most wars. One group pushes their ways and beliefs onto another.
You still don't get it..... A cell is a living thing. Where did the first cell come from. You are confusing atoms and molecules with cells.
I agree. As Shaggy said social norms change and evolve. I see it more an more everyday. Especially in Christianity and other religions. Just as dancing used to be wrong, then drinking, gambling, alternative lifestyles. It’s widely more accepted today. Just as I think we will move to a more lawless society. Reducing police and possibly guns will be the aim in the future. When the movie purge came out. I said that is crazy. Now looking at today’s times I could see in the future something like that happening. Society and social norms are evolving quickly. Thanks for both your input and answers. I agree with you both.
Use your best judgment. So far on this site I've only seen a small handful of posts that toed the line and just a couple that crossed it. Also, giving examples in today's world could easily be taken out of context and used against the site or me personally and I'd rather not go down that road
Sorry, but that is such a stretch to think that molecules, just by chance, by themselves, became living cells that could breed and reproduce? Wow, and you say that believing in God is ridiculous? ..........Just remember it is still only a theory. Not a fact.I assure you am not confusing atoms and molecules with cells, the base amino acids needed to proteins etc formed in the primordial earth.....there would have been millions of years for endless chances of these amino's stringing up to build the basic parts of DNA....its not even that hard to do....then there would have been another few hundred million years for those single cells to divide essentially a infinite number of times allowing natural selection to evolve them into the person reading this post today.....
Life As We Know It Nearly Created in Lab
Scientists have created something in the lab that is tantalizingly close to what might have happened.www.livescience.com
"One of life's greatest mysteries is how it began. Scientists have pinned it down to roughly this:
Some chemical reactions occurred about 4 billion years ago — perhaps in a primordial tidal soup or maybe with help of volcanoes or possibly at the bottom of the sea or between the mica sheets — to create biology.
Now scientists have created something in the lab that is tantalizingly close to what might have happened. It's not life, they stress, but it certainly gives the science community a whole new data set to chew on.
The researchers, at the Scripps Research Institute, created molecules that self-replicate and even evolve and compete to win or lose. If that sounds exactly like life, read on to learn the controversial and thin distinction.
Specifically, the researchers synthesized RNA enzymes that can replicate themselves without the help of any proteins or other cellular components, and the process proceeds indefinitely. "Immortalized" RNA, they call it, at least within the limited conditions of a laboratory.
More significantly, the scientists then mixed different RNA enzymes that had replicated, along with some of the raw material they were working with, and let them compete in what's sure to be the next big hit: "Survivor: Test Tube."
Remarkably, they bred.
And now and then, one of these survivors would screw up, binding with some other bit of raw material it hadn't been using. Hmm. That's exactly what life forms do ...
When these mutations occurred, "the resulting recombinant enzymes also were capable of sustained replication, with the most fit replicators growing in number to dominate the mixture," the scientists report.
The "creatures" — wait, we can't call them that! — evolved, with some "species" winning out."
