Open for Debate

I am an atheist

I am an atheist.  That is, I believe that God does not exist.  I don’t make a point of telling people this (except when I’m writing a philosophical piece like this), but when I do tell people this, I get strong, often accusing reactions.  People challenge my moral character (“So you don’t believe in right or wrong?”), my amiability (“I hope you’re not one of those militant atheists?”), and my motives (“Are you trying to undermine my faith?”).  Such reactions are irritating, and occasionally disturbing (why would I want to undermine your faith?), but in some ways they bother me less than the challenges that focus on my reasonableness:

  • “How could you possibly know? You can’t prove a negative, you know.”
  • “Don’t you mean you’re an agnostic? That’s what I
  • “You probably think that only idiots believe.”

Comments like these are evoked (or provoked) by the topic of atheism, but the challenges they raise involve epistemological issues that are quite general.  Outside of the context of religion, I don’t think that many people would endorse the epistemological positions that these remarks presuppose.

Consider the “truism” that you can’t prove a negative.  In non-religious contexts, no one believes this.  Adults deny the existence of Santa Claus all the time, and generally without censure. (Exception: if you tell your kids the truth about the man in red, you’ll be called a bad parent.)  Now it might be argued that because Santa Claus is an impossible being, one can prove that he doesn’t exist.  But to do so, you need to assume some general empirical facts about the world, facts about distances and maximum speeds and the poor aerodynamics of reindeer.  The fact is that genuine proofs – conclusions validly drawn from self-evident premises – don’t exist outside the realm of logic and mathematics.  What we expect in the way of backing for knowledge claims in ordinary life is justification – reasons to believe.  To the extent that these reasons involve sensory experience – that is, things we’ve seen, heard, felt, touched, smelled or tasted – they provide something less than certainty.  But that doesn’t prevent us from claiming to know things like where we live, who the president of the United States is, what color we’ve painted the dining room and so forth.

Once we recognize that proof is an impossible standard, we can see that there’s no in-principle difference between the justification of negative and positive existence claims.  Both require evidence if we claim to know them, and both must be evaluated in the context other of our other rational beliefs.  Consider the matter of whether King Arthur really existed.  According to Jason Urbanus, writing in the January/February issue of Archaeology, this is a “contentious question [that] has divided both scholars and enthusiasts for centuries.”

But Urbanus himself thinks that the Arthur of legend is mythical.  He explains that there is only one historical text – Geoffrey of Monmouth’s The History of the Kings of Britain — that even mentions a British monarch named “Arthur.”  But that text says nothing about Camelot, a Round Table, or knights thereof, and the book itself was deemed unreliable by Geoffrey’s own contemporaries.  There is, moreover, no archaeological evidence that such a person as Arthur ever existed, even at his reputed birth place, Tintagel Castle.

Now this brings up the notorious question whether “absence of evidence” constitutes “evidence of absence.”  The answer to the question is “sometimes.”   Here again, everything depends on the hypothesis under consideration and the assumptions that form the background of inquiry.  The fact that I cannot see one is excellent evidence, in Massachusetts, that there is no elephant around.  If the animal in question were a fox, or if I lived in Kenya, it would be a different story.  I cannot be sure that there is no elephant, but I can be extremely well justified in believing there isn’t.

But let’s turn to the second challenge.  Why am I so determined to say that God doesn’t exist; why don’t I say instead that God might not exist, or that I don’t know whether God exists?  Why do I insist on being an atheist, rather than an agnostic?  Well, it’s because the question whether God exists has been settled to my satisfaction.  (And why is my satisfaction all that’s necessary?  Because I am the one who is deciding what to believe.)  I claim to know that God doesn’t exist because I have excellent reasons and arguments against his existence, and because none of the arguments that are put forward in favor of his existence are any good.  To say that I’m an agnostic would be to say that I’m undecided, and I’m not.  There are plenty of things that I am agnostic about: whether string theory is true, whether the Game of Thrones spin-offs will be any good, and whether you burn more fat if you exercise before breakfast.  I have no idea about the first thing, a somewhat warranted opinion about the second, and a bit of evidence (courtesy of the New York Times) about the third.  But the existence of God is different.  I am completely confident about that.

This brings us to the third challenge (already broached): who the hell do I think I am?  Better minds than mine have concluded that God does exist – what makes me think my evidence and arguments are better than theirs?  This challenge is a version of what is being called, in the epistemology literature, the problem of peer disagreement.  It goes like this: suppose that you find yourself in a disagreement with another person (an “epistemic peer”)  who is a) just as smart as you are and b) acquainted with all the same evidence and arguments that you are acquainted with.  What should you do if you discover that the two of you disagree about something?  Flying in the face of thousands of pages worth of philosophical disputation, I think the answer to this question is easy.  The answer is: it depends.  (The alert reader will have seen this coming.)  That is, I contend that there is no general answer to this question.  There are certainly cases where the discovery that I disagree with someone who has roughly the same smarts as me and the same evidence that I do ought to make me reconsider my position – those are cases where the best explanation for our disagreement is that one of us has made a mistake, but where there’s no evidence that it’s one of us rather than the other.  But there are other cases where I ought to stand my ground: if, by my calculations, the tip at the restaurant ought to be $12.50, while my colleague (just as smart as me, just as knowledgeable about arithmetic) comes up with the amount of $768.40, I have excellent reason to think that they are the one who is wrong.  It is always, or ought to be, data that someone disagrees with me, but it should also be an open question what explains the data.  Maybe, despite our having roughly the same information, there are a few crucial facts that I have that you don’t.  And then there’s the fact that “intelligence” is pretty context-dependent.  People can be very intelligent and very well-informed, yet still have their blind spots.  For that matter, people can be very intelligent in one domain and total idiots in another.

But I don’t have to think that anyone who disagrees with me in the matter of religion is a total idiot, or even a partial one.  In general, I don’t have ready explanations for the disagreements I have with my theist friends – in one or two cases, I have a hypothesis — but that doesn’t mean I’m wrong to think that I’m right and they’re wrong.  And of course, they think they’re right, and I’m wrong.  So it goes.

In closing, let me just note that, while it’s true that there are lots of people smarter than me who believe in God, it’s also true, probably, that there are lots of people smarter than you who don’t.

 

Picture Graffitied Atheism Advert by David Emery on Flickr. All Rights Reserved. Reproduced with permission of the author

Comments

  • Autumn Sonnata

    Dear Ma’m,

    So,you are satisfied with arguments disproving existence of God, Really?Maybe western notion of God,but what about Eastern notion of God?
    Since you are one of the foremost experts in this,I would like know if you have contemplated existence of something greater than this materialistic world?You must have had read and analysed a lot about concept of God and which must have shaped your views regarding God,but what have you also felt something mystical something your rationale or logic would find incomprehensible?
    or Maybe you have been looking in wrong direction.Fortunately,there is still one home of ancient wisdom left which is,INDIA.What if I tell you that an experience awaits you,An experience which may destroy your faith in conventional logic and rational wisdom,when a completely illetrate 80 years old woman can tell all your past history without needing you to speak a single word.Or when a person can tell all about you even deeply personal habits/vices/fear which you yourself did not know using mere 3 details :date/time/place of birth!

    Answer lies in east.

  • ARTHUR HILL

    Let the discussion begin. Reading your outline, on your conclusion, that God does not exist. I see that your foundation, is, I have concluded that the evidence presented is not tangible, and therefore cannot be tested concludes that there cannot be a God. Also your conclusion is based on the philosophical platform that the spiritual, or religious text has not the power to convince. So let’s throw religious text out of the equation, and let’s use other sources. I would rather this subject using messenger video chat. Is this a format that is useful to you also?

  • Usma

    Try to Recongnize God with breakage of your intentions and plans.

  • Jim Humphreys

    Consider the “truism” that you can’t prove a negative.  In non-religious contexts, no one believes this.”

    The main proponents of the claim that “you cannot prove a negative”, from on my experience, are atheists. Very often these atheists define atheism as “a lack of belief in gods”. They seem to think that defining atheism in this way (not the way most academic atheist philosophers would define it) absolves them of any need to make a positive case for atheism and, furthermore, that as one “cannot prove a negative” it is unsurprising that if cannot disprove the existence of God. My position is that this is simply flat-out wrong. It’s easy to prove a negative: A v-B, -A :. -B is such an (elementary) proof. Furthermore, so far as God is concerned one could, in principle, show that He doesn’t exist by showing that He entails contradictory properties.

    “…The fact that I cannot see one is excellent evidence, in Massachusetts, that there is no elephant around.  If the animal in question were a fox, or if I lived in Kenya, it would be a different story.  I cannot be sure that there is no elephant, but I can be extremely well justified in believing there isn’t.”

    I think that there is an implicit category error here, since God is not said to be a physical object like a fox or an elephant which one could discover (or not discover) by conducting an exhaustive physical search.

    Finally, you refer to arguments and evidence which you think shows God does not exist, but do not present any such arguments. What, one wonders, is this evidence (or arguments) that God does not exist?

  • Barati

    Dear madam!
    We are a group of university professors.We like ho have debate with you through webinars .Is it possible?
    Please answer me on this adress: barati36@yahoo.com

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Hi Louise

    If you believe like you claim, in mathematics, witnessing and probabilities, I will prove to you that God exists.
    For this to happen we need common ground and i would like to know whether you believe in the existence of historical figures like Julius Caesar, Napoleon Bonaparte,Alexander the Great and Jesus Christ (all of them well documented ).
    Jesus is so well documented that He became the center point of time when referring to historical events ie .before or after Christ.
    It will be even easier to prove the existence of God if you believe that a human being posses a soul or spirit.

    I look forward to receiving communication from you

  • Chris Andrews

    Hi Louise,

    Thanks for sharing your views and insight. I am a believer in both God and in the divinity of Jesus. I am not offended
    or threatened in the least by your views and I hope you are not offended by mine. It’s true. I grew up in a God believing
    home (although my parents were very down to earth and accepting and loving toward all people and taught us to be as well)
    and I attended a Christian school. I do believe that this upbringing still influences me today. However, I’m in my 50’s and there
    came a time when it wasn’t enough to just take their word, I had to do a lot of deep thinking. It is my belief that it is futile to
    try to prove the existance of God. I also believe that it is futile to disprove his/her existence. There are too many questions that I believe science will probably never be able to answer for us no matter how far we probe. Where is the edge of space? What is space contained in? What is nothingness? How can we quantify nothingness without something to compare it to? If there was a Big Bang, what were the materials or matter that caused this to happen? Where did they come from? Did we evolve? Evolve from what? What did original living matter or beings evolve from? Where is the mind? Not the brain, the mind. How can the mind if it is simply an evolved machine
    of sorts express and recognize human emotion? How do we even quantify emotion? I can go on and on. No, I can’t explain why
    a loving God would allow horrific and cruel things to happen all the time. I’ll never be able to explain it. Nor will I be able to explain
    many things such as this. But I cannot deny that throughout my life there have been situations and outcomes and answers that
    I have received that I believe to have come from God. If I called them coincidences I would be a fool. I would also be a fool if
    I sometimes (especially when I allow it in) am awash and embraced with a feeling of love and peace that to me seems to surpass even
    the purest and most powerful love that I’ve received from people. Do I believe Atheists can be happy, fulfilled and kind people ?
    Of course! I also know that Christians and believers of God can be evil, cruel and ugly people. I’ve been all of those things before at certain times. I do my best to keep my mind focused on the lessons taught and more importantly the actions displayed by Jesus.
    I often fail but sometimes I don’t. I suppose I might ask “what have I lost by believing ? Clarity? ” I don’t believe that anyone alive will have true clarity while we are here. I do however believe that I have the hope of life beyond this one where there is no more death or ugliness and that there is indeed a loving and caring creator helping us along this journey. Actually, I just had a conversation with a
    satanist. I was intrigued by his thoughts and had many questions for him. He was a very pleasant guy and I didn’t feel the least
    bit threatened by his beliefs. He seemed like a good and decent man and I believe you to be a lovely and very thoughtful person
    who I would very much enjoy exchanging ideas with. I am always up for learning from someone and possibly offering something to someone else if I have an answer or idea they may not have considered. I wish you all good things and again, thank you for sharing yourself with us.

  • Raquel

    I’ve wanted to ask an atheist this question for a long time. If you believe that we are here due to a process of biological evolution that has occurred through the mechanism of natural selection, then (considering that you have some knowledge in natural sciences) … How can natural selection favor the development of an organ or member in a species if at present these characteristics (which lead to the development of said member or organ) do not suppose any evolutionary advantage?

    I guess you wonder what I mean exactly. The truth is that according to evolutionary theory this must have happened all the time and many times.

    I’ll give you an example and put it in context:
    This example does not talk about how reptiles became birds, but about how non-flying reptiles became flying (based on the version proposed by the evolutionary theory that flying reptiles became birds). Well, before these reptiles were flying, they should be non-flying. Let’s specify a little more: before the wings of these reptiles were flying (functional) they were non-flying (non-functional) and probably the advantages provided to the species were different. As for example, (if their wings had feathers), they promoted the conservation of body heat.

    As we know, natural selection favors characteristics that are advantageous in the present. Natural selection does not favor characteristics that will suppose a future advantage because this (natural selection) is not an entity with intention, nor does it know the future, but a natural mechanism.

    And here is something in this thought that does not take this into account. It is assumed without more, than natural selection in the case of reptiles transformed a limb (or organ) whose present utility was the preservation of body heat, into another whose utility was an activity as complex as flying. Note: wings are not the only characteristics that make this activity possible, there are other things that must be considered; as body mass and morphology.

    It is possible that you still cannot see what I am saying, it is one of the traps of this apparently intuitive thought. But it is still some kind of logical fallacy. I will try to be a little more specific:

    If this member currently provides benefits that consist of improving the preservation of body heat, according to the customs and current way of life of the species, it is these characteristics that will be favored in the species to each generation. Why? Due to the limited number of activities carried out by this species, not all the characteristics with potential can be “tested” to find any advantage in them. And here would be those that lead to their wings in the future being capable of supporting flight. These characteristics mentioned in the present do not suppose any advantage because they do not even allow the realization of the flight activity. Natural selection in this case could lead the species to develop “warmer” wings, which translates into a specialization according to the advantages found in the present for the species and dependent on its activities and habits.

    One way to put this: These reptiles don’t need to fly. Natural selection will find other avenues of specialization with far greater instant advantages. This is so according to the definition of natural selection and the observed facts, such as the case of the color change of moths during the industrial revolution in Great Britain. But assuming that a limb or organ has been addressed in a direction completely contrary to the current way of life of the species, is at least capricious and cannot be caused by the mechanism of natural selection.

    I like to think of this example when highlighting the first question asked. But other examples can be given: the passage from aquatic creatures to terrestrial creatures (What advantage does a respiratory system bring to an aquatic creature that does not allow it to breathe outside the sea, but which addressed in this direction? How does this transition take place if the intermediate steps still do not contribute anything?), the passage from oviparous to mammals, etc … They are the “more striking” things I can think of, but I’m sure you can find more subtle things.

    Natural selection is not capable of walking blindly for thousands of years while these small changes occur, until finally the organ is formed and finds some use that represents an advantage. They are added as facts, changes that would suppose too great a leap for natural selection, and impossible from a logical point of view based on the definition of natural selection.

    I admit that I am not an expert on the subject, but I know enough that it is possible for me to ask these questions.

    Sincerely, I would like to know your opinion on this subject, assuming that you have understood the approach. I also invite anyone with a background in evolutionary science to answer this question.

    Best regards

  • David

    Ha! Great blog. I often feel alone in my beliefs, but would really like to discuss this subject with others. In essence, I believe mankind’s consciousness and burblings are hubris and the language and perceptions are human centric and should be viewed with-in this context.I have stood on the rim and hiked the Grand Canyon, flown as a professional pilot at 45,000 feet and the surface of the earth speaks to me of eons that never knew the human creature. It will be thus after we are erased. And I have recently stood at the bedside of my dying wife of 40 years, her suffering finally ceased. But now, it is as if it never happened.
    The best things produced by humanity?
    Music,bicycles, eyeglasses!
    BTW, when I was 16, after hitchhiking all over North American, I spent a year in a pentacostal commune speaking in tongues!

  • David

    You assume man has actual wisdom and knowledge and can theorize correctly how all creatures and living things came into existance. We don’t have the tools to understand, probably never will. All we can honestly do is be grateful if we have enough to eat, and a warm place to sleep at night. Many don’t have this nor the luxury of postulating existential opinions. Consider yourself fortunate that you have the means and leisure for ‘deep thinking’.

  • Mike Higgins

    I find it strange and perhaps worrying that many people do not respect others beliefs. Belief is not necessarily based on evidence, e.g. faith, nor is ‘belief’ owned by the religious. It is quite acceptable to say I believe that something is not true or does not exist.
    If Louise states she does not believe in a god or religion, then that is her position, a view she is entitled to have.
    Louise believes in debate and is prepared (although she says reluctantly) to share her beliefs with those willing or wishing to discuss the ideas and views of others.
    One thing is plain to me, many who attack or hurl insults at anyone who is of the atheist persuasion are usually very self-important, believing their beliefs or views are superior to others’ positions. That is the problem of belief, that it is a body of views or opinion that has been adopted, a position that cannot necessarily be proven as true or false. Perhaps belief could be considered as ‘what one thinks is true’. Belief could come to you suddenly out-of-the-blue or perhaps arisen after a long consideration of differing views and opinions carefully examined and compared, out of which comes a deeper understanding and more certainty about ones own belief.

  • Anonymous

    My ideals of being a human and of humankind and of the God above are obsolete when it comes to my faith. That is the first thing that I would tell someone so that they do not overstep a boundary with an almighty not just called God but is a god and is powerful enough to do damage and confuse someone until kingdom come… or not. My thoughts of God may not even be that important enough to be heard let alone a dignified response. I know that people want to protect their children from the harshness of submission but there is no mistaking right from wrong in this case. You are either grateful enough to do this thing for this god or not. His grace and goodness may be Englishly misunderstood. When good is done for anything then it would’ve been dealt with and seen as good in the right manner. That is what His goodness is and He is kind enough to not let His creation run wild without knowing Him and without purpose. And if my creation can do nothing for me than it is no good for me anymore and is as good as the average firewood after ashes have turn. Do you agree?

    • Etienne

      Raquel hit the nail on the head. To simplify what he/she was implying is that a certain life particle didn’t just decide he wants to be a cow with a stomach and anus and another life particle that it wants to be a tuft grass that would like to be eaten by this cow and become an excrement via his anus. (This according to evolutionists ,the backbone and launchpad of the Atheist believes that all forms of life originate from a big bang of dust and matter.).
      To top this there are scientists who would defend this theory to the hilt. Absolutely insane!!!!!!!!!

      Logical conclusions would therefor have to incorporate the existence of a Creator of planet earth with a perfect ecosystem which we as Christians call our God Jahweh

  • David

    After being on both sides of this, I have concluded we believe what we choose to believe. The question I pose is “why do you need to believe what you believe”. To me answers of existence are unknowable to the human perception limitations. So we choose a narrative to fill in the gaps…

  • Anonymous Potato

    I love the humble way in which you wrote your blog.

    First, I personally am 100% sure that the Gods of religions do not exist because you can find 100s of fallacies and contradictions in their texts.
    Second, the definition of God is very subjective and this is why it has survived thousands of years if not more, each person creates God in their own imagination, which cannot actually be shared with others.
    Third, let’s say God is the creator of the world, then why are we supposed to worship him/her/it? Do you worship your parents?
    Forth, why do we have to be told about God since a young age? Why didn’t we discover him/her/it on our own?
    Fifth, it is very scary to drop the idea of God because it creates an empty spot in our minds and raises lots of questions that were dormant when we were reassured by the idea of God, and this is why religious people cannot easily grasp the idea, it is a process that requires time and efforts.

    Cheers

    • Etienne

      Dear Anonymous Potato

      Have you ever asked yourself why we are in the year 2021 and why one Person’s birthday is so widely celebrated across the world?

      • Anonymous Potato

        Dear Etienne

        thank you for your reply.
        Yes, of course I have asked myself this question before, please keep in mind that in different countries with different religions they have different calendars depending on their leader’s birth, like in Islam the calendar is based on the moon and they are in a different year than in the west for example.

        Also, Christmas has its origins in a pagan celebration btw.

        Plus, who does not like to celebrate Christmas? Even people from different religions celebrate it because it is one of the most beautiful celebrations (on a side note, they make a lot of profit out of it, it is commercial).

        Cheers

        • Etienne van Heerden

          Potato -The fundamental difference being that all history pivots around the birth of Jesus ie. BC and AD. which implies that his existence cannot be disputed only whether or not he was the son of God.There is also little doubt that he performed a host of miracles including raising people from the dead all well documented and before thousands of witnesses with no ancient scriptures anywhere denying the truth or accuracy of these events.
          Jesus himself said he did this through the power of God.
          Do you know of any ancient scriptures contradicting the books of these witnesses ?

          Have an awesome day

          • Potato

            Dear Etienne

            to be honest, I did not dispute the existence of Jesus and I did not mention anything regarding the miracles, even though I do not believe in those miracles because if it was possible to have those miracles back then, why can’t we have them happening now? And why do miracles happen to some people and to others no? Is God discriminating?

            As a mathematician, I know that giving 1 counter-example can prove a whole theory wrong. Since the new testament has been written by 4 disciples of Jesus (they got a flame from God to be able to write it), then it must not have mistakes or contradictions because it was God-given. However, that’s not the case. There an numerous fallacies, mistakes, and rules that do not make sense at all in the bible. Please, remember that 1 fallacy or mistake is enough, yet there are plenty of them. So, I can very confidently conclude that it is man-made because we humans are not perfect and we do mistakes, which should not be the case of God.

            What do you think?

            Have a lovely day <3

          • David Robertson

            You must mean all Christian history. The whole of human civilization has much more history than this one context, and you can buy a Chinese calendar which is predicated on an alternative historical context.😊

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Good day Robert i don’t mean just Christian history i mean events like wars, earthquakes,floods, civilisations, extinction of animals,ages of artifacts and the list goes on.
    As for the Chinese calendar a Xin Chou year is not even a full year but falls short by around 2.5 weeks and nothing of historical importance is related to this calendar

    NS. The great wall of China was built 1474 AD.

    Have an awesome day brother

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Dear Potato
    Neither Mark nor Luke were one of the 12 disciples and nor was Paul ( the biggest persecutor of Christians ) became the most devoted follower of Jesus.
    Miracles do happen today and off hand what comes to mind and is publicly known ( note that i give examples not just unsupported statements) Through the power of God, Smith Wigglesworth, raised around 12 people from the dead and Angus Buchan helped a paraplegic walk, Todd White helped a deaf person hear amongst other miracles these people performed .

    After the death of Jesus a number of people undertook to write about the events they saw and heard of and not all of them did however through own witnessing and investigation they wrote down their recollections as well as interviewed other witnesses so of course there might be a recollection or memorial error here and there. They were inspired to write not given the words to write.

  • Potato

    Dear Etienne

    Thank you for the correction, yes you are right that Mark and Luke were not disciples of Jesus, however it is worth mentioning that Mark was the secretary of Peter (disciple of Jesus). I would like to ask you: why did God allow such mistakes to happen? He is omnipotent and can definitely prevent those mistakes. Also, why do you have to believe in him if if he can simply reveal himself to each one of us? Plus, if you believe in something, and then you prove its existence, that’s not a belief anymore. It is indeed a vicious cycle.

    As for the miracles, I am sorry, I do not believe they happened or people can even do miracles. Have you ever had a miracle in your life? How do you prove miracles? Why do we use science if we can simply have miracles? Also, why do miracles happen to specific people and not to others? This is discrimination. If so, then God is not fair, which contradicts with the fact that she is benevolent.

    Please, think about this scenario:
    Let’s say I am an atheist and you are a good Christian, you pray everyday, you do good to everyone, you read in the Bible, you go to church weekly and you fast during lent. One day, we both get into a car crash, I heal quickly from my broken arm but you don’t. It turns out God healed me and it was a miracle, but God did not heal your broken members. How would you feel about it? Isn’t this discrimination?

    Also, a kind reminder, please note that giving only 1 counter-example to a hypothesis is enough to prove it to be fallacious. You can give as many examples that align with the hypothesis as you want, it will never be enough to prove it right.

    Lastly, as we know there is an estimate of around 30billions of Gods in the world, why do you think that your God is the right one? How did you choose to be a Christian? Did you read about all 30bn Gods to choose and decide to become Christian?

    Thank you very much for engaging.
    Cheers

  • David Robertson

    We expect logic or a semblance of rational behavior from our professionals, i.e. doctors, teachers, airline pilots etc, But we accept irrational explanations from our religions.

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Dear Potato

    You slapped me with a host of questions and i will try to deal with as many as possible with my limited time and one finger typing.
    First of all, nowhere in the Bible does it say that Christians are exempt from falling,breaking arms, falling sick, dying, getting covid,cancer etc.Your life on earth is just a dot on the infinity line and whether you are Bill Gates or sweep the streets,die a horrible painful death or die peacefully in your sleep, it all happens in the little dot.
    I do not know why God has not revealed Himself in person although He did reveal Himself through His Son.
    I sense that you are a seeing is believing person when in fact seeing is only confirming your believes.If i take the kettle plug out of the wall socket and ask you to stick your finger in the socket will you ? Off course not ,you will tell me you will get electric shock to which i will reply whether you are able to see the electricity which off course you cannot, you just know it’s there.
    My God is a living God who’s Son was resurrected ,and this was documented by various witnesses none of whom has ever been proved or called a liar.

    Please give me examples of the fallacies you are talking about but not more than 2 at a time and i will deal with them as best i can

    Cheers

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Dear David

    Please elaborate what you mean by irrational explanations

    • David

      Few of us would buy a used car we had never seen and the seller had assured us via a lengthy letter that his used car was ‘the last car you’ll ever need”. That would be irrational behavior.
      But many will base their world-view and self identity on similar circumstances.

      • Etienne van Heerden

        Good morning David

        Off coarse not but if i read the reviews and testimonials of the people that bought cars and dealt with that seller before i would since scenario changed considerably. For example if i wanted to go on vacation to an unknown resort the reviews would have to be favourable before i will book and if they are i will.If this is regarded as irrational then i plead guilty.

        Cheers

          • Potato

            Hello Etienne

            I will focus only on 2 topics now:
            1) electricity can be experimentally detected, predicted, and measured. You have the opportunity to test it in the lab if you feel like it. You don’t have to believe in it without evidence or proof. Also, you can actually see it in some cases like when you see lightning in the sky.
            2) Mistakes in the bible: Earth is flat, Earth is the center of the world, we are all descendants from Adam and Eve who only had 3 sons (think very well about the last one ;D)

            Cheers

          • Etienne van Heerden

            Hi David unfortunately no reviews from either yet as judgement day lies in the future.You cannot get a review on a car or resort that hasn’t been built yet however you can buy shares in the proposed future development / design. if you have faith in the developer or car manufacturer.

            Have an awesome day

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Hi there Potato

    1) You are correct about electricity being detected, measured etc although a lot of people i know have never measured or detected electricity . The point i was trying to make is one knows it is there in the wall plug but can’t see it and if you tell your child not to put his/her finger in the plug they should trust you even though they have never been electrically shocked or cannot see it.

    2)It is not a mistake. The people in those days did believe the world was flat although Jesus knew the world is round as he prophesied that on Judgement day 2 people will be working in the fields and one will be taken and the other left behind and two people will be sleeping one will be taken and the other left behind. This implies that He knew then, that on Judgement day it will be dark(people sleeping), and light (people working) on the same day.which off coarse is not possible if the world is flat.
    Adam and Eve had sons and daughters ,just a lot more was written about the sons.(refer Gen 5:4 ) There were also giants which indicates to me that they were not the only or maybe even the first people made by God. My personal view is that these giants were discarded from history because Jesus is a descendant from Adam but i can’t be certain.

    I trust my answers were satisfactory/helpful and looking forward to the next two
    Have an awesome day

    • Potato

      Hello Etienne

      1) your children don’t have to trust you with anything, it’s up to them. As for the electricity, do you place a 2year old child next to a socket? That’s a no, you have to keep them safe until their cognitive abilities develop into understanding physical phenomena. Also, I’m sure as a kid you have burned yourself at least once and you know how fire works, this is how you learned not to mess up with fire (by analogy to electricity). Also, we are all taught about electricity at school, we experimentally played with that and we know what it is. If not, there are these little electrocuting toys that we all have tried at some point. Not to mention how many times you have touched someone and got electrocuted or maybe even experienced your hair being electrocuted.
      I’m sorry, but comparing electricity to belief in God is very erroneous, I hope you notice that and we close this topic 1.

      2) God (the father) does not know the earth is round? If so, She can tell Her son so very clearly, no need to prevaricate.
      “He knew then, that on Judgement day it will be dark(people sleeping), and light (people working) on the same day.which off coarse is not possible if the world is flat.”, are you saying they did not have day and night at the time of Jesus?
      “Adam and Eve had sons and daughters”, well incest was okay? As for giants, you are postulating and I would please ask you to continue in a more reliable way.

      Look Etienne, it is okay to admit the bible is wrong, it is okay to have wrong beliefs and to adjust accordingly, it is not shameful to do mistakes and on the contrary, I would respect someone who admits their mistakes and adjusts accordingly. If you don’t feel like answering, it is okay, I do not oblige you to do so. If you feel like answering, please do so following a logical way.

      Have a lovely day and take care.

      • Etienne van Heerden

        Hi Potato

        If the can’t see electricity-can’t see God comparison did not work for you i will respect your view and leave it at that

        If the world was flat as was believed in ancient times, then everybody on the planet would experience day during day time and when the sun sets night time for everybody which was how they perceived their day and night experiences . God and Jesus were the only ones who knew 2000 years ago, that when it was day time in the middle east it was, unknown to the Israelis, night time on the other side of the planet ie. Perth or Beijing..
        Today just the thought of incest is revolting but quite okay in ancient times (it is what it is) and as for the giants refer Gen 6:4
        I have been honest and open in all my communication with you.
        Let’s get a different Athiestic perspective for example, explain to me how life on earth started and how the universe came to be ?

        Cheers for now

        • Potato

          Hi Etienne

          If you are interested to know more about the contradictions, mistakes, and fallacies in the Bible, I invite you to check some that can be found here: https://www.news24.com/news24/MyNews24/The-Problem-of-the-Bible-Inaccuracies-contradictions-fallacies-scientific-issues-and-more-20120517

          Example:


          GE 6:4 There were Nephilim (giants) before the Flood.
          GE 7:21 All creatures other than Noah and his clan were annihilated by the Flood
          GE 13:33 There were Nephilim after the Flood

          This was extracted from a document written by a Pastor, which can also be found in the above link.

          Good question, it is a big question that we all naturally ask because we are curious to know about our existence. We are naturally inquisitive people, which has been used to manipulate us into believing things we do not know about to satisfy our hungry curiosity. So, if I pretend that I know exactly how we were created, you straight away can call me a liar. Some things are beyond our comprehension, and we have to admit this. We are not able to explain everything we experience, and that is okay. We have not yet discovered exactly how we were created, but we are seeking the truth year after year. When you are inside of a dark tunnel and you see some light, you follow it, and then this will lead you to more sight…etc. I suggest you read about the allegory of the cave if you have not done so yet.

          Also, it is very important to separate the idea of God from the idea of the Creator, you do not have to worship your Creator the same as you do not worship your parents.

          Please note that giving ideas creatively to explain how we were born, does not necessarily mean that it is the truth. In other words, our ancestors have written those books to guide us and they got creative in answering those questions. If an idea answers a question you are curious about, the idea does not necessarily have to be true. Saying that God created us because it has been said to us by many people, does not make it the answer. It is way more honest to say: I do not know, than to create false hopes and explanations.

          I personally am an existentialist, which means I am happy that I exist to begin with, and I want to make the most out of this small opportunity that I was given. Religion was a good way to start teaching the majority of people how to be ethical/moral in the society by giving them simplified rules of thumb, but now it is not enough anymore, we need to build a new more sophisticated system that must be better than the religious ones. You can argue that ethics and philosophy have existed way more than the Abrahamic religions, but keep in mind that philosophy cannot be taught to everyone easily; at those old times, people had the incentive to survive rather than think critically and philosophize. Philosophizing and being ethical are luxuries as David mentioned earlier; I am immensely grateful that we have the luxury to think, analyze, and discuss such topics, which others do not really have the luxury to do.

          Cheers

          • Etienne van Heerden

            Dear Potato

            Don’t know what the issue is with the giants Gen 6;4 states clearly there were giants in those days AND thereafter when the creatures from heaven had children with the woman of man although gigantic people cannot exclusively be attributed to them only.(This happened before and after the flood.) Numerous skeletons ranging from around 2.4m to 2.7m which would qualify in anybodies terms as gigantic, have been uncovered ie.Catalina island skeleton as well as Miamisburg skeleton and various others. Note there is no Gen13;33 as you claim Gen 13 has only18 verses.

            Most critics are knit picking on the airtIghtness of Biblical inerrancy, the authorship,and penmanship when Christianity is centered around the birth,teachings,miracles performed,death and resurrection of Jesus who died for our sins and rose on the 3rd day.The fact that there are different numbers of witnesses as to the empty grave, has no bearing on the Christian faith.
            Most of the contradictions are differences when independent accounts describe the same event with nuances..

            For example, if i tell you the story that during the battle of Bloodriver more than 10000 Zulus perished and a friend who’s grandfather was involved in the battle says it was more like 20000, we cannot dismiss the event as never happened, or assume because our fatality numbers differ that nobody died.The scriptures are not diametrically opposed to one another even though minor detail might differ.
            To simply dismiss an entire text because of secondary errors, can be regarded as logical fallacy.
            Many of the discrepancies can be attributed to translation errors via misreading/mishearing for example the Jewish word “yom”which could give several different meanings of a verse,also bearing in mind that there are more than twenty thousand Biblical manuscripts, written by various historians.I am Afrikaans speaking and i can confirm that there are huge discrepancies with the translation to Afrikaans Bibles.

            To demonstrate how easily this could happen i will use our same language, uncomplicated, brief communication between us, where you,a mathematician , made 2 numerical errors. First you mentioned that there are and i quote ” 30 Billions of gods” when there is only around 8 Billion people on earth (around 4 gods per person babies included). I did not want to make an issue of it because i sensed the point you were trying to make which is, that there are lots of gods.Your second numerical error was to state i have to look at Gen 13: 33 which i already dealt with.

            The point i am making is not to be distracted by discrepancies or minor detail whereby you will miss the bigger picture.

            Grab yourself an awesome weekend

          • Potato

            Dear Etienne

            Apologies for my mistake, it should be NU 13:33 instead of GE 13:33, thank you for pointing this out, I appreciate it.

            Those errors that YOU call minor are many, and you can check the link I have sent you earlier. Also, there are mistakes, fallacies, and CONTRADICTIONS in the bible itself, not only differences in numbers. Also, I do not agree that these are minor mistakes because you are basing your entire life, beliefs, and mentality on these books, which contain a huge amount of errors, and you are turning a blind eye to them just to maintain your inherited faith.

            Well, since we both agree that the bible contains a hell lot of mistakes, we can very well conclude the bible was written by people, it is man-made. We humans do mistakes and I am not one of the numerous Gods that have been created by humans. I eventually do minor mistakes like the ones you mentioned and I never pretend I am perfect, but when someone points it out, I acknowledge that I made a mistake and I correct it. As for my claim of 30bn of Gods, it is just an estimate from this source: https://atheism.wikia.org/wiki/How_many_gods%3F#:~:text=The%20ancient%20Hittites%20claimed%20to,an%20estimate%20of%20N%20%3D%2028%2C000%2C000.
            Though, it really does not matter if they are 2 or 30bn, we can’t deny the truth of having at least more than 2 Gods (to take the worst case scenario), which raises the question of which one is the correct one. So basically, you are claiming that your God is the right one and dismissing the Gods of others. I am curious to know if you notice the analogy between how people used to believe in multiple deities long ago and how people now believe in a God (male, white, all powerful) because they both are not able to fathom certain phenomena happening around them.

            Regarding the big picture, I can say exactly the same about your vision, how can you not realize that your faith is completely dependent on your parents, upbringing, community, and geographical location. Do you realize that if you were born in a different country with different parents, you would have had a different religion? You would have also thought that your religion is the right one. Zoom out the earth, think about how religions are distributed on it, think about how your parents have taught you about religion by telling you “stories” (we love stories, don’t we?) and how easily you were convinced as a kid. Think how they convinced you of Santa until you actually saw a family member actually wearing Santa clothes (pun not intended), think how much money and profit the church institution makes out of the people’s beliefs. Think how much we are controlled by religion and how restrictive it is to our mind. Think about how scary it is not to know everything, to doubt God, and to finally accept that there is nothing after we die. Think about how God was barely able to manage Adam and Eve in the beginning, and how is he supposed to be able to manage all of us? It was mentioned in the Genesis that he “got tired” and took a break (this is human behavior, not Godly at all), these are the imaginations and projections of our ancestors, postulations, ideas, hypotheses…etc

            Since you are choosing to turn a bling eye to the numerous errors, fallacies, mistakes, and discrepancies in the bible, I can very safely conclude that it is your decision to choose to cherry-pick what is convenient for you from the entirety of the books and leave what is inconvenient aside. There is a big difference between what is present in the books and what you choose to use out of it. This shows that it is just your desire to keep these beliefs because it makes you feel good, even though you have a lot of evidence that proves it is man-made for manipulation of the masses. Mind you, the process of becoming religious is way easier than getting out of religion because being religious is the default and being non-religious or atheist requires a lot of efforts, analysis, and critical thinking to finally find out there is no God as we were told and promised to meet Her.

            Note: it is funny that God is pictured in Genesis as a human being with human behaviors. God is supposed to be beyond time and space, he must not be physical, he is metaphysical, yet religious people are very much comfortable with the idea of attributing to Her human characteristics. You can argue we are created based on his image, well: what image? He is beyond our 5 senses, this image is not supposed to be physical (at least).
            Another funny thought: how is the genome of Jesus formed, half of it is supposed to be coming from virgin Mary, how about the other half?

            Have a lovely and cheerful day

          • David

            Well said. But I think trying to convince someone of the fallacies inherent in religion is a futile exercise because ultimately we believe what we want to believe, And most adults cannot be persuaded to leave their world view cocoon. It is security we all seek and try to structure the perceived chaos of existence.
            Life is wondrous, magical and mysterious in all its manifestations and if you have the liberty to experience them, you must for our time here is short and so precious, Death awaits us all, but without death, there would be no life,
            Personally I have experienced profound tragedies. But cynicism is not a way forward for me.

          • Potato

            I totally agree with you David. It is extremely hard to change one’s mind (it is the hardest thing in the world, in my opinion).
            However, it is important to make the distinction between emotionality and beliefs. If it makes them comfortable, that’s absolutely okay, but it does not prove religion to be right or even that God exists. It is so important to be aware of your psyche and how it can trick you in amazing ways.
            Same for me, I have experienced a lot of ups and downs, but we have to be realistic, this is life. I also love to take a positive/realistic approach to life, not a fan of pessimism and negativity.

          • David

            Unfortunately throughout history to present day religion is used to cover acts of deception and cruelty towards mankind and all living creatures.
            In this regard religion reflects man at his worst.

      • David

        We’re just bubbles in a boiling pot, we’re clever but we’re clueless-Jack Johnson

        When ever one states they “know THE TRUTH’
        They are either fools or lying.

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Hi there Potato

    No need to apologise. Just wanted to make you aware how easily discrepancies and inaccuracies could creep in during the translation and interpretation process which are not Biblical mistakes.
    I did click on the link of your 19 March message called Bible inaccuracies, and after objectively analysing the first four alleged fallacies/mistakes, realised that there are probably logical explanations for all of them, and that it is just a pity full attempt to discredit the Bible, for the following reasons:

    Allegation A) The river Gihon could not possible flow from Mesopotamia and encompass Ethiopia. Gen 2:13
    In the original manuscript the word Cush is used, representing an area which were on both sides of the Red sea, with Ethiopia on the one side.Neither the word Mesopotamia nor the word Ethiopia appears in the original manuscript.

    Allegation B) The name Babel does not come from the Hebrew word balal Gen 11:9
    The original manuscript does not claim it be.The direct translation reads and i quote ” Babel it’s name is called thus upon Yahweh confused there for and from there the earth of all the language over Yahweh scattered them abroad the earth of all the face”

    Allegation C) Ur was not a Chaldean city until a 1000 years after Abraham Gen 15:7
    Ur was built around 3800 BC. Abraham 1996 BC- 1821 BC. Moses,who wrote the book of Gen.lived by estimates around 700 -800 years after Abraham. The Chaldeans had already occupied Ur during the time of Moses for whom it would then have been perfectly normal, to refer to Ur as the Chaldean city.

    Allegation D) Abraham pursued enemies to Dan Gen 14:14 The name wasn’t geographically used until after the conquest. Judges 18:29
    Again Abraham 1996 – 1821 BC. Samuel 1070-1012 BC who wrote the book of Judges lived after the conquest which happened around 1300 BC and therefor perfectly normal to refer to it as Dan.

    Given then that none of the alleged mistakes you mentioned so far, including the four above were really mistakes, nor fallacies, or even translation errors, I would like to make it as easy as possible for any Atheist, Satanist,Muslim or any religious denomination including Louise Antony (creator of this platform) to prove my Christian religion as baseless without generalizations like” the Bible is full of mistakes” or your quote that God is pictured in Genesis as a human being. Be specific when you quote for example: the verse on which your claim is based

    My Christian believes are not entirely based on my parents teachings because i have an enquiring mind and after weighing all the facts and data,from own investigation, base my religion on the following:

    1 The birth of Jesus from the virgin Mary.
    2 Miracles and teachings performed by Jesus.
    3 His crucifixion
    4 His resurrection.

    There is no credible evidence to the contrary and you are invited to disprove me.
    Please use specific books, scriptures, texts, science, balance of probabilities , etc. and not generalizations.

    Trust you had a great weekend

  • Atheist Potato

    Dear Etienne

    thank you for the explanations that you gave.

    I wish you could answer my question regarding the genome of Jesus. I mean, we all know that each half of our genome comes from 1 biological parent. Well, how was the genome of Jesus formed? Also, why was Jesus not born black or blonde for example? Why was it a male not a female Jesus? Why did he have to be born looking similar to the people from his town?
    Here is an interesting study done at Stanford University regarding the consequences of perceiving God as a white man:
    https://news.stanford.edu/2020/01/31/consequences-perceiving-god-white-man/

    I think you ignored the Nephilim mistake that I pointed out and the number of Gods available to be explored.

    Also, a kind reminder that giving explanations to all the obvious mistakes in the bible is not enough to prove it right, however, 1 counter-example (or mistake) can prove an entire abstract theory wrong.

    Sorry that I did not quote the Genesis when I said that God is given human traits as I thought this is common knowledge, and as a Christian, I do not doubt that you know the Genesis chapter quite well and the fact that God took a rest on the 7th day. Why do you find it normal and not absurd that God the almighty and powerful entity needs to rest? And here I quote the bible as per your request:
    “And on the seventh day God finished the work that he had done, and he rested on the seventh day from all the work that he had done.” GE 2:2

    Another thought: why Dinosaurs were not mentioned in the bible? 🧐 I mean how can you miss such a huge creature, come on?

    Well, there is no credible evidence to prove that unicorns do not exist, thus I believe in unicorns and I invite you to prove me wrong.

    I do actually appreciate your inquisitive mind and how engaged you are in the debate, this is the best way to go.

    Have a lovely day and take care.

    • Etienne van Heerden

      Good morning Potato

      Mary was impregnated by the Holy Spirit Math 1:18 whilst she was still a virgin (the one thing i can not prove was her virginity as she did not exactly go for a checkup with a doctor, and one would have to except, which i do , the testimony to this from her and Joseph.)
      Jesus was born brown as was, and still is, the colour of the middle eastern people like Jews,Pakistanis, Arabs, Syrians etc. God has a son not daughter, it’s like asking why was Hitler not a female.
      The purpose of Jesus’s bitrh as Human, was to be an example of how one could live without sin and to bring redemption to anyone in the world who believes in Him.
      Man was created in the IMAGE of God Gen 1:27 God is not necessarily white .His appearance is brilliant like stone jasper and sardius Revelations 4:3
      In 2 Peter 1:8 a comparison is made that 1000 years is like 1 day to God and 1 day like 1000 years. God created animals before Human Gen 1;24 it doesn’t specify what animals and therefor one can only assume that the dinosaurs must have been the earliest animals He created, bearing in mind it is just a comparison which could actually be a million or hundred million for that matter.(million wasn’t really a familiar term in those days).
      God finished all of creation, so don’t know what else he should have done but sit back and appreciate his work of art including humans ,to which he gave free will.
      I am not sure whether Unicorns existed or not as there is no archeological evidence for their existence as far as i am aware.

      Have you discussed the issue of Jesus with any of the people holding a similar view to yourself to disprove the Christian faith ?

      Cheers for now

      • Green Potato

        Hello Etienne,
        hope you had a good week.

        I had replied to you few days back but strangely the comment did not appear.

        I would like to point out an important fact about virginity: doctors cannot know if a woman is virgin or not, you can check the facts in here:
        https://www.who.int/reproductivehealth/publications/eliminating-virginity-testing-interagency-statement/en/

        Well, I’m sorry but you failed to answer what Jesus genome was made of. Since his genome is half from virgin Mary and half of it is from “unknown”, then this unknown can be anything if it was from God. Why did he have to be born looking similar to the people around him? Think about it 😉

        Hitler not being a female is a totally different scenario. God the almighty has created the “savior” as a male, why not female? Why not gender-neutral?… Hitler does not serve God and is not Her “son”. The analogy is wrong.

        Also, why are you being born with a sin? Why do they plant on you a sin you did not commit? The answer is to inflict on you a sense of guilt, this is very manipulative btw.

        You said that “His appearance is brilliant”, well why are you attributing to God physical characteristics related to our 5 senses? God is beyond time, space, and materials, and light is a physical measurable electromagnetic wave. Why he’s not orange or green? Also, we humans are not really bright, neither physically nor mentally, how is this our image?

        Well, I appreciate the fact that you admit it is an “assumption” that you are making regarding dinosaurs. Do you really believe assumptions? Is your faith based on assumptions? If so, why are you so sure about them then since they are simply assumptions?

        Why does God not know what a million is? The bible is supposed to be a reliable source of information, while in reality it isn’t.
        I’m very curious about the fact that you are so comfortable with attributing to God human-like behaviours, like for example: “sit back”.
        The answer is: we humans create this duality of God and Evil, which represent the spectrum of our behaviours, personality, intentions, and traits. You project on God your idealistic self and what your wish/need to observe in yourself and others, while you project on the Devil your worst intentions, fears, and things you disdain. People are scared of their own minds, here is an interesting ted talk that might help illustrate what I am talking about: https://www.ted.com/talks/elizabeth_gilbert_your_elusive_creative_genius?referrer=playlist-the_most_popular_talks_of_all#t-755185

        Have you read Gen 19:1-11? And what are your thoughts on it?

        Have a lovely day

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Good Morning Potato

    I have answered most of your questions up to now and will continue to answer them as best i can bearing in mind i am not God and cannot answer some of the questions only He would be able to.
    I on the other hand I have raised 4 events in my March 22 commentary on which my Christianity is based to which you have not replied yet and for convenience sake, will raise them again.

    Why should i not believe that:
    1) Jesus was born around 2000 years ago
    2) He performed numerous miracles and teachings
    3) He was crucified
    4) He was resurrected by God ?

    There are many religions and gods but only one Gospel.
    NS I will answer your questions raised from your March 29 comments in due course but in the mean time, see if you have credible answers for my question.

    Have a great day

    .

  • Scott Nunnemaker

    It seems to me we could easily answer if God exists or not simply by removing all children from their parents and raising them without any knowledge of religion. If they come out talking about Jesus or Allah or Zeus then we know those are self evident things and those religions are probably true religions, if they come out as atheists or if they come out having created their own unique belief system that doesn’t match any other religion, then religion is garbage and God doesn’t exist, only the idea that something exists instead of nothing exists. If something falls we wonder why it fell. If we are creative we might come up with some elaborate story as to why something fell, or if you are more inquisitive you might study why something fell and come up with the theory of gravity. It’s the same with religion, it’s just a creative way of saying why things happen that we don’t understand, but if we study it long enough we’re sure to come up an explanation that isn’t as catchy and shiny, but ultimately is worth more.

    • Etienne van Heerden

      Dear Scott

      That very exercise must have happened thousands of years ago and look what we have today!!!!!!!!
      PROVE to me that Jesus didn’t exist and let’s use that as a starting point.

      Have a good day

  • Allan Payne

    Atheists reject miracles as contrary to natural law. However, given all science agrees the universe had a beginning, is it not true that atheists believe in the biggest miracle ever – that nothing created something out of nothing?

    • Etienne van Heerden

      Hi Allan
      Atheists find it difficult to comprehend that science cannot explain a lot of things especially anything supernatural like the OBE’s (out of body experiences ) that a large percentage of people have who have had NDE’s (near death experiences).
      As for the BIG BANG it is only theory, as there are numerous flaws for example, the matter density observed in the universe is more than 10 billion times higher than the predictions from BIG BANG calculations. Further to this it requires the existence of dark matter ” mysterious particles” that have never been observed in the universe or laboratory anywhere are amongst the numerous flaws with the theory.
      Anyway this was my 50 cents for today

      Have a good day

      • David

        Uh huh. And that everything was created by one entity that loves suffering and cruelty make perfect sense. Maybe we’re just clueless bubbles living in an AI construct😊

        • Potato Again

          Hey,

          I’m not sure why people take “beliefs” so seriously and base their entire life on them.
          However, I do believe that religious people or previously religious people can speak for themselves. For example, a religious person cannot explain the perspective of an atheist.

          Anyway, the Big Bang theory does not ask anyone to kill for honor or punish their children for not accepting Her as opposed to what God asks people to do.

          Regarding the question of nothing created something from nothing, that’s not what atheists believe in at all, that’s what religious people think of atheists and there is a big difference in here. Atheists simply say they are not sure how the world has been created and find that the Big Bang theory makes more sense (speaking scientifically). We are humble and we do not think that each one of us is the center of the world and has the full attention of God. We are able to understand that there are some things we do not know yet, the same as many discoveries have been done throughout the years where people postulated a lot of things, but only one truth came out. Science is built from data and evidence, religion is a business/political tool to control the people.

          Cheers
          Potato

  • Etienne van Heerden

    Hi David

    Remember everyone is given free will to do good or bad which means that good and bad will happen when people exercise this freedom.
    Also bear in mind that whatever happens on earth happens in the little dot on the infinity line of eternity which means, whatever suffering or exuberance is so short lived that it is incomparable with eternal life .

    Have a great day

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *