Originally posted by The MISTER
@ King Kandy
First off I'm interested in the evidence that something can come from nothing. Please elaborate. My statement about a power that can do the impossible was made due to my being unaware that we have any evidence that something can come from nothing. You stated that energy existing eternally seems like a possibility but you don't know. I can relate to the feeling of not knowing what may be the case or not. It's annoying to me. Since my faith in God is one of those rare areas where I do feel certainty, I am exceedingly interested in why it seems like flawed logic to people that I consider intelligent. It almost seems to me that the more intelligent people get the more they abandon the faith that they once had in the fact that there is a divine order to things.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtual_particlesLike I said, I don't know all the physics behind this, or really whether its relevant to the origin of the universe, but there are certain effects related to this phenomena where particles more or less arise out of nothing.
I don't know with certainty, because I have not seen a strong logical argument about whether the energy of the universe has always existed, or was arose spontaneously from nothing. However, I have seen even less of a strong argument in favor of god creating the universe, so I cannot believe that either. Right now, this is an area of research being discussed; from what I have heard, current advances have made spontaneous creation plausible. I haven't read them enough to decide on that one.
The more intelligent people are, the more people realize that that "fact" is flawed. There is no "divine order" to the universe. We see things as orderly because of something referred to as the anthropic principle.
Originally posted by The MISTER
Humans can choose to teach good or evil through actions due to the fact that they are aware of how their actions are perceived by their kin. No other sentient animal species can choose to pursue it's own imaginations, outside of what it has been shown. Are humans more capable of making choices? Humans have dominated every animal that we have come across. The flu may be kicking your ass but I'd put money on you killing it. The virus can't capture some humans and dissect them constantly searching for a permanent advantage over humans. Humans are kicking the flu's ass and not in numbers of course but in influence. Humans could choose to purposely obliterate the planet with bombs and attempt sustained survival on an experimental space colony that theoretically can last ten million years. The creatures of earth are more at the mercy of humans than ever before. The environment has been in danger of us since we first wielded fire as ours, so we have long been capable of making more choices than the other sentient species. As far as ruling over them consistently, making choices about their future is the norm.
That's just completely false. Many animals pursue their own imagination (any animal playing can show you that), your idea you've been continually claiming, you have not given it one shred of substantiation other than it is what you wish to believe. We have not cured AIDs, or figured out a way to remove many parasites, nor could we have much impact on a variety of bacteria, that exist all over the earth and permeate everything. Even if we nuked the world with everything we had, plenty of bacteria would linger and survive us, insulated in strange environments and able to survive the harshest of conditions.
Originally posted by The MISTER
Why would you presume that you represent all those that call themselves atheists.? I surely don't represent all those that call themselves christians. I am definitely not suggesting that all atheists are anything. I already stated that I'm concerned with individuals. I'm glad that you feel a sense of responsibility, but do you truly believe that all christians or atheists do? All I was suggesting is that an atheist can state that any action they might take is OK as long as they survive for survival is all that matters to any animal. Humans and bacteria are equals when concerning responsibility as survival is for the fittest. A person calling himself a christian can choose to state this. I just see it making more sense when it's coming from someone who says ( whether they believe it or not ) that there is nobody to answer to for their behavior after death.
You may feel atheists are more likely to show no compunction for their actions, but this is not true. Digi even showed a study earlier, demonstrating that atheists in a classroom were not only no more likely to cheat or copy than christian students, but in fact did it less; the atheists demonstrated
more morality than the christians. inimalist in the GD forum (he will hopefully elaborate on this), demonstrated that people who believe they are following perfect morals are far more likely to lie and then rationalize it away.
Originally posted by The MISTER
Evidence that the soul exists. Hypocrisy directed upon others is evil and corrupts the soul of the people who do it. Treating others in ways that you wouldn't want yourself treated is obviously wrong and we know it, but it does come naturally. We have the ability to stave off this natural selfishness and deal with others sincerely as we have an emotional connection with all other life forms that no other creature can boast. We can imagine how others feel. We can purposely seek to help or harm and we will do one or the other. Doing nothing equates to harming others with inaction. Because we MUST choose then it is logical to believe that there is a penalty for choosing to harm others.
This is in no way evidence that the soul exists. I do not see what makes that "logical" in the slightest.