How would finding out there is no God make you feel?

Originally posted by Newjak
But once again he assumes objective morality can only come from a higher power. In which case he is essentially arguing people can not be objective. Do you believe that?

So either there is a sentient consciousness behind our reality and therefore an objective morality defined by the creator of our reality, or we exist arbitrarily because of the higher power of chance in which case our existences are arbitrary and there is no objective morality.

Originally posted by Newjak
I'm not suggesting that laws equate to pure morality but that doesn't mean we haven't seen humans develop collective morals similar to each other despite distance and religious backgrounds. Things like rape being bad, hurting children, outright murder.

Basically, law and government exist to provide security for the people consenting to law and government, so basically it's based upon "we'll protect each other and not hurt each other so we don't get ****ed" which can just as easily be motivated by selfish self-preservation as by an objective morality, and commonness in law can also be attributed to what works best for the people creating the laws.

It's like a business contract, there may be various similarities in business contracts and deals, but that's not necessarily because of an implicit morality in business, its because two people agreed on a mutually beneficial outcome.

Originally posted by Newjak
And he is trying to argue that without God there can be no morals therefore rape would be okay. The implication he is trying to say is therefore there must be a God because rape is bad. It's a circular argument that tries to force an extreme view to solidify his own belief easily.

If he at some point made a statement or implication that morality exists so therefore God does, then feel free to prove me wrong, but he could very likely have a different reason for believing in God and the argument that "if God doesn't exist morality is an illusion" could be completely independent of that reason, so unless there's something actually pointing to that it seems a bit unfair of you to assume he's making that argument.

Originally posted by Lord Lucien
Better page the dermatologist, cuz I'm under your skin.

Man. That aint a trip to the Derma....that a RUN to the Free Clinic....STAT!!!!!!

I'd mostly be just extremely confused. Without getting too deep into the whole discussion, I'd be absolutely mind-blown on how there is so much order and complexity in the universe without some sort of intelligent designer. Like, the odds of it all happening by chance and everything being random are so astronomically and hilariously low it's almost inconceivable, and as such, I would be in a profound and prolonged state of complete and utter confusion.

Originally posted by nfactor1995
I'd mostly be just extremely confused. Without getting too deep into the whole discussion, I'd be absolutely mind-blown on how there is so much order and complexity in the universe without some sort of intelligent designer. Like, the odds of it all happening by chance and everything being random are so astronomically and hilariously low it's almost inconceivable, and as such, I would be in a profound and prolonged state of complete and utter confusion.

👆

My thing is that we see life comes from life: the law of Biogenesis. We don't observe abiogenesis. The universe had a start point (see the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics), and a supernatural Creator/Lifegiver that can act outside the laws of matter, space, and time (like the two above-mentioned) lines up with the evidence that is readily observable.

Originally posted by John Murdoch
👆

My thing is that we see life comes from life: the law of Biogenesis. We don't observe abiogenesis. The universe had a start point (see the 1st and 2nd Laws of Thermodynamics), and a supernatural Creator/Lifegiver that can act outside the laws of matter, space, and time (like the two above-mentioned) lines up with the evidence that is readily observable.

Outside of the universe? If there is an outside of the universe, then when and how did it begin?

I think you need to look at the Laws of Thermodynamics. I think you have been reading Christian propaganda, again.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Outside of the universe? If there is an outside of the universe, then when and how did it begin?

I think you need to look at the Laws of Thermodynamics. I think you have been reading Christian propaganda, again.

It is either true or not, not propaganda.

The universe had a start, yet energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed (1st Law of Thermodynamics). The universe is a closed system, and entropy always increases in a closed system over time (2nd Law of Thermodynamics). Thus something (or Someone, in this case, God) supernatural had to start the universe.

Originally posted by John Murdoch
It is either true or not, not propaganda.

prop·a·gan·da

information, especially of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view.

I have seen a lot of Christians try to say that the Laws of Thermodynamics to prove that a god made the universe. When I've looked at their web sites they post as support, in every case, it was a distortion of the laws. So, it is propaganda.

Originally posted by John Murdoch
The universe had a start, yet energy cannot be created nor destroyed, only transformed (1st Law of Thermodynamics). The universe is a closed system, and entropy always increases in a closed system over time (2nd Law of Thermodynamics). Thus something (or Someone, in this case, God) supernatural had to start the universe.

Then how can I build a house or anything. Also, there is no proof that the universe had a start.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Then how can I build a house or anything. Also, there is no proof that the universe had a start.

That actually supports the case for there being a Creator:

- You start with a plot of land.
- You have the materials to build the house.
- But, there has to be someone act upon those materials to build the house. The house cannot build itself.

For a house to exist, there has to be a builder.

Originally posted by John Murdoch
That actually supports the case for there being a Creator:

- You start with a plot of land.
- You have the materials to build the house.
- But, there has to be someone act upon those materials to build the house. The house cannot build itself.

For a house to exist, there has to be a builder.

😆

Then how does a crystal form? Same thing. The entropy on Earth is lower then other parts of the universe. But you said...

You don't understand the Laws of Thermodynamics! All you are doing is spreading propaganda.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
😆

Then how does a crystal form? Same thing. The entropy on Earth is lower then other parts of the universe. But you said...

You don't understand the Laws of Thermodynamics! All you are doing is spreading propaganda.

I'm talking about the origins of the universe, not the continual processes of life and nature. You asked how you could build a house, I replied with a house needs a builder, materials cannot come from nothing nor put themselves together. Parallel that to creation of the universe from a Creator. God is the house builder.

I think we got mixed up there: the laws of thermodynamics argument and God being beyond them and things like the Watchmaker analogy is for the origins of the universe, not processes that occur naturally.

How does crystallization disprove God creating the universe/the Watchmaker analogy?

EDIT: I mean the above as an honest question, not trying to win the argument. I'll admit I don't know anything about crystallization, but the elements for it to take place are there in nature. I'm talking about where the elements came from in the first place, thus creation by God.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
😆

Then how does a crystal form? Same thing. The entropy on Earth is lower then other parts of the universe. But you said...

You don't understand the Laws of Thermodynamics! All you are doing is spreading propaganda.

http://mbbc.us/resource/skeptics.pdf

Dr. Patrick R. Briney is the author of this pamphlet, man. It's one of my sources, no need to hide that. The primary one that led me down looking more into scientific laws and discoveries going hand-in-hand with The Bible. Take a look through it and tell me what you think.

Originally posted by John Murdoch
http://mbbc.us/resource/skeptics.pdf

Dr. Patrick R. Briney is the author of this pamphlet, man. It's one of my sources, no need to hide that. The primary one that led me down looking more into scientific laws and discoveries going hand-in-hand with The Bible. Take a look through it and tell me what you think.

Published in the United States of America in 1999 Mission Boulevard Baptist Church

This is propaganda, nothing more.

Maybe you should take a science class is school.

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
Published in the United States of America in 1999 Mission Boulevard Baptist Church

This is propaganda, nothing more.

Maybe you should take a science class is school.

Just because it is published by a Baptist church does not mean it is propaganda. Did you read through it?

Originally posted by John Murdoch
Just because it is published by a Baptist church does not mean it is propaganda. Did you read through it?

I disagree.

I will not read your propaganda, because I've read it before.

Anyway, lets get back on topic.

"How would finding out there is no God make you feel?"

Originally posted by Shakyamunison
I disagree.

I will not read your propaganda, because I've read it before.

Anyway, lets get back on topic.

"How would finding out there is no God make you feel?"

I'll finish the thread within a thread by stating that anyone can have bias. For example, Dr. Richard "Dick" Lewontin, Harvard University geneticist, biologist, and social commentator:

"Our willingness to accept scientific claims that are against common sense is the key to an understanding of the real struggle between science and the supernatural. We take the side of science in spite of the patent absurdity of some of its constructs, in spite of its failure to fulfill many of its extravagant promises of health and life, in spite of the tolerance of the scientific community for unsubstantiated just-so stories, because we have a prior commitment, a commitment to materialism.

It is not that the methods and institutions of science somehow compel us to accept a material explanation of the phenomenal world, but, on the contrary, that we are forced by our a priori adherence to material causes to create an apparatus of investigation and a set of concepts that produce material explanations, no matter how counter-intuitive, no matter how mystifying to the uninitiated. Moreover, that materialism is absolute, for we cannot allow a Divine Foot in the door.

The eminent Kant scholar Lewis Beck used to say that anyone who could believe in God could believe in anything. To appeal to an omnipotent deity is to allow that at any moment the regularities of nature may be ruptured, that Miracles may happen."

EDIT: Added bolding to the quote by Dr. Lewontin above. The rest of my original post continues below.

You are correct though, I'm not on topic. As I stated earlier, I'd be as Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 15:16-22 - "most miserable" if Christ did not rise from the dead. The passage is in context talking about the resurrection of Christ from the dead, so I'd take the original question one step further and say that if Christianity turned out to be false, then my worldview would be that of 1 Corinthians 15:32 - "If after the manner of men I have fought with beasts at Ephesus, what advantageth it me, if the dead rise not? let us eat and drink; for to morrow we die."

Also, just want to say glad we can have a thread in the General Discussion Forum that has at the least points being made back-and-forth and doesn't get too far into name calling and such. Some of the more, shall we say, politically-geared threads go that route sometimes.

No different than I do now. What difference does it make? We die regardless.

It pretty much just boils down to the old saying...

Congratulations. You Won Absolutely NOTHING!

Enjoy.