The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence - Religion - Nairaland
Nairaland Forum / Nairaland / General / Religion / The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence (1072 Views)
My Prophecy About The End Of Atheism Still Very Much On Course 3 Months Later / The Explanation For Existence / I Think I Am Threading The Path Of Atheism (2) (3) (4)
| The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 11:03pm On Oct 07, 2017 |
The Failure of Atheism to Account for Existence As a worldview, atheism is intellectually bankrupt and is wrought with philosophical problems. One of the biggest is its lack of ability to account for our own existence. Okay, so we exist. That's obvious. And though atheists like to tout the evolutionary flag, evolution isn't the issue here. Instead, we need to go way back and ask, where did the universe come from? You see, whatever has come into existence was caused to come into existence by something else. The universe came into existence. So, what caused it to come into existence? When answering this question, there are only two possibilities to account for the cause of the universe: an impersonal cause and a personal cause. This is an antonymic pair that exhausts all possibilities. It is either one or the other. There is no third option. Let’s first look at the atheist option to explain the universe: an impersonal cause. If the atheist were to say that the universe brought itself into existence, then that would be illogical since something that does not exist has no nature; and with no nature, there are no attributes; and with no attributes, actions can’t be performed such as bringing itself into existence. So, that doesn’t work. If the atheist said the universe has always existed, that doesn’t work either because that would mean the universe was infinitely old. If it is infinitely old, then why hasn’t it run out of useable energy by now as the 2nd law of thermodynamics would state. Also, in order to get to the present in an infinitely old universe, an infinite amount of time would have to be crossed. But, it is impossible to cross an infinite amount of time to get to now. These problems would also mean that there could not be an infinite amount of past cycles of the universe where it expands and contracts forever. So, those explanations can’t work. If the atheist says that matter and/or energy have somehow eternally existed before the universe, just in different forms, then the same issue of crossing an infinite amount of time to get to now would negate that idea. But, this explanation would pose yet another problem. If the necessary conditions for the cause of the universe have always existed within the pre-existent matter and energy, then the effect of the universe being formed is a necessary result of that matter and energy; and the universe would have been formed an infinitely long time ago. But this can’t work since it would mean the universe would have already run out of useable energy by now (entropy problem again)--not to mention the perpetual problem of crossing an infinite amount of time to get to now. So, that explanation doesn’t work either. Okay, so the universe, which is comprised of matter and energy, cannot be infinitely old in its present form or any other form. So, how did it and ultimately we get here? Atheism can’t help us here. So, let’s turn our attention to the other option: a personal cause. If there is a personal influence, which means a personal being that acted upon the universe, then we have an explanation for the cause of the universe. Let me explain. A rock doesn't suddenly change from being a rock into say an axe head unless acted upon by something else. For matter and energy to change and form something new, they must be acted upon from the outside. So we must ask what acted upon matter and energy and caused the universe to exist? Whatever caused the universe existed before the universe. Since the universe had a beginning in time and since matter and energy do not spontaneously change and arrange themselves into something new, then the best explanation for the cause of the universe is an action that was a decision. In other words, a decision to act at a specific time in the past is the best explanation of the existence of the universe. Of course, we Christians would say this decision was made by a personal being whom we call God. You see? The atheists have nothing to offer us with the important issue of explaining how we got here. Atheism can’t answer one of the most important philosophical questions pertaining to our own existence. It is deficient and lacking and at best can offer us only ignorance and guesses. Okay, finally, even though it isn’t necessary in this video, I’ll deal with one of the standard objections atheists have when this topic comes up. What brought God into existence? The answer is simple. Nothing brought him into existence. He has always existed. He is the uncaused cause. Think about it. You cannot have an infinite regression of causes. It’s like having an infinite line of dominoes falling one after another. If you go back infinitely in time to try to find the first domino that started it all, you’d never find it because you’d have to cross an infinite amount of time to get to it which is impossible to do. This would also mean that there you can’t have an infinite regression of causes. Furthermore, this would mean there would never be a first cause. If there is no first cause, then there can’t be a second, or a third, and so on; and you wouldn’t have any of them falling at all. But since they are falling, there had to be a first cause--that itself was uncaused that started the whole thing moving at a specific time in the past. So, too, with the universe. It was caused to exist at a specific point in time. The uncaused cause is God, who decided to create the universe and who, as the Bible says in Psalm 90:2, “is from everlasting to everlasting.” Christian Apologetics & Research Ministry © Matthew J. Slick, 1995 - 2017 |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 11:07pm On Oct 07, 2017 |
Do note that the above post is part of a series, the first of which is titled What Is Atheism? As posted here. I advise you read comments for that posting too. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by vaxx: 11:27pm On Oct 07, 2017 |
Atheism is a belief system ...how? A disbelieve is a believe. If I disbelieve in God then I belive that god does not exist. Disbelieve is to assume falsehood |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 11:49pm On Oct 07, 2017 |
vaxx:I think the assumption is that one becomes an atheist because it was preached to one, as one becomes a Christian or Muslim because one has heard it preached. The idea that one can become an atheist all by oneself is not an acceptable idea for those who adopted theirs by having heard it preached to them. The whole idea of philosophy of atheism goes right over the believers head. (I sound convoluted there vaxx. I hope it makes sense!) |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by Zodiac61(m): 12:00am On Oct 08, 2017 |
budaatum:You are convoluted because what you say makes no sense. So your assumption is that theism accounts for existence. The onus is on you to prove it. I am waiting for your proof. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by vaxx: 12:15am On Oct 08, 2017 |
budaatum:no, most atheists become atheists due to personal willingness... While some become atheists due to access of information or knowledge in their disposal.. .philosophy of atheism is divided into two...morality and scientific which contradict themselves....you can go through this link to share your views...https://www.nairaland.com/4093854/atheism-definition-problematic |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 1:00am On Oct 08, 2017 |
Zodiac61:I am not convoluted. What I wrote may be though. Does it not make sense as in, it has no meaning, or you do not agree with it? Please note, I have not said theism, which is the belief in the existence of god or gods, accounts for existence! I may chose to believe I have a million pounds in the bank but no one would take my belief in exchange for a spanking brand new red Ferrari! Moreso, I will not say for instance, "I believe it is raining" when rain is pissing down on my head. Whatever I decide to believe in my head has nothing to do with existence unless it matches reality, in which case why do I merely believe it? |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 1:19am On Oct 08, 2017 |
vaxx: vaxx:I saw the thread when it was first posted and decided it was way above my intelligence level. Besides I lost interest when it descended into pig farms. I did think of it though, but decided it was like saying there are two types of Christians or Muslims, when everywhere I look I see millions more with various divergent beliefs. Same with atheists. They come with various colours and mixtures of thereof such that if I claim to only see two I must be blind. The article I directed to in the second post above mentions many more types of atheist. I do agree that most atheists become atheists due to some information they have considered. I have not yet come across an atheist who became one because someone preached it to them. 1 Like 1 Share |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by Bekwarra(m): 3:05am On Oct 08, 2017 |
following 1 Like |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by segunojo866: 7:20am On Oct 08, 2017 |
budaatum:So true. Atheism is a personal decision. Nobody preached to me about it. In fact i have never seen an atheist in real life apart from nairaland 1 Like |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by Zodiac61(m): 8:34am On Oct 08, 2017 |
budaatum:This is really a dishonest argument. You start by saying that atheism does not explain existence. If so, what are we to conclude? Your argument is convoluted because it makes no sense. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 10:35am On Oct 08, 2017 |
Zodiac61:Seems to me you did not read the article and comments I advised you read in another thread. You want to look at half the evidence and conclude? In fact, conclude what? Should you conclude? Can you conclude? Should you not first at least understand before you conclude? If you can't bother, I absolutely refuse to help you. Sorry. 1 Like |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 10:38am On Oct 08, 2017 |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by gboxbaba(m): 11:02am On Oct 08, 2017 |
So what op is saying is we need God to exist, I've been doing pretty fine without religion for a long time. So.......whether God exists or not is not really my problem. When I'm dead I'll know the next move to make. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by gabe: 11:40am On Oct 08, 2017 |
You try so hard to box the existence of the universe into 2 erroneous choices. science tells us the known universe started with the big bang. Please google and read. Now, you and other creationists insist it was created by an uncaused causer. Your Causer has to be specially uncaused to escape the infinite regression caused by your faulty logic of all things having an animated, personal creator, which has to be more complex than its creation. The problem here is an uncaused causer negates your postulation. An exception negates your rule. Who's to say there is only one uncaused causer? So many things were created by processes, not a creator. Rocks, for instance, are created when molten magma melts. The earth exerts a gravitational force on all bodies by virtue of its mass. Aside from your faulty logic, there is also the nagging issue of proof, which creationists NEVER provide. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by mumumugu(m): 12:36pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
it is not the duty of atheism to account for existence. it is not theist duty either 3 Likes |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 1:54pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
gabe:Finally! A reader!! I dof my capito to thee. The exact words in the original post (op) are: If the atheist were to say that the universe brought itself into existence, then that would be illogical since something that does not exist has no nature; and with no nature, there are no attributes; and with no attributes, actions can’t be performed such as bringing itself into existence. So, that doesn’t work. If the atheist said the universe has always existed, that doesn’t work either because that would mean the universe was infinitely old. If it is infinitely old, then why hasn’t it run out of useable energy by now as the 2nd law of thermodynamics would state. Also, in order to get to the present in an infinitely old universe, an infinite amount of time would have to be crossed. But, it is impossible to cross an infinite amount of time to get to now. These problems would also mean that there could not be an infinite amount of past cycles of the universe where it expands and contracts forever. So, those explanations can’t work. Basically, nothing exists without something bringing it into existence. Things cannot just be. But further down, he claims the following What brought God into existence? The answer is simple. Nothing brought him into existence. He has always existed. He is the uncaused cause. Think about it. You cannot have an infinite regression of causes. If nothing uncaused exists, then everything that exists is caused. Surely no one can argue that the universe does not exist. If the universe does exist, it was caused. Which begs the question, What caused the universe, what was its causer? Something afterall must have brought it into existence! If the first premise that, nothing that is uncaused exists, (or the equivalent, everything that exists is caused), and as some claim, God exists, is true, would it be illogical to claim that God was caused, and that the causer of God was caused, and that the causer of the causer of God was caused, and that the causer of the causer of the causer of God was caused, and that the causer.......... an infinite regression. Spinoza argued that the universe (Nature, it was called in his day, C.1650), exists. It must be caused. Something must have brought it into existence. But despite being Jewish, he could not accept that Yahweh done it. Spinoza said God is Nature itself—the infinite, eternal, and necessarily existing substance of the universe. God or Nature just is; and whatever else is, is “in” or a part of God or Nature. Put another way, there is only Nature and its power; and everything that happens, happens in and by Nature. There is no transcendent or even immanent supernatural deity; there is nothing whatsoever outside of or distinct from Nature and independent of its processes. and for this, he was excommunicated and expelled from the people of Israel, "no one should communicate with him, not even in writing, nor accord him any favor nor stay with him under the same roof nor [come] within four cubits in his vicinity; nor shall he read any treatise composed or written by him.” Basically, if God exists, something must have brought it into existence it must have had a causer - something Pre-God that begat God. But the begatter of God must have had a begatter - a begatter of the begatter of God. But that begatter must also have a begatter - a begatter of the begatter of the begatter of God. And that begatter must have a begatter, the begatter of the begatter of the begatter........ and we're back to infinite regressing again. It is in this way that the likes of Einstein claims there is existence so there must be a causer, a something that brings that which exists into existing and into being. And its what he meant when he claims to believe in Spinoza's God, the begatter of the begatter of the begatter of the begatter....... ad infinitum. Surely this would happen over eons, or an "infinite amount of time" contrary to what is claimed in the op. And we humans can't even accurately describe the times of the first begatter. And there's the lesson for you atheists, and the reason why it is written, "The fool says in his heart there is no God". Would most people not go mad trying to work out who the begatter of the begatter of the begatter..... is? When would such a person be tilling the land and producing the food? So, I put it to you that to avoid madness, and due to compassion, there must be a God. If one doesn't exist one must be created or people will just go mad searching for the begatt....... Ok, I'll not be begatting anymore. Even you must be exhausted by now! And Church people will soon be back. Link for the excommunication of Spinoza |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by gabe: 3:33pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
The crux of the matter is the postulation is wrong. That it leads to an infinite regression of causers is a pointer. That for it to make sense, you have to add an exception to the rule ie God is another pointer. beings, things processes do not always have a single animated creator. Some things or processes are made when several factors act at the same time or at various times on the same subject/object. These actions by these factors may be a one off and may never happen with the same variation again. Take a rock for example. Molten magma may be forced out by internal pressure within the earth. The particular viscosity of the magma may decide how far it flows and when it hardens. it's shape may further be acted on by other weather conditions like rain and wind. Several factors, one rock. The big bang is another example. High temperatures, gravitational forces and so many other factors led to the giant explosion that birthed our universe. The conditions that made this happen may never occur again. But from our evidence, it wasn't just one causer. 1 Like |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by festwiz(m): 4:38pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
OP I didn't really read all that because, Boring, but i think the bottom line of what you are saying is that the Universe can't just exist because it had too but was created by 'God'. Okay This question may have been asked countless times before, but If the Universe didn't just exist from the 'Big Bang', how did 'God' come into being? Your stone to axe head insists that an actuator is necessary to cause events, hence my question. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 6:59pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
1 Like |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 7:06pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
gabe:Absolutely. That is indeed the error in the op ed. It claims a cause is required for bringing a thing into existence. But gives God a caveat. Why stop there, the atheist would ask? What's wrong with giving the creator of God the caveat? The post itself is claiming all things that exist are created. The universe exists so a creator must exist. It says a lot more besides but you'll have to read it to figure that out. 1 Like |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 7:10pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
festwiz:I won't really read what your writing because, boring. |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 7:18pm On Oct 08, 2017 |
mumumugu:I agree. We do not know how the universe came into existence. Problem is no one wants to profess their ignorance so they come up with some story. And people who know no better claim it to be so. So, here's one. The creator of the creator of t....he creator done it (continue to add creator till you tire please). It practically said, "let the Universe be". There was a big bang, and the Universe is. What!? I can't write my own mythology? |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by budaatum: 5:16pm On Mar 24, 2021 |
budaatum: |
| Re: The Failure Of Atheism To Account For Existence by MaxInDHouse(m): 6:31pm On Mar 24, 2021 |
God created us as intelligent creatures so we can think a lot but people just don't wake up one day to say "God doesn't exist" The first main cause is lots and lots of questions running through their minds unanswered. Moreover when they try to look for answers they fall into the wrong hands of misinformed and deluded religionists who don't have answers but are revered by most people in the neighbourhood as knowledgeable men. These ones try to answer thought provoking questions using man-made traditional beliefs and unfortunately they cause further damage in the heart of the one seeking answers because as they struggle to explain what they themselves can't comprehend the intelligent Inquisitor will be left with no option than to conclude saying in his/her heart "perhaps there is no God" From that moment he/she has lost confidence or trust in so called men of God, now he listens to them with critical reasoning which can't be bought over with cheap traditional beliefs. And as he/she keep sinking into the dungeon of Atheism the deluded religionists begin threatening him/her with the same beliefs which doesn't even sound logical in the first place. So the atheist's mind will become rock solid that he/she has broken free from DELUSION!  That's why Jesus sent his followers to go and meet people in their homes so that anyone with such burden like questions could be relieved {Matthew 11:28-30} the truth is everyone wants to be free as in Freedom from delusion and lies but when you come to know the truth then you'll realize that there is no real freedom outside the TRUTH! John 8:32 |
(1) (Reply)
Miracles Don't Exist. Faith Healing And Prayer Are False. / 7 Strange Religions You Don’t Know About / Prophet Sadhu Sundar Selvaraj Reveals Why Donald Trump Will Remain President
(Go Up)
| Sections: politics (1) business autos (1) jobs (1) career education (1) romance computers phones travel sports fashion health religion celebs tv-movies music-radio literature webmasters programming techmarket Links: (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) Nairaland - Copyright © 2005 - 2024 Oluwaseun Osewa. All rights reserved. See How To Advertise. 82 |