Serious question for atheists.

[AzogtheDefiler]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

No

 

[ding]

So to rephrase your statement: “Because the creation of space and time occurred in a consistent, definable, predictable manner. Specifically quantum mechanics and conservation.

At the heart of this debate is whether or not the material world was created by spirit. if the material world were not created by spirit, then everything which has occurred since the beginning of space and time are products of the material world. Everything which is incorporeal proceeded from the corporeal. There is no middle ground. There is no other option. Either the material world was created by spirit or it wasn't. All other options will simplify to one of these two lowest common denominators which are mutually exclusive.

So we need to start from that position and examine the evidence we have at our disposal which is creation itself. Specifically, the laws of nature; physical, biological and moral. And how space and time has evolved.

It should be obvious that if the material world were not created by spirit that everything that has unfolded in the evolution of space and time would have no intentional purpose. That it is just matter and energy doing what matter and energy do. Conversely, if the material world were created by spirit it should be obvious that the creation of the material world was intentional. After all in my perception of God, God is no thing and the closest thing I can relate to is a mind with no body. Using our own experiences as creators as a proxy, we know that when we create things we create them for a reason and that reason is to serve some purpose. So it would be no great leap of logic to believe that something like a mind with no body would do the same. We also know from our experiences that intelligence tends to create intelligence. We are obsessed with making smart things. So what better thing for a mind with no body to do than create a universe where beings with bodies can create smart things too.

We have good reason to believe that we find ourselves in a universe permeated with life, in which life arises inevitably, given enough time, wherever the conditions exist that make it possible. Yet were any one of a number of the physical properties of our universe otherwise - some of them basic, others seemingly trivial, almost accidental - that life, which seems now to be so prevalent, would become impossible, here or anywhere. It takes no great imagination to conceive of other possible universes, each stable and workable in itself, yet lifeless. How is it that, with so many other apparent options, we are in a universe that possesses just that peculiar nexus of properties that breeds beings that know and create.

The biological laws are such that life is programmed to survive and multiply which is a requisite for intelligence to arise. If the purpose of the universe was to create intelligence then a preference in nature for it had to exist. The Laws of Nature are such that the potential for intelligence to existed the moment space and time were created. One can argue that given the laws of nature and the size of the universe that intelligence arising was inevitable. One can also argue that creating intelligence from nothing defies the Second Law of Entropy. That creating intelligence from nothing increases order within the universe. It actually doesn't because usable energy was lost along the way as a cost of creating order from disorder. But it is nature overriding it's tendency for ever increasing disorder that interests me and raises my suspicions to look deeper and to take seriously the proposition that a mind without a body created the material world so that minds with bodies could create too.

If we examine the physical laws we discover that we live in a logical universe governed by rules, laws and information. Rules laws and information are a signs of intelligence. Intentionality and purpose are signs of intelligence. The definition of reason is a cause, explanation, or justification for an action or event. The definition of purpose is the reason for which something is done or created or for which something exists. The consequence of a logical universe is that every cause has an effect. Which means that everything happens for a reason and serves a purpose. The very nature of our physical laws point to reason and purpose.

All we have done so far is to make a logical argument for spirit creating the material world. Certainly not an argument built of fairy tales that's for sure. So going back to the two possibilities; spirit creating the material world versus everything proceeding from the material, the key distinction is no thing versus thing. So if we assume that everything I have described was just an accidental coincidence of the properties of matter, the logical conclusion is that matter and energy are just doing what matter and energy do which makes sense. The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing. So we literally have an example of no thing existing before the material world. The creation of space and time from nothing is literally correct. Space and time were created from no thing. Spirit is no thing. No thing created space and time.

 

[Indeependent]

If I am not mistaken, the word worship means to celebrate.

It would depend on a few factors. Is it a loving, benevolent God? Or is it the vengeful, insecure God in the Old Testament?

Like Crepitus said, in my mind he has a lot to answer for.


pinqy asked an interesting question of the OP. Magnificat, If some other god, different from the one you worship, we’re proven to be true, would you worship that god?

Funny how that “Loving god” in the two child religions caused those religions to commit mass murder.

 

[ding]

Then you have proof God does not exist? Please elaborate.

Do you have proof "god" does exist?
Please elaborate.

The laws of nature existed before space and time were created from nothing.

How can you demonstrate that? And the concept of “nothing” is interesting. If I say there is nothing in my hands, my hands still exist (we’ll ignore air and microscopic particles). But when you talk about nothing before the universe, that means no space, either...no frame. So there really can’t be nothing at all.

Matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the existence of matter and energy creates space and time.

Your logic is tortured here. If it is true that matter and energy create space and time, then they would have to exist outside if space and time in order to create it. The creator has to exist prior to the creation.

I didn't say that matter and energy create space and time. I said that they can't exist without space and time being created. Matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

 

[cnm]

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

YHWH, the jealous god of hate, revenge and destruction? No way.

 

[TNHarley]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

I'm agnostic but no. I couldn't worship a tyrannical, jealous genocidal maniac like the abrahamic god.

 

[rightwinger]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

I'm agnostic but no. I couldn't worship a tyrannical, jealous genocidal maniac like the abrahamic god.

He is a nice God
He just has anger issues

 

[ding]

Or you people don’t understand what you are reading.

 

[TNHarley]

Or you people don’t understand what you are reading.

Or you add a bunch of bullshit to it to help justify your weakness in worshipping that asswipe

 

[ding]

Or you people don’t understand what you are reading.

Or you add a bunch of bullshit to it to help justify your weakness in worshipping that asswipe

What bullshit would that be, TN?

 

[ThisIsMe]

Do you have proof "god" does exist?
Please elaborate.

The laws of nature existed before space and time were created from nothing.

How can you demonstrate that? And the concept of “nothing” is interesting. If I say there is nothing in my hands, my hands still exist (we’ll ignore air and microscopic particles). But when you talk about nothing before the universe, that means no space, either...no frame. So there really can’t be nothing at all.

Matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the existence of matter and energy creates space and time.

Your logic is tortured here. If it is true that matter and energy create space and time, then they would have to exist outside if space and time in order to create it. The creator has to exist prior to the creation.

I didn't say that matter and energy create space and time. I said that they can't exist without space and time being created. Matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

What boggles me is, if all matter occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom, then where did all this matter that we see today come from?

Look at all the planets, stars, gas, elements that exist throughout the universe. All that was contained in something as small as what you mentioned?

I understand the singularity could have been dense, but I dont think it could have been that dense.

All the matter we see, even on earth alone couldn't have fit into something so small.

True, I'm no astrophysicist, so I may not understand the complexity, but to say everything that exists in the universe came from something as small as 1 billionth of.1 trillionth the size of an atom doesnt seem logical.

 

[alang1216]

The laws of nature existed before space and time were created from nothing.

How can you demonstrate that? And the concept of “nothing” is interesting. If I say there is nothing in my hands, my hands still exist (we’ll ignore air and microscopic particles). But when you talk about nothing before the universe, that means no space, either...no frame. So there really can’t be nothing at all.

Matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time because the existence of matter and energy creates space and time.

Your logic is tortured here. If it is true that matter and energy create space and time, then they would have to exist outside if space and time in order to create it. The creator has to exist prior to the creation.

I didn't say that matter and energy create space and time. I said that they can't exist without space and time being created. Matter and energy cannot exist outside of space and time.

We know from science that space and time had a beginning. Specifically, red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations, quantum mechanics, the First Law of Thermodynamics, the Second Law of Thermodynamics and Inflation Theory.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations tells us that all matter and energy in the universe once occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom and then began to expand and cool. The the First Law of Thermodynamics (i.e. conservation of energy) tells us that since that time matter and energy has only changed form. Which means that the atoms in our bodies were created from nothing when space and and time were created from nothing.

Red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics tells us that space and time did have a beginning. If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning. The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. For every matter to energy or energy to matter exchange there is a loss of usable energy. So while the total energy of the universe does not decrease, the usable energy of the universe does decrease. If it is a periodic or cyclical universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem. Since we do not see thermal equilibrium (good thing too because there would be no life) we know that the universe did have a beginning.

Inflation Theory, the First Law of Thermodynamics and quantum mechanics tells us that it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

What boggles me is, if all matter occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of an atom, then where did all this matter that we see today come from?

Look at all the planets, stars, gas, elements that exist throughout the universe. All that was contained in something as small as what you mentioned?

I understand the singularity could have been dense, but I dont think it could have been that dense.

All the matter we see, even on earth alone couldn't have fit into something so small.

True, I'm no astrophysicist, so I may not understand the complexity, but to say everything that exists in the universe came from something as small as 1 billionth of.1 trillionth the size of an atom doesnt seem logical.

Don't forget that matter and energy are interchangeable and energy has no spatial dimensions. I think of matter as solidified energy and the big bang as the constriction of an hourglass. A whole lot of sand passing from a big space to a big space through a very small space.

 

[BreezeWood]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

.

EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

the evidence is otherwise than the forgeries written in the christian bible that has nothing to do with the distinction between being an atheist or a theist. that difference is whether someone is honest or deceitful.

 

[ABikerSailor]

Don't forget that matter and energy are interchangeable and energy has no spatial dimensions. I think of matter as solidified energy and the big bang as the constriction of an hourglass. A whole lot of sand passing from a big space to a big space through a very small space.

What you have just described is what some physicists have theorized and called a "white hole", which is the other end of the black holes of our universe.

And, for one of those mind blowing "what if's", what if God is some being in another dimension who figured out how to harness a black hole over there to emerge on the other side in a white hole over here, being able to control all matter that comes into the new dimension?


'White Holes' May Be the Secret Ingredient in Mysterious Dark Matter

Previous research has suggested that black holes and white holes are connected, with matter and energy falling into a black hole potentially emerging from a white hole either somewhere else in the cosmos or in another universe entirely. In 2014, Carlo Rovelli, a theoretical physicist at Aix-Marseille University in France, and his colleagues suggested that black holes and white holes might be connected in another way: When black holes die, they could become white holes.

 

[anynameyouwish]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

no commentary?


none?


i can't explain my answer?


NO!


I would NOT worship your god.

 

[Magnificat]

So. Several people have said that they would not worship their Creator. The One who gave them life. The One who sent His only Son do die so that they may live. And THAT is why you're going to Hell. Don't bother replying. There is nothing you say that would excuse such sinful pride. Such arrogance.

 

[Slade3200]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

What do you mean when you say worship?

 

[Muhammed]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

What part of the bible are you talking about?

 

[Magnificat]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

What do you mean when you say worship?

Ever seen sports fans at a championship game? That is the kind of worship that God deserves.

 

[Magnificat]

And I would appreciate a serious answer.

If there was absolute proof that God exists, would you worship Him? No commemtary required. Just a simple yes or no.
EDIT: I'M REFERRING TO THE CHRISTIAN GOD IN THE BIBLE.

What part of the bible are you talking about?

I'm not talking about the Bible. This is about God. You know, the One who created everything. The One who sent His only Son to die for us. Don't you think such a Being is worthy of worship?