Atheist.net Full of Erroneous Thinking

[Spacedog]

if infinite regress were true, we would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so.

Yet you fail to give a reason why this is impossible. Why can I not have already happened before?

This fact alone proves nature needs a cause outside of itself, outside of time and space.

A cause cannot not exist without time

this is whom we call the uncreated Creator or God. There is no infinite regress outside of time. It is simply the uncreated Creator.

Overall all I'm agnostic to the principle of infinite creator. My brain tells me there needs to be something infinite, whether it's right in thinking that or not I can't say. What I'm atheist to is the idea that the creator is a conscious being, or that we could claim to know the nature of this being.

There is no multiple reality.

Please provide evidence to support this statement

We have proven the existence of the uncreated Creator so that's it.

No the existence of a creator is proven in your mind, there are billions of humans, most physicists being in this group, who do not feel it is proven at all.

If you have little understanding then I trust you won't make a decision for atheism. Even if there was multiple realities they all exhibit cause and effect so you should have happened already, having had an eternity to do so.

I will refer you back to the start of this reply as to your opinion that infinite regress is impossible.
I am atheist to the fictional characters people have applied to infinite creators, not to infinite creators themselves. Also my definition of atheism does not mean I totally rule out the possibility of say, Allah, I just find it very unlikely.

True we can only go with the evidence, but if it were true there was no such thing as cause and effect then you would never have come into being and would not exist.

I have no reason to disagree with this, but I also have no reason to assume my birth can be compared to the birth of existence.

All we can do is go with the evidence and the evidence is we see trillions and trillions of cause and effects in nature, which is an overwhelming preponderance of evidence beyond a reasonable doubt.

This is evidence that cause and effect happens not that it is the only thing which can happen.

infinite regress is impossible

I await your reply as to why it is impossible

something can't come from nothing.

Again you have no way of knowing this

You're confusing dark matter and empty space with that which does not exist.

We are moving into very speculative physics here but it is still worth discussing to prove that an infinite creator doesn't have to be your god. You are correct empty space may not actually exist at all. In fact this is obvious because because it is nothingness, and nothingness does not exist, therefore we can't include nothingness in our arguments. What we see as nothingness in our universe, i.e. the vacuum of space, is not nothingness at all. It is filled by dark or anti-matter.
My point here is that there's no reason to believe that nothingness is a thing at all, it's name even means something which is non-existent. It is possible that the infinity we are looking for could be simply the universe itself (I don't mean just the one we know, full of galaxies and stars etc but everything our little universe is contained in (whatever that may be)). The nothingness beyond existence may not be a factor at all because existence itself, at it's most basic level, could be infinite. So the idea we have is a sort of infinite breeding ground of universes. There's no need to conjure up fictional characters in order to explain the infinity which we think is required.
As for how this 'breeding ground' might create a new universe, physics is starting to find answers and if you have any real interest in this you should read into dark matter theories. Seeing as I am not a physicist myself I won't risk the validity of my argument by wrongly explaining something to you.

Sure we experience true reality. This is a true world and we are real human beings.

Agreed. Perhaps 'true' was a bad word. 'Naked' reality would fit better I think. Our reality is certainly distorted. Regardless, what we see is certainly based entirely on reality.

As was said countless times, infinite regress is impossible, because you would have happened already, having had an eternity to do so. You must deal with this point if you want to talk about it.

I have dealt with it. The issue is that you have yet to give a reason why me having existed more than once is impossible.

Now that we know God exists

We have not established any such thing. We have established that an infinite creator may exist and that there is no reason to believe it is the god you are imagining.

we are free to find out where He has revealed Himself.

This should be fun

God acknowledges Himself. Jesus does that. He also must prove Himself. Jesus does that too, since the original disciples testified to having seen Jesus alive from the dead in various group settings.

Where is your evidence for this other than the bible? The bible is not evidence it is a claim. What is your evidence for the claims made by the bible?

Since you can find no naturalistic explanation for this, you convince people to believe in Jesus as Lord and Savior, Creator and Resurrected.

That's like saying I can find no naturalistic explanation for the events in Harry Potter, therefore we should all believe magic is real.

Put more simply, my naturalistic explanation is that the bibles claims didn't happen. The evidence for them happening is one book written by cultists 100 years after the story they were writing about. Do you believe the Greek books about the gods on Olympus?

The primary source for proof Jesus is God is the Bible. Historians don't throw out a document because the historian is biased. He deals with it and gleans what data he can from it.

Yes as a historian myself I have found the bible very useful for studying Roman life and christian beliefs, but it doesn't prove that supernatural events took place, only that some people claimed they did (which is not uncommon in the ancient world!). There is no evidence to support their claims.

God condescends Himself to us. But it is not entirely true what you said because remember also, the Godhead is a Trinity of 3 Persons. All I can say about that right now is that God is relational in 3 Persons, so the Godhead can't help but create out of the glory that is the Triunity of God.

OK, maybe Christians on the whole don't believe god is as similar to a human as I made out, although past Christians certainly did and so did the writers of the bible. But still, I find it very improbable that an infinite creator would be able to think in a way which allows it to communicate with humans. Such thought processes require a brain (or similar) which has evolved and is based on the laws of space and time. You claim that god is outside of space and time and is infinite.

Don't jump, but compare Jesus. Find out who provides a proof as good as Jesus does in paying for the sins of the world and by the resurrection proof. None can compare.

Jesus and the bible are not proof of a claim they are the claim itself. A claim cannot be evidence for itself.

I would be agnostic right now if the evidence wasn't so compelling. You should be agnostic and not atheist if you didn't need to be so certain. Think how insane you are since we observe trillions and trillions of causes in nature, and no hard evidence something happens all by itself, then to claim otherwise that causation doesn't exist. If causation didn't exist, you wouldn't exist since you would have no cause to your existence.

No you are bias to a belief which brings you security. Any rational person who has read my arguments above will see that you are bias to evidence supporting an infinite creator, and hold on to claims with no evidence with regard to the Christian beliefs, while ignoring the mountain of evidence against them.

You're starting from the position that God does not exist whereas I am starting from the evidence of trillions and trillions of cause and effects and the 1st law of thermodynamics which you violate. You're simply catering to some assumptions that violate reality out of your hostility and independency to your Creator

As I have clearly explained in this reply your arguments are nowhere near as certain as you like to believe

for which I assure you that you will go to Hell for because you don't want to be redeemed back to God, and it is a choice to want to be eternally separated from God. You have nobody to blame but yourself.

I'm terrified. Please provide some evidence for the existence of heaven/hell without simply restating a claim.



As for that last comment stop being so immature and pathetic. You've just proved that you are desperate for any way to get at me due to your weak arguments. That comment was referring to the fact that I had said I wouldn't be drawn into arguing with yet another religious fanatic, but fell into the trap.