Atheists: Did Something Come From Nothing?

[Man of Steel]

Typical Fundie attack

Typical atheist distraction tactic 

[Agnostic007]

Typical atheist distraction tactic 

typical fundie circular logic fallacy 

[Man of Steel]

typical fundie circular logic fallacy 

typical atheist hit and run 

[Agnostic007]

typical atheist hit and run 

Typical Fundie personal attack on family

[Man of Steel]

Typical Fundie personal attack on family

Typical atheist distraction when cornered   

[Agnostic007]

Typical atheist distraction when cornered   

you're pretty good at this..

[tbombz]

All comes from the Divine and is the Divine.

  Lies, theft, and adultery?  God did not create those!

Cancer cells, viruses, and pimples? These are not God!


God created the universe,  and it was perfect, it is no longer perfect.. it is now filled with evil. But it has always been creation, it has never been Creator.  God is Creator, creation is not.

[Agnostic007]

  Lies, theft, and adultery?  God did not create those!

Cancer cells, viruses, and pimples? These are not God!


God created the universe,  and it was perfect, it is no longer perfect.. it is now filled with evil. But it has always been creation, it has never been Creator.  God is Creator, creation is not.

Isaiah must be wrong then. The bible (Isaiah) says there is NOTHING that exists that God didn't create. He even specifically says God created evil......


If you disagree, take it up with God

[Man of Steel]

Isaiah must be wrong then. The bible (Isaiah) says there is NOTHING that exists that God didn't create. He even specifically says God created evil......


If you disagree, take it up with God

Here are previous responses to you about this exact point.....answers haven't changed and are still correct.

So does the book of Amos:

Amos 3:6
King James Version (KJV)

6 Shall a trumpet be blown in the city, and the people not be afraid? shall there be evil in a city, and the Lord hath not done it?

The KJV of the bible uses the term evil differently in different contexts....we don't speak like that today.  

Modern readers don't use the word "evil" to describe "calamity and destruction" today and this is exactly how the term evil was used in the context of the verse you cite and I cite out of the KJV.

You also have to realize that the Hebrew language is quite small.  One individual can memorize every word in the language so attempts at producing new translations from the same available manuscripts can produce slightly different translations in terms of OT material.  Not all linguists agree on how words translate.  Often times the differences are very slight, but occassionally they're significant.

For example, the word "yom" in Hebrew means day, but "yom" can be translated according to 5 or 6 correct definitions.   In terms of the Genesis creation account some textual critics say "yom" means a literal 24-hour day and other textual critics say that same "yom" means an age or expanse of time.  In this case the context is needed to help define, but (in this case) the context still has support for both young and old earth creationist perspectives.    

Now the Greek language is more robust so the available NT manuscripts typically provide more consistent translation since there's an easier "1 for 1" link between english and greek terms.  

It's tough to say which is the best translation, but again modern scholarship heavily replies upon the NASB, NIV, ESV and NLT.  Some still ONLY utilize the KJV, but that translation contains antiquated english....hence the modern translations we have now.

If there is a passage of verses you really want to dig in on there are plenty of great online tools that will take each verse and compare it across every available translation.

Like the multiple definitions of the hebraic word "yom" for the english "day" we have multiple definitions of the hebraic word "ra' " that in english can be evil, wickedness, destruction, calamity, etc....the lexicons and theologians agree the context in these passages (Isaiah and Amos) translates"ra' " as destruction or calamity......not wickedness and sin.  This harmonizes with other scripture which many will say, "you say it harmonizes because it sounds better to you."  No, it harmonizes and is defined as such because it is correct.

[Agnostic007]

Here are previous responses to you about this exact point.....answers haven't changed and are still correct.

Like the multiple definitions of the hebraic word "yom" for the english "day" we have multiple definitions of the hebraic word "ra' " that in english can be evil, wickedness, destruction, calamity, etc....the lexicons and theologians agree the context in these passages (Isaiah and Amos) translates"ra' " as destruction or calamity......not wickedness and sin.  This harmonizes with other scripture which many will say, "you say it harmonizes because it sounds better to you."  No, it harmonizes and is defined as such because it is correct.

So you're saying God... even with the help of the holy spirit, was unable to manage to guide translators to use the correct wording and allowed for 100's of years, his book to say he created evil, yet he really didn't... Ok... so you are arguing that 1. God is unable to properly translate his words, and 2. he DID admit to creating calamity and mayhem... not too sure I would put up that argument if I were you 

[Man of Steel]

So you're saying God... even with the help of the holy spirit, was unable to manage to guide translators to use the correct wording and allowed for 100's of years, his book to say he created evil, yet he really didn't... Ok... so you are arguing that 1. God is unable to properly translate his words, and 2. he DID admit to creating calamity and mayhem... not too sure I would put up that argument if I were you 

No, I'm saying the simple, surface objection that "the KJV says 'God made evil' so that's it 'God made evil' " isn't a sufficient understanding of the text. 

It's a great, coffee house objection for those opposed to Christianity to present because most Christians at the coffee house can't provide an answer to it.....most are just deer in headlights.  That's why the objections are fun for some and regardless of answers and reconciliations of the objections many objectors persist with them because it's most probable they'll encounter far more ignorant Christians than informed Christians.

I can't speak to early readers of the KJV because I don't understand and use language like they did at that time in history.  The use of "evil' in that context may have made perfect sense to them....doesn't to me and many others in the current era.  So we have updated translations that account for shifts in language.  Words can have multiple, correct meanings and I leave it to the expert linguists, textual critics and theologians to come to a consensus on such issues (and they have).  These folks help guide the shifting language and harmonization of specific scriptural texts and surrounding context.   Regardless, it says nothing about the inspiration of scripture.       

[tbombz]

So you're saying God... even with the help of the holy spirit, was unable to manage to guide translators to use the correct wording and allowed for 100's of years, his book to say he created evil, yet he really didn't... Ok... so you are arguing that 1. God is unable to properly translate his words, and 2. he DID admit to creating calamity and mayhem... not too sure I would put up that argument if I were you 

languages change with time, and early languages are more complex and intricate than modem ones. If you look at the original language, then you get the best understanding, but if you translate it into modern language you may get the translation correctly  yet in 50 years when the language has changed  your translation may be wrong... Even though it used to be right. Does that make sense?

Long story short, God does create some forms of "evil". For example, God flooded the entire earth and killed everyone but Noah' family. But this is not evil, it is actually good, because it is good for the wicked to be punished.  But God does not create actual EVIL... The kind that is not based in righteousness. Real evil originates when a creature fails to love God.

[avxo]

languages change with time, and early languages are more complex and intricate than modem ones. If you look at the original language, then you get the best understanding, but if you translate it into modern language you may get the translation correctly  yet in 50 years when the language has changed  your translation may be wrong... Even though it used to be right. Does that make sense?

Long story short, God does create some forms of "evil". For example, God flooded the entire earth and killed everyone but Noah' family. But this is not evil, it is actually good, because it is good for the wicked to be punished.  But God does not create actual EVIL... The kind that is not based in righteousness. Real evil originates when a creature fails to love God.

Can you provide a rational and logically consistent definition of God that stands up to critical scrutiny and allows us to understand what the creature you refer to as "God" is and how it differs from, say, a figment of your imagination?

Unless you can, your entire post is drivel.

[Agnostic007]

d

languages change with time, and early languages are more complex and intricate than modem ones. If you look at the original language, then you get the best understanding, but if you translate it into modern language you may get the translation correctly  yet in 50 years when the language has changed  your translation may be wrong... Even though it used to be right. Does that make sense?

Long story short, God does create some forms of "evil". For example, God flooded the entire earth and killed everyone but Noah' family. But this is not evil, it is actually good, because it is good for the wicked to be punished.  But God does not create actual EVIL... The kind that is not based in righteousness. Real evil originates when a creature fails to love God.

There is a problem when humans are willing to accept ANY deed, no matter how atrocious it is.. as "good" simply because of who is doing the atrocious deed or deeds. when asked of Christians, "Is there ANYTHING God could ever do, that would be so cruel, so atrocious that you would be morally offended by it?" and the answer is always no... that is ridiculous

[Man of Steel]

d
There is a problem when humans are willing to accept ANY deed, no matter how atrocious it is.. as "good" simply because of who is doing the atrocious deed or deeds. when asked of Christians, "Is there ANYTHING God could ever do, that would be so cruel, so atrocious that you would be morally offended by it?" and the answer is always no... that is ridiculous

And my question to unbelievers that challenge this point is "why do you favor the reprobate?"

God severely punished those whom he made a divine, righteous covenant with and those who were fully wicked, deceitful and full in their sin.  

So, don't straw man the argument or create a hypothetical and then outright object to your "what if" scenario that hasn't happened and won't be happening.  

So often terrible people do terrible things to good folks and immediately so many are ready to pounce and be critical of God saying, "Why doesn't God do something to those bad guys?!!"  

If God pronounces judgment upon the terrible people the same folks say, "Can you believe an all-loving God would do something like that to those poor folks? So immoral!!"

Whichever way the anti-God breeze is blowing is the direction most unbelievers proceed in.  

"Your so called 'God' should do something about those bad guys!"  
"Can you believe their 'God' did something about those poor people!"

The reprobate are "bad guys"   in one breathe and "poor people"    in another.  

Yes, all their wickedness vanishes when they're held accountable and that wickedness is then capriciously applied to God.  "Gotta blame someone and it ain't gonna be me!"  

[tbombz]

Can you provide a rational and logically consistent definition of God that stands up to critical scrutiny and allows us to understand what the creature you refer to as "God" is and how it differs from, say, a figment of your imagination?

Unless you can, your entire post is drivel.

well, the first distinction I would make is that God is Creator, not creature.

[avxo]

well, the first distinction I would make is that God is Creator, not creature.

"Creator" tells us nothing. And it begs the question to boot, but let's skip that for now.

A composer is a creator - he creates a symphony. A novelist is a creator - she creates a story. So, unless you worship musicians and novelists, then clearly there must be a better definition of God than "Creator".

So again: provide a rational, internally consistent definition of the entity you perceive as God which allows anyone to unambiguously understand what the term means, what being or entity it refers to, and how the existence of this being or entity can be ascertained.

[tbombz]

"Creator" tells us nothing. And it begs the question to boot, but let's skip that for now.

A composer is a creator - he creates a symphony. A novelist is a creator - she creates a story. So, unless you worship musicians and novelists, then clearly there must be a better definition of God than "Creator".

So again: provide a rational, internally consistent definition of the entity you perceive as God which allows anyone to unambiguously understand what the term means, what being or entity it refers to, and how the existence of this being or entity can be ascertained.

"Creator" tells you nothing, absolutely nothing at all?

[Man of Steel]

"Creator" tells you nothing, absolutely nothing at all?

My advice....let it go.

I've done the dance and thoroughly answered.

He'll subtly attach qualifiers and criteria making any definition insufficient.

It's a game and I've personally played and watched the requirements stretch and stretch and stretch...he knows what he's doing LOL....it's a word game wrapped in the guise of "dialogue".

I have nothing against avxo personally but my recommendation is to spit out the bait....life choices have long since been made.

Only if you feel this will bear good fruit for others then pursue..that was my only previous motivation. 

[avxo]

"Creator" tells you nothing, absolutely nothing at all?

There's all kind of creators - how can I distinguish them from yours? What other attributes can you provide?

[The Ugly]

http://www.christianpost.com/news/atheists-did-something-come-from-nothing-145015/

It seems atheists would much rather believe that something came from nothing, than to believe that Someone has always existed. Of course both beliefs are a matter of faith.

So did the universe come from nothing, or from God? Is there a rational mind behind the mathematical precision of the universe, as well as human DNA, or did it all just happen by chance?

In his book, "The Grand Design," Professor Stephen Hawking writes, "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing. Spontaneous creation is the reason there is something rather than nothing, why the universe exists, why we exist."

But Hawking's premise is illogical. Without the cosmos, there would be no law of gravity. And if the law of gravity truly helped create the universe as Hawking suggests, then the universe was not created from nothing, but from something. In that case, how did the law of gravity originate, and how could it have been in existence prior to the creation of the universe? Impossible and irrational.

You mean to tell me that the man who is perhaps the world's most famous living scientist actually believes the mystical doctrine that something came from nothing? Yes indeed. Hawking's confession of faith is unequivocal. And a multitude of others in our world today have also chosen to place their faith in such imaginative science fiction. True science, on the other hand, recognizes that something cannot be created from nothing.

By the way, Hawking recently revealed his latest theory. He now believes that passing through a "black hole" could lead you to another universe. And his latest theory comes less than two years since Hawking made headlines with this bold statement: "There are no black holes."

But the man who believes the law of gravity helped create the universe has been digging a little deeper on the question of black holes. And he wants you to be prepared in case you ever find yourself inside one. Seriously.

Hawking now says that "if you feel you are in a black hole, don't give up. There's a way out." A way out? And Hawking knows this for a fact? Actually, it's just more science fiction from an intelligent physicist with a creative imagination.

Obviously, man is susceptible to embracing the myth that nothing created something. The Christian mind, on the other hand, has been delivered from such irrationality. Christians believe in a personal God who loved us enough to send His only Son to save us from our sin. Christians have been given "the mind of Christ." (1 Cor. 2:16) That is, we now see a number of things the way Christ sees them.

But how can that be?

Well, wisdom from God gets poured into a believer when he meets Christ through faith. Without this wisdom, how in the world could we possibly believe in a personal God? After all, we are not born into this world possessing "the mind of Christ." We only possess human reason. And those who reject God admittedly don't know where human reason originated.

Karl Popper delivered the first Darwin Lecture at Darwin College, in Cambridge, on Nov. 8, 1977. It was entitled, "Natural Selection and the Emergence of Mind." Popper stated, "I conjecture that life, and later also mind, have evolved or emerged in a universe that was, up to a certain time, lifeless and mindless. Life, or living matter, somehow emerged from nonliving matter; and it does not seem completely impossible that we shall one day know how this happened. Things look far more difficult with the emergence of mind. While we think we know some of the preconditions of life, and some of the substructures of primitive organisms, we do not have the slightest idea on which evolutionary level mind emerges."

That's simple. The rational mind of man was created by an intelligent and rational Creator. He is all-powerful and all-knowing, and so it was easy for God to create both the body as well as the mind of man.

Consider for a moment the mathematical precision of human DNA. Francis Collins is the director of the Human Genome Project. Collins stated, "I have led a consortium of scientists to read out the 3.1 billion letters of the human genome, our own DNA instruction book. As a believer, I see DNA, the information molecule of all living things, as God's language, and the elegance and complexity of our own bodies and the rest of nature as a reflection of God's plan."

Perry Marshall noted, "Dr. Jean-Claude Perez started counting letters in DNA. He discovered that these ratios are highly mathematical and based on 'Phi,' the Golden Ratio 1.618. This is a very special number, sort of like Pi." Perez' discovery was published in the scientific journal Interdisciplinary Sciences / Computational Life Sciences in September 2010.

Since God's mind is obviously a million times more advanced than the human mind, it was a piece of cake for the Creator to place this mathematical perfection into the DNA of Adam and Eve. "Wait a minute! Who believes in that Adam and Eve stuff?" Well, Jesus for one. Christ said, "Haven't you read that at the beginning the Creator 'made them male and female.'" (Matthew 19:4)

And we have all descended from that first man and woman. It requires faith to believe that God is an eternal Being who created man at a special time and place. On the other end of the spectrum, it requires far greater faith (and a blind faith at that) to believe that something came from nothing.

Scriptures reveals the origin of the cosmos: "By Christ all things were created: things in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or powers or rulers or authorities; all things were created by Him and for Him. He is before all things, and in Him all things hold together." (Colossians 1:15-17) God is not a thing, but a Person. Actually, three Persons in One God. And when you meet Christ through faith, you enter an eternal relationship with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Francis Collins said, "I had always assumed that faith was based on purely emotional and irrational arguments, and was astounded to discover, initially in the writings of the Oxford scholar C.S. Lewis and subsequently from many other sources, that one could build a very strong case for the plausibility of the existence of God on purely rational grounds. My earlier atheist's assertion that 'I know there is no God' emerged as the least defensible. As the British writer G.K. Chesterton famously remarked, 'Atheism is the most daring of all dogmas, for it is the assertion of a universal negative.'"

So did the universe create itself out of nothing? And did the human mind come into existence without the work of a rational designer? Or has God always existed? You make the call.

But just remember. The Lord is going to reign in heaven forever, whether you want to be part of that eternal celebration or not.

I think you're misrepresenting the cosmological argument, Man. And I think you know that, as you follow the debate and seem to understand much of the physics as well.

They aren't saying "nothing"; they're hypothesizing a multiverse, which would solve the physics conundrum. Unfortunately, I'm unprepared to defend or even explain it, but I bet you understand it enough to at least know  it ain't a nothing issue anymore. I think Krauss might be the go-to guy here.

[Agnostic007]

And my question to unbelievers that challenge this point is "why do you favor the reprobate?"

God severely punished those whom he made a divine, righteous covenant with and those who were fully wicked, deceitful and full in their sin.  

So, don't straw man the argument or create a hypothetical and then outright object to your "what if" scenario that hasn't happened and won't be happening.  

So often terrible people do terrible things to good folks and immediately so many are ready to pounce and be critical of God saying, "Why doesn't God do something to those bad guys?!!"  

If God pronounces judgment upon the terrible people the same folks say, "Can you believe an all-loving God would do something like that to those poor folks? So immoral!!"

Whichever way the anti-God breeze is blowing is the direction most unbelievers proceed in.  

"Your so called 'God' should do something about those bad guys!"  
"Can you believe their 'God' did something about those poor people!"

The reprobate are "bad guys"   in one breathe and "poor people"    in another.  

Yes, all their wickedness vanishes when they're held accountable and that wickedness is then capriciously applied to God.  "Gotta blame someone and it ain't gonna be me!"  

That would be a beautiful argument if I didn't have access to the bible and know it says god killed an entire population except 8 people. There could not have been an entire population of reprobates to include children. He also commanded Moses to attack a tribe and moses killed all the captives, women and children, except the virgin women which he gave to his soldiers. Now if THAT is ethical in your book, you may have deeper issues than I thought.. in my book, that's atrocious, no matter who is behind it. 

[The Ugly]

And my question to unbelievers that challenge this point is "why do you favor the reprobate?"

God severely punished those whom he made a divine, righteous covenant with and those who were fully wicked, deceitful and full in their sin.  

So, don't straw man the argument or create a hypothetical and then outright object to your "what if" scenario that hasn't happened and won't be happening.  

So often terrible people do terrible things to good folks and immediately so many are ready to pounce and be critical of God saying, "Why doesn't God do something to those bad guys?!!"  

If God pronounces judgment upon the terrible people the same folks say, "Can you believe an all-loving God would do something like that to those poor folks? So immoral!!"

Whichever way the anti-God breeze is blowing is the direction most unbelievers proceed in.  

"Your so called 'God' should do something about those bad guys!"  
"Can you believe their 'God' did something about those poor people!"

The reprobate are "bad guys"   in one breathe and "poor people"    in another.  

Yes, all their wickedness vanishes when they're held accountable and that wickedness is then capriciously applied to God.  "Gotta blame someone and it ain't gonna be me!"  

Man, is this really what we do? Just nitpick tiny, harmless discrepancies? Because I'm not feeling that at all.

Let's use the Flood:

For your point to make sense, we must first accept that 100% of creation (minus Team Noah) turned sour. So does the bible say everyone? Or most, or many, or some, or what? Because He killed every-fucking-one, which means LOTS of collateral. And this is a an all-powerful PERFECT being, remember, so no need to kill even a single innocent.

He could very well have killed ONLY the wicked. Just like with every other event or era in human history, just root out the bad. He could do it today. So, again, why does He handle business like an imperfect army when we're told He's anything and everything but?

I won't bring up the slaves here, because we know they were ALL wicked, every single one, and therefore deserved to be treated like insentient labor tools. Plus, slavery itself, eh, really not so bad.

[Fortress]

So if some sky god does exist, what created IT?

More than likely, the universe and its essential building blocks has always existed.

But even if something actually did create us or other universe stuff, why do humans feel a need to worship it and label it a god? We create things, and despite our sophistication not yet being where it needs to be to create something as complex as us, we're not gods. And if we survive as a species long enough and do come to such sophistication, we still will not ever be gods.

Such weakness, fear, ego, and shortsightedness involved in the belief in a sky god.

[Agnostic007]

So if some sky god does exist, what created IT?

More than likely, the universe and its essential building blocks has always existed.

But even if something actually did create us or other universe stuff, why do humans feel a need to worship it and label it a god? We create things, and despite our sophistication not yet being where it needs to be to create something as complex as us, we're not gods. And if we survive as a species long enough and do come to such sophistication, we still will not ever be gods.

Such weakness, fear, ego, and shortsightedness involved in the belief in a sky god.

On the same note, why does a creator crave/demand to be worshipped? seems that is a character flaw we would despise among us, why do some find that to be acceptable among a creator?