Championship Subdivision Football | FCS Football | Stadiums | Blogs | Forums

How are Atheists squaring their beliefs with the Big Bang? I am sure there are some on this board who have been asked this before and am interested in their ideas.

There's lot's of stuff we don't know... and pretending to know is fun
But anyway: That's why I don't pray to God - well at least not the God that made the universe
You see, I pray to the God that made God
(Because God had to come from somewhere silly)

What is it, exactly, that needs to be "squared"?

Chizzang wrote:There's lot's of stuff we don't know... and pretending to know is fun
But anyway: That's why I don't pray to God - well at least not the God that made the universe
You see, I pray to the God that made God
(Because God had to come from somewhere silly)

....it's turtles, all the way down.....

Chizzang wrote:There's lot's of stuff we don't know... and pretending to know is fun
But anyway: That's why I don't pray to God - well at least not the God that made the universe
You see, I pray to the God that made God
(Because God had to come from somewhere silly)

Yes, but isn't the predominant thought that there was a big bang?

SeattleGriz wrote:

Chizzang wrote:There's lot's of stuff we don't know... and pretending to know is fun
But anyway: That's why I don't pray to God - well at least not the God that made the universe
You see, I pray to the God that made God
(Because God had to come from somewhere silly)

Yes, but isn't the predominant thought that there was a big bang?

Yeah but that was caused by Your god...
My God made your god


(FACT)

Chizzang wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:
Yes, but isn't the predominant thought that there was a big bang?

Yeah but that was caused by Your god...
My God made your god


(FACT)

So if it was made by my God, how are atheists squaring it with their beliefs?

houndawg wrote:What is it, exactly, that needs to be "squared"?

That many atheists don't like that the Big Bang is the predominant theory. They would like it to go back to the "it was always there" version.

SeattleGriz wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Yeah but that was caused by Your god...
My God made your god


(FACT)

So if it was made by my God, how are atheists squaring it with their beliefs?

No Atheists in here..? (I checked, they all left)

Who created God?

SeattleGriz wrote:

Chizzang wrote:
Yeah but that was caused by Your god...
My God made your god


(FACT)

So if it was made by my God, how are atheists squaring it with their beliefs?

Your god doesn't exist. "It" was always here, neither created or destroyed. Conservation of energy.

houndawg wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:
So if it was made by my God, how are atheists squaring it with their beliefs?

Your god doesn't exist. "It" was always here, neither created or destroyed. Conservation of energy.

That defies logic and reason.

houndawg wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:
So if it was made by my God, how are atheists squaring it with their beliefs?

Your god doesn't exist. "It" was always here, neither created or destroyed. Conservation of energy.

Okay, one for burying head in the sand in response to science.

SeattleGriz wrote:

houndawg wrote:
Your god doesn't exist. "It" was always here, neither created or destroyed. Conservation of energy.

Okay, one for burying head in the sand in response to science.

It's the same reasoning people use for God though. He just always has been. Everything had to come from somewhere, except God. We need a first cause but why doesn't the first cause need a cause?

Vidav wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote:
Okay, one for burying head in the sand in response to science.

It's the same reasoning people use for God though. He just always has been. Everything had to come from somewhere, except God. We need a first cause but why doesn't the first cause need a cause?

Where I think you are wrong in your argument, is that the current cosmological theory on the origin of the Universe is the big bang. There is data for this, and thus why it is the prevailing theory.

Besides, people can use that reasoning for God, because no one has given them any reason to think God does not exist, especially atheists. If that is a personal belief, so be it, but the big bang has science behind it.

Lastly, if one believes in God and that God created the universe, then God would not be bound by the laws of the universe and would be impossible to fathom - I know that is a cop out though, but in relation to the physics of the big bang, the two do not stand as equal and therefore cannot be compared.

SeattleGriz wrote: Where I think you are wrong in your argument, is that the current cosmological theory on the origin of the Universe is the big bang. There is data for this, and thus why it is the prevailing theory.

Besides, people can use that reasoning for God, because no one has given them any reason to think God does not exist, especially atheists. If that is a personal belief, so be it, but the big bang has science behind it.

Lastly, if one believes in God and that God created the universe, then God would not be bound by the laws of the universe and would be impossible to fathom - I know that is a cop out though, but in relation to the physics of the big bang, the two do not stand as equal and therefore cannot be compared.

*whew...
You've been waiting to deliver that for 45 minutes
The agony of suspending your big punchline was exhausting I can tell

and now..

for your second act..?

I'm not really following how the "big bang" (a dopey name for it by the way) would bother an atheist. I can most definitely see where it would bother a Christian, especially a fundy literalist.

death dealer wrote:I'm not really following how the "big bang" (a dopey name for it by the way) would bother an atheist. I can most definitely see where it would bother a Christian, especially a fundy literalist.

There's no sound in space, shouldn't it have been called the big flash? Of course, the light might not have been in the visible spectrum, and there were no people to see it anyway. Big sudden expansion of energy doesn't sound cool though.

BlueHen86 wrote:

death dealer wrote:I'm not really following how the "big bang" (a dopey name for it by the way) would bother an atheist. I can most definitely see where it would bother a Christian, especially a fundy literalist.

There's no sound in space, shouldn't it have been called the big flash? Of course, the light might not have been in the visible spectrum, and there were no people to see it anyway. Big sudden expansion of energy doesn't sound cool though.

death dealer wrote:

BlueHen86 wrote:
There's no sound in space, shouldn't it have been called the big flash? Of course, the light might not have been in the visible spectrum, and there were no people to see it anyway. Big sudden expansion of energy doesn't sound cool though.

I think creationists should refer to it as the Big Lie.

Vidav wrote:
It's the same reasoning people use for God though. He just always has been. Everything had to come from somewhere, except God. We need a first cause but why doesn't the first cause need a cause?

b'cause

death dealer wrote:I'm not really following how the "big bang" (a dopey name for it by the way) would bother an atheist. I can most definitely see where it would bother a Christian, especially a fundy literalist.

Because the big bang supports more of a theistic model, especially the Genesis story. Something had to create the big bang, so why not God?

Don't know how accurate my statement is, but that is the gist as to why the big bang does not sit well with some atheists.

In light of what I said above, how would it not sit well with a fundy literalist?

Chizzang wrote:

SeattleGriz wrote: Where I think you are wrong in your argument, is that the current cosmological theory on the origin of the Universe is the big bang. There is data for this, and thus why it is the prevailing theory.

Besides, people can use that reasoning for God, because no one has given them any reason to think God does not exist, especially atheists. If that is a personal belief, so be it, but the big bang has science behind it.

Lastly, if one believes in God and that God created the universe, then God would not be bound by the laws of the universe and would be impossible to fathom - I know that is a cop out though, but in relation to the physics of the big bang, the two do not stand as equal and therefore cannot be compared.

*whew...
You've been waiting to deliver that for 45 minutes
The agony of suspending your big punchline was exhausting I can tell

and now..

for your second act..?

Had to eat dinner first, and actually I asked atheists to tell me about how the big bang doesn't fit in with their atheistic beliefs, but not a one has given an answer other than one that flies in the face of current cosmological thought.

My reply was only to tell Vidav I thought he was comparing apples to oranges.

Chizzang wrote:There's lot's of stuff we don't know... and pretending to know is fun
But anyway: That's why I don't pray to God - well at least not the God that made the universe
You see, I pray to the God that made God
(Because God had to come from somewhere silly)

Babe, this is the guy behind the guy behind the guy.

SeattleGriz wrote:

death dealer wrote:I'm not really following how the "big bang" (a dopey name for it by the way) would bother an atheist. I can most definitely see where it would bother a Christian, especially a fundy literalist.

Because the big bang supports more of a theistic model, especially the Genesis story. Something had to create the big bang, so why not God?

Don't know how accurate my statement is, but that is the gist as to why the big bang does not sit well with some atheists.

In light of what I said above, how would it not sit well with a fundy literalist?

Well, seeing as how according to most biblical literalists the universe is only a few thousand years old, and the big flash took place more than a few billion years ago, I can see a potential conflict.

And I don't see how the "big bang" in any way supports a theistic model than a non-theistic one. The Big Bang is a scientific theory. A theistic model for creation is a theological/philosophical discussion unrelated to science. Believe whatever you want to believe. Believe it was a gigantic dragon fart if it floats your boat. I don't care, and I support your right to believe it. It is not, however, science, and that will never change, no matter how long a post JSO makes to the contrary.