I am new to the Athesit Nexus.  Should I be out of place in my posting, or right to post than please tell me.  While this does not seem to be too much of a problem on this forum I can understand the need to keep it clean of unimportant topics, or of ones that dont belong on it.  The purpose of this posting is to provide some of the best answers I have found to common apologetic arguments, as I have found that those here seem not to know the best answers and ways to respond.  I mean no offense by this, after all how can one know somthing without being taught it? And as anti apologetics is, while mine, a very rare hobby, I find it unlikely that more than a few of you have had time to truly get into it. 

  1. If God does not exist, what made/started/created the big bang?

         This is a perfectally reasonable question and one that can be difficult to answer as it requires going somewhat outside our intuition.  Our immediate reaction to seeing somthing is to assume that it is created by somthing.  When no clear creator can be found mankind often assigns its creator to god.   We on here agree that the universe was not created by god.  What then created it?  The answer is that nothing/nobody did.  The universe is eternal, it has always existed and will always exist.  While science is currently unsure about the has part, the mathmatics so far show that it is a clear possibility.  For further research into this I suggest that you look up the big crunch.  When you think about it, Theists themselves state that an eternal being created the universe, why then can't the universe itself be eternal, after all somthing must be eternal.  Besides by cutting out the middle man, we can claim benefit of Occam's Razor.

 

     2.    Insert personal (possibly, could be a miracle), unlikely, and amazing story here.

            While generally not the most reasonable of arguments, I have found this one to be very common and impossible to answer except on an individual basis.  I shall start with miracle stories and move on to personal ones later.  Since your opponent will claim superior research knowledge/personal information about somthign that you yourself have not had time to check up on, one cannot claim the higher knowledge ground that we usually have.  Therefore this arument must be surrendered to with the statment that research shall be done so that you know more about the situation that they speak of.  Should the story be more than a few hundred years than lack of stringent documentation  is the obvious answer.  For more modern day times carefull research must be taken, skeptics magazines and articles generally have an overview with much of the research already done about every miricle story.  But I have found that with enough time, all miracles are either too old to be reliable, or can be shown through recent documentation to be questionable.  Personal stories take one of two different forms, that of extreme luck whether good or bad, and that of emotion.  Obviously emotion is not a logical basis for an argument and some basic knowledge of psycology and brain chemistry is enough to argue angasint these stories.  Those of extreme luck are more difficult to answer, and even some miricles can fall into this catagory.  Essentially this can be explained through a little bit of statistical anaylsis knowledge.  Consider Julias Ceaser, he was a great general and leader of Rome who died many thousand of years ago. What are the odds that we inhale some of his dying breath?  The amount of air molecules in the atmosphere are about 10^44.  This is terrible odds, however one breath holds about 10^22, and, upon doing the division there is greater than 50% chance (its been too long since ive read my introduction to statistical anaylsis book and I cannot remmber the exact number) that you breath some of his molecules every second.  The sheer amount of trials make up for the small chances.  It works this way with unlikely events, if you think about it, there are billions of unlikely things that could happen to us at any one moment with billion to one chances of happening.  Occurances such as this are actually quite common, it is simply only the easily noticable ones and ones that have some symbolic meaning or a pattern that we notice.

 

I understand that this is alot of text and I thank you for your time spent in reading this, this is obviously only a start of the many questions asked by us all the time, as if it was our responsibility and not theirs to prove ourselves and our responsibilities to know these things.  Should you find my explanations too long/tedious/boring/illogical then please say so in the comments below. This is my passion and hobby and you cannot insult me, only make me more determined to improve.  Should you wish to hear more from me on different questions we are asked, or have specific ones you would like me to search the answer for I will be more than happy to do so.  I am always looking for new apologetic arguments so that I can always be prepared. 

 

A word of warning, especially about the second argument, do not expect logic to change their minds or even to bring them on the fence.  I have found that by the time they start to run out of arguments, people get tired of you even if they enjoyed the debate before and will begin to consider you a hostile person.  Perhaps I am simply a hostile person, but do not expect results most of the time (I have had 5 successes in my 6 years of atheism). 

Tags: apologetic, creationism, id

Views: 164

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

  If god did not exist then how the big bang happened?

This is a good question for a discussion here and has been asked before in one form or other.

Many learned friends here will answer this eloquently but I believe that this question is to be really answered by an expert cosmologist. I will therefore depend on Stephen Hawking who has said that this universe came in to existence purely by laws of science and nothing else was needed, no god was needed anytime. Quantum physics tells us that something indeed can emerge out of nothing. In other words, no creator is needed.

Anyone can go on asking questions like why and how because they are so easy to ask but the knowledge science has given us is sufficient for us. Let us give science some more time to discover more.

Madhukar, that makes good sense to me.

Travis,

To #1, the best of all possible answers is I don't know.

I also don't much care; while reading the current guesses helps my pass the time, having an answer won't change my life in any way.

To #2, I could do an essay on what some people call "the gift of faith" and others call "the burden of faith".

RSS

Support Atheist Nexus

Donate Today

Donate

 

Help Nexus When You Buy From Amazon

Amazon

AJY

 

© 2014   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service