Thursday, January 29, 2009
Monday, January 5, 2009
Friday, August 8, 2008
My Reasons...
My reasons for being an atheist are:
1. The concept of hell in Christian and Muslim theology. Jesus said, "Narrow is the way" so evidently most people are going to hell. Infinite excruciating punishment for finite sins is not only atrocious, it is illogical. This argument only applies to Christianity and Islam, however.
2. Natural explanations have been found for practically everything, making God superflous. There are natural explanations for the origin of life, Evolution explains the diversity and complexity of life, and of course there are natural explanations for the origin of the Universe and its laws.
3. The Ultimate Boeing Jet 747. Creationists argue that the odds of life happening are similar to a tornado blowing through a junkyard and producing a brand new Boeing Jet 747, therefore life must be designed. I have read, and fully believe, that the human mind is the most complex structure in the universe. Since human beings cannot create life from scratch (yet) much less a Universe, I conclude that God must be exponentially more complex**. Since, according to the argument, complex things are highly improbable, God must be even more improbable than the Universe. Normal rules of logic tell us that we must choose the most probable option, all things considered. Therefore, God does not exist.
4. I know of no evidence or arguments for God which do not have major flaws.
5. Supposing that there were one God or Pantheon, why is it that different cultures all worship different Gods or Pantheons?
** I am assuming that I can make an analogy between what is inside the Universe and something that is supposedly outside the universe. If human beings cannot make that analogy, then there is no way to know whether there is a God or Pantheon, or which one it is, and we simply have to say that we do not know.
1. The concept of hell in Christian and Muslim theology. Jesus said, "Narrow is the way" so evidently most people are going to hell. Infinite excruciating punishment for finite sins is not only atrocious, it is illogical. This argument only applies to Christianity and Islam, however.
2. Natural explanations have been found for practically everything, making God superflous. There are natural explanations for the origin of life, Evolution explains the diversity and complexity of life, and of course there are natural explanations for the origin of the Universe and its laws.
3. The Ultimate Boeing Jet 747. Creationists argue that the odds of life happening are similar to a tornado blowing through a junkyard and producing a brand new Boeing Jet 747, therefore life must be designed. I have read, and fully believe, that the human mind is the most complex structure in the universe. Since human beings cannot create life from scratch (yet) much less a Universe, I conclude that God must be exponentially more complex**. Since, according to the argument, complex things are highly improbable, God must be even more improbable than the Universe. Normal rules of logic tell us that we must choose the most probable option, all things considered. Therefore, God does not exist.
4. I know of no evidence or arguments for God which do not have major flaws.
5. Supposing that there were one God or Pantheon, why is it that different cultures all worship different Gods or Pantheons?
** I am assuming that I can make an analogy between what is inside the Universe and something that is supposedly outside the universe. If human beings cannot make that analogy, then there is no way to know whether there is a God or Pantheon, or which one it is, and we simply have to say that we do not know.
Wednesday, April 2, 2008
The Holy Bible ain't Wholly Reliable
Failed Prophecy:
Ezekiel 30:12 and Zechariah 10:11 The Nile shall dry up. This has never happened.
Isaiah 13:17-19 Says that the Medes would conquer Babylon and it would never again be inhabited. Of course this is false, because they did not destroy it. In fact, Alexander the Great conquered it in 331 B.C. Babylon was alive and well long after the Persian empire was destroyed.
The Bible says the Earth is flat
Read Isaiah 40:22 It says, "the circle of the earth". As we all know, the Earth is a sphere, not a circle. The dedicated Christian will say, "They did not have a word for sphere!" Well, what about Isaiah 22:18 (Same book!) which uses the Hebrew word for sphere (translated: "ball"). And on top of that, the metaphor in Isaiah 40:22 confirms the idea of a flat earth. Picture yourself looking at the flat earth from the side. Now picture a curtain being pulled from one end of the earth to the opposite end of the earth to form the shape of a "tent". Can you reconcile this metaphor with a round model of the earth and infinite space("heaven")?
In the bible, God commands the Israelites to kill every Midianite except the virgin girls.Numbers 31:17-18"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
Scribes copied books of the Bible over and over again for hundreds of years. Some of them decided to alter texts as they were copying. We don't have any of the earliest copies, thus we cannot possibly know what they said, much less what the originals said.Sources: "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman
http://www.1001errors.com
http://www.atheists.org/christianity/realbible.html
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/goliath.html
Ezekiel 30:12 and Zechariah 10:11 The Nile shall dry up. This has never happened.
Isaiah 13:17-19 Says that the Medes would conquer Babylon and it would never again be inhabited. Of course this is false, because they did not destroy it. In fact, Alexander the Great conquered it in 331 B.C. Babylon was alive and well long after the Persian empire was destroyed.
The Bible says the Earth is flat
Read Isaiah 40:22 It says, "the circle of the earth". As we all know, the Earth is a sphere, not a circle. The dedicated Christian will say, "They did not have a word for sphere!" Well, what about Isaiah 22:18 (Same book!) which uses the Hebrew word for sphere (translated: "ball"). And on top of that, the metaphor in Isaiah 40:22 confirms the idea of a flat earth. Picture yourself looking at the flat earth from the side. Now picture a curtain being pulled from one end of the earth to the opposite end of the earth to form the shape of a "tent". Can you reconcile this metaphor with a round model of the earth and infinite space("heaven")?
In the bible, God commands the Israelites to kill every Midianite except the virgin girls.Numbers 31:17-18"Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man, but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man."
Scribes copied books of the Bible over and over again for hundreds of years. Some of them decided to alter texts as they were copying. We don't have any of the earliest copies, thus we cannot possibly know what they said, much less what the originals said.Sources: "Misquoting Jesus" by Bart Ehrman
http://www.1001errors.com
http://www.atheists.org/christianity/realbible.html
http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/contra/goliath.html
Thursday, March 20, 2008
Why There is Almost Certainly A Multiverse
There has been a lot of debate about just how and why our universe seems so "fine tuned" for life. That is, there are certain constants of physics that must be a certain value or else life is impossible. Of course, theists have seized this as evidence of god. Other, perhaps more imaginative people, have speculated that there are many universes, and of course with trillions of universes (or an infinite number of universes) one would eventually come about that could support life. I thought of both of these as pure speculation until now.
As some of you may know, I argue that the universe started from nothingness:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzEhC9iAbeE
Of course, outside the space of our universe is an infinite amount of nothingness (an infinite amount of nothingness must exist by definition) and therefore there is an infinite number of universes. Even if the creation of universes is extremely rare, there must still be an infinite number of them. And by the way, I suspect it is rare: I think it comes about by a statistically improbable concentration of quantum fluctuations.
As some of you may know, I argue that the universe started from nothingness:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzEhC9iAbeE
Of course, outside the space of our universe is an infinite amount of nothingness (an infinite amount of nothingness must exist by definition) and therefore there is an infinite number of universes. Even if the creation of universes is extremely rare, there must still be an infinite number of them. And by the way, I suspect it is rare: I think it comes about by a statistically improbable concentration of quantum fluctuations.
Saturday, March 15, 2008
My hypothesis about the Evolution of Morality
Here is my explanation of morality, which I believe is a slight variant of Dawkins' selfish gene explanation of altruism:
Studies have shown that when you see someone else in pain, your brain responds as if it were in pain*. You see someone in pain, and it reminds you of your pain, and your brain reacts accordingly. In a situation where you are near them, you will react to try and relieve their pain (to relieve your own). I hypothesize that this is either a byproduct of the brain and of remembrance which just happens to be beneficial was not altered, or that it evolved by a selective advantage for groups with at least one altruistic individual (having at least one who rescues others from pain or death is still advantageous).
Studies have shown that when you see someone else in pain, your brain responds as if it were in pain*. You see someone in pain, and it reminds you of your pain, and your brain reacts accordingly. In a situation where you are near them, you will react to try and relieve their pain (to relieve your own). I hypothesize that this is either a byproduct of the brain and of remembrance which just happens to be beneficial was not altered, or that it evolved by a selective advantage for groups with at least one altruistic individual (having at least one who rescues others from pain or death is still advantageous).
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
The Ultimate Argument Against Christianity
Has anyone read this? Check out the NPR interview:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19096131
I think that the Bible's 'explanations' for suffering, as well as common christian explanations like Free Will, fail because the bible teaches in its first three chapters that we had a perfect world to begin with. According to Genesis, in the beginning suffering was not redemptive or necessary to feel pleasure. There are indications that man did not have evil in his soul (Genesis 3:6-7, the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil was good for gaining wisdom, and after they had eaten, "their eyes were opened"). We now come upon a contradiction. If eating the fruit was evil, then they should not have had it in their hearts to do evil. If it was not evil, they (and us, their "seeds") should not have been punished for doing no wrong. Christians must conclude that we suffer because of a remote ancestor's sin. Fair and Loving, Huh? Christians may argue that we would have done the same thing if we were in the garden of Eden, so this is why we were never given a perfect world to begin with. But don't we have free will? Since we are innocent to begin with (having done no wrong before we are born), why are we not given what we deserve (a perfect world)?
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19096131
I think that the Bible's 'explanations' for suffering, as well as common christian explanations like Free Will, fail because the bible teaches in its first three chapters that we had a perfect world to begin with. According to Genesis, in the beginning suffering was not redemptive or necessary to feel pleasure. There are indications that man did not have evil in his soul (Genesis 3:6-7, the fruit of the knowledge of good and evil was good for gaining wisdom, and after they had eaten, "their eyes were opened"). We now come upon a contradiction. If eating the fruit was evil, then they should not have had it in their hearts to do evil. If it was not evil, they (and us, their "seeds") should not have been punished for doing no wrong. Christians must conclude that we suffer because of a remote ancestor's sin. Fair and Loving, Huh? Christians may argue that we would have done the same thing if we were in the garden of Eden, so this is why we were never given a perfect world to begin with. But don't we have free will? Since we are innocent to begin with (having done no wrong before we are born), why are we not given what we deserve (a perfect world)?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)