Originally Posted by PVPPRO

Lets assume that there is no religion, no God, no supernatural being. Lets take another theory, the "Big Bang" for example. As everyone knows, two masses in space collided and as a result and the right mixture of gases, created life. Then that life evolved into what we are today. That is completely wrong. Nobody knows where the first cell came from. But lets say it did come from that. But, where did the two masses come from!? They had to be created. By whom? A supernatural being.

Originally Posted by JayStar

That's not even what the Big Bang Theory is. Please do some research before you spout off about theories you know nothing about.

The idea is that all the mass in the universe always existed as a singularity (infinite mass in a point somewhere in the universe, imagine a Cartesian plane). Eventually this singularity exploded as what we called the Big Bang. We know it happened because we can observe mass receding into the universe and super high speeds. If you understand some physics you'd know that light has a finite speed. Because starts are millions upon millions of light years away, we can essentially look back into time. We see these stars getting further away. You may ask what caused the Big Bang? Well, no one really knows, but the answer is not anything we would expect for you see, before the Big Bang, there was nothing besides this singularity which means the laws of physics does not apply. Which means there need not be a cause for an effect.

Now, another theory is the Big Crunch, the idea that is based off of Newton's law of Universal Gravity. It is the idea that eventually this mass will stop expanding and begin to contract back to this singular point. Crunching together and forming another singularity. The idea is that the Universe is just a cycle of crunches and expansions. It's just what's been going on forever. Nothing created it, it's just always been.

To say that it must have been created by a supernatural being because we have no answer would be like saying we fall to the ground because a loving God wants us to, not because there's gravity. Without asking "why" how do you expect to innovate? All you and your religious fan boys do is halt scientific innovation, truth, and understanding.

Ever heard of the dark years? Ya, well it's about a millenium of nothing, just halted scientifc advancement due to religion.

Graph

Show

---

two masses in space collided and as a result and the right mixture of gases, created life

Originally Posted by PVPPRO

Even so, the point is the same. But to conflict both points of views, we will never know until we die, maybe not even then.

Originally Posted by PVPPRO

But, where did the two masses come from!? They had to be created. By whom? A supernatural being.

Originally Posted by Oracle

The argument that you would know if there's a god or not when you die relies on a couple very impossible to prove claims. One, memory and knowledge are dictated by the chemical reactions in the brain. Once you're dead, memory and knowledge cease to exist. How can one suddenly learn anything when the capacity to learn has been terminated?

Two, assuming that there's a conscience inside the body that can learn upon death of a god, begs the question of where said conscience resides. Is it in the brain? The heart? The kidney? Your big left toe? And how would you be able to determine where it is? How can you be certain said conscience even exists, let alone is capable of existing outside of it's physical construction? Until it's observable, and knowledge of it's indisputable existence is established, then it's only logical to assume it doesn't exist.

"Psychics" claim to be able to read minds, yet are incapable of beating the odds when given a 50:50 situation to be either right or wrong. Since it's not observable, telekinesis is assumed to be false. Same thing with gods. You can't prove they exist, and you can't prove they don't exist. Because of lack of evidence, you can only conclude it doesn't exist, or you must place faith in the unknown and assume it exists. There is no absolute truth in the unknown. True believers in religion do not assume an absolute truth, but acknowledge that there is no truth. There is only faith.

And no, the Bible is not a legitimate source to cite to retort any of this. It's a story book written by several different authors from several different times who had their works compiled into one book, then given "divinity" by a vote among a council of old politicians who only a couple decades back were burning people alive who believed in said "divinity" and dismissed it as heresy. There is a history that backs this up. There is evidence that backs this up. And there's a bunch of anecdotal evidence to support that people are stupid enough to believe in fictitious stories and accept them as facts without evidence.

Originally Posted by deprav

Lal Gorman, you're gonna melt his brain with confusion.

Your last point makes me think about the "holographic projection" theory. I only know a tiny bit about it, I'm no physicist, but it's the same kind of idea.