Is there a first cause? i.e. God?

[Theland1]

Atheists have had great success in rubbishing the concept of a First Cause, i.e. God, as the prime mover and shaker of all of Creation.
Science simply says, "We don't know, but one day we will."
Sorry folks, that is simply not good enough when eternity is at stake.
So the question is, should not atheists seriously consider the possibility of God and adjust accordingly?

[cassa333]

That would get into the 'what ifs'. To live your life on every what if that presented itself would be so restricive you wouldn't get out of bed.

Also 'what if' your religion was not the 'one true' religion? Which one do you choose to hedge your bets?

[Buenchico]

As an atheist I have to accept that the 'Big Bang' (or whatever other start to the Universe, and to life, you happen to believe in) MIGHT have come about through the actions of some supernatural being (who, if you like, I'll call 'God').

However there is no scientific logic to assuming that a 'Creator' would have any further interest in his (or should that be 'its'?) creation. A scientist might create life in a test tube but then walk away from it and take no further interest in its development. There is certainly no reason to assume that the scientist should seek to become a 'moral arbiter' of what happens within that test tube.

Further, your question makes assumptions by the use of the phrase 'adjust accordingly'. If there really is a 'God' who wants us to conform to his requirements, why should I assume that those requirements are the ones specified by Christianity, Islam or any other religion? Perhaps (as nature and evolution seem to indicate) God simply believes in the survival of the fittest? If that's true I should 'adjust accordingly' and arm myself with the most powerful weapons available and destroy everyone who gets in my way.

Chris

[Theland1]

It is not a question of religion, it is a question of logic.
"What if, there were a God?"
"What if, there were no God?"

[Rasman]

There's never been a shred of proof to support the existence of a God but evidence based on observation does support what people know of science. That isn't any thing archaic and set in stone but a continually expanding and evolving area of human intellect and understanding.
Shouldn't you also consider the question - should not theologists seriously consider the possibility of NO God and adjust accordingly?

[Theland1]

I think you miss the point. Scienhce simply cannot answer the question of a first cause, but is content to wait for an answer.
However, this fliea in the face of our experience, of cause and effect.

[Theland1]

If I cannot prove God, you cannot disprove Him.

[Rasman]

Science doesn't have all the answers, obviously not. Is it correct then to invent a fairy story and profess non believers are wrong?

[Rasman]

I think magic and superstition has had it's time.

[Mamyalynne]

Why on earth should Atheists have to rethink their position or mode of thinking? That is somewhat arrogant to suggest.

[Answerprancer]

"If I cannot prove God, you cannot disprove Him".

Does the same go for the tooth fairy, santa clause and the easter bunny ?

(in your humble opinion).

[Answerprancer]

IMO 'Godvocates' like the originator of this thread have a vested interest in selling their business - there is SO much profit to be had from being a successful god-botherer, either through *actual* profit or manipulation and power gained as a result of that manipulation.

[naomi24]

Hello Theland, long time no see. I do hope you are keeping well.

//Sorry folks, that is simply not good enough when eternity is at stake.//

How do you know eternity is at stake? Because someone else told you it is?

//It is not a question of religion, it is a question of logic.
What if, there were a God?"
"What if, there were no God?"//

What if? So what? It doesn't really matter whether a god created the universe or not, because if it did, it isn't the one you and the rest of the 'faithful' talk about anyway. Something mighty enough to do that is hardly likely to concern itself with your sex life. That's logic.

[society]

Hello Theland! You've resurrected for the Christmas holidays... ;-) Good to see you back.

[NazNomad]

Surely 'God' was created my man? How do you then explain a fossil that's 50 Gazillion years old?

[jake-the-peg]

Hi Theland

Well I think theists have the same problem don't they?

God is the first cause - what created God? - hand waving, it's a miracle, don't ask questions -all that stuff !

At the heart of this is the nature of time - To even start to understand this you have to realise that Time can slow down and even stop at very high speeds or gravity.

This isn't just esoteric theory - without this knowledge of who time misbehaves like this your satnav wouldn't work!

Our best understanding is that time actually stops in a black hole and since a black hole is kind of like the big bang in reverse there's your prime mover.

We may learn more in time - fine detail is tough with such extreme events but it is a rational explanation that explains the facts better than a Charton Heston look-alike in a white beard waving his hands about

[joggerjayne]

Mankind's guess at how the Universe came into being is ...

"It must have been a bloke just like us, but a bit cleverer."

"He even looks just like us (having made us in His own image)."

Well, I for one am feeling quite empowered. Someone just like us created the Universe. And there was me thinking it must have been more complicated.

[NazNomad]

"He even looks just like us (having made us in His own image)."


Whos image did he make the Platypus in?

[joggerjayne]

Lesley Ash's ?

[NazNomad]

gah, of course.

[naomi24]

Jake, at this moment in time (oops, sorry) science is irrelevant. Nothing proves god didn't do it - likewise, nothing proves he did - but rationality suggests the kind of faith we see all around us is ... well ... irrational.

Jayne, you do realise that if God made man in his image, God must look something like an amoeba! :o)