UK: 70% of young people are 'not religious' according to a report - Sensationalist Headlines

My problem has always been how do you know you're worshipping the right god? How does it being the only logical answer mean the Abrahamic Christian God is the only God? There are thousands of Gods, and there are concepts of God that are very equivalent to your chosen God but are distinct. You were raised in a given religion, so therefore that's the truth. If you were raised in a different region, you would believe in a different religion, and that would be the truth. I can accept the logical necessity of your argument, but not the leap you make afterwords implicitly.

I just don't think you've thought hard enough about it. The big bang is evidently true, and it isn't illogical to assume it could have happened for no reason. In infinite time everything can happen, which is a fuckton more logical than saying "oh yeah god came outta nowhere and created everything out of nowhere".

Simply put, I find there to be a lot of truth within Christianity. It doesn't try to give easy answers to hard question, it provides a worldview that really does help to explain the world, and humanity, as it is. I also find it to be historically defensible, which the vast majority of religions are not (see the work by Gary Habermas that I mentioned previously). The final proverbial nail is that I find it to be personally true. When I live by the tenets laid out by Christianity, I receive the promises given. It gives me joy through good times and bad, I see it totally change the life of others on a consistent basis, It provides satisfactory answers to life's most important question, etc. I can honestly say that I have an active two-way relationship with God. I know that sounds absolutely absurd to an atheist, but I can't deny it myself. It is so clearly evident that to deny it would be like denying the truth of the world around me. It would be to deny my own experience, it its totality, as untrustworthy, and at that point I might as well become an absolute nihilist. Note that I don't use the things found in the second paragraph when discussing the existence of God because I know that it, as a personal thing, isn't persuasive to someone who hasn't experienced it. I fully recognize that.

Quantum tunneling? If we assume that God is an assumption and that the null hypothesis is "The universe is entirely natural" then we can use the simple fact that we exist as proof that it is POSSIBLE for it happen. Unfortunately, you live in a different reality it seems.

What? Let's say an apple is sitting on a table. I say, "If we assume that a person put it there and the null hypothesis is "a giant alien beamed it there from their spaceship," then we can use the simple fact that the apple exists as proof that it is POSSIBLE for a giant alien to have beamed it there from their spaceship." That would clearly be ridiculous, yet that's exactly what you're doing. You are assuming you're right, and then using that to prove that you're right. I would argue that your so called "null hypothesis" isn't even rationally possible.

The Null Hypothesis to the question "How is the apple there" would be "It is there by natural causes" not some random Alien bullshit. It is your worldview that adds a random third-party that is not evident whatsoever. The Null Hypothesis for our universe for all things is evidently based in natural causes such as physics, so it is COMPLETELY logical to assume our universe was started by natural causes until you can PROVE evidence of any third party, which you can't.

So your null hypothesis for a time when physics as we know it almost certainly didn't exist is to posit physics as a null hypothesis...

Nah, I never said we needed physical laws before the Big Bang, just that the null hypothesis logically supports the assumption that our universe is entirely natural. Thus unless you force God as some sort of "contending position" it is also logical to use the infinite time and infinitesimal chance argument. All this in response to your claim there are no logical alternatives.

Can you define the term "natural" for me? I'm not sure how it can even be applied before the creation of our universe and the physical laws as we know them. Can you also substantiate your claim that absolute nothingness has a potential to cause something?

Natural can best be defined as things with a cause, things that can be explained and measured, have precedence, things that are evident and repeatable and testable. It did, didn't it? We KNOW that we exist, and there technically must've been nothing before us, right? So here we are.

So what is the mechanism of cause in your alternative explanation? How can nothingness rationally cause anything? That would seem to go against the very definition of what it means to be nothing.

What is your mechanism of cause for a God doing basically the same thing? My belief just takes out the "God" thing, which is entirely meaningless and anthropocentric sky daddy nonsense. I don't know the mechanism, but we do know that the Big Bang happened. That's closer to any mechanism God has ever shown us. Hey, I gotta go. I just want you to ask God some basic questions like: "What is the 3rd number on the lottery next wednesday going to be?" If you get a correct answer multiple times in a row, I might be willing to accept your divine inspiration as legitimate.

The rational mechanism for causing change with God is that he is a being with a will. So while there is no material cause, there is an efficient cause that can rationally lead to change. Again, you don't seem to have an even basic understanding of the topic at hand. I'm not asking for an evidential proof of some specific cause. I'm asking you to provide a rationally consistent way that nothing can cause something. It can be anything at all. Have a good rest of your day, but I really do think you've proven exactly my point. You have zero interest in real discussion and are coming from a place of derision, not honesty.

How can i prove it when the only time it seems to happen you think is caused by some magical will that can effect the material world.

Again, I'm simply talking about rational consistency and possibility. It is rationally consistent for a God with a will to cause something to happen. We can go on and ask whether it's possible for something to happen without a material cause, but that's a question of physical possibility, not rational consistency. You have yet to even provide a rational framework by which to substantiate your alternative. You've done nothing but postulate that nothingness can cause things over long periods of time, which goes directly against the very idea of what nothingness is. It's like saying that a square can be a circle if you give it enough time. It just doesn't make any rational sense.

I think this whole argumentation about what came before or what caused the big bang is pointless, as it is likely that no evidence will ever exist to prove or disprove it. If that changes, then we can follow the evidence. Until then, all we know for sure is that the big bang happened, and "I don't know" is the only valid answer for what came before.

I really don't know how many times I need to say this: I'm not asking for evidence. I'm asking for a rational framework. That is how we know if something can even be possible. We rule out things that aren't rationally possible. If you can't even offer a rationally consistent alternative, then there's zero reason to think that an answer exists at all, even if we never find it.

You're free to say you have an active relationship with God but what about those of us who sought him and had the opposite responses from the world you did? How do you respond to that? I was was a dumb little kid when I first started expressing interest in God and my interest was genuine and weird to my parents but they've let me pursue it. But tragedy after tragedy befell me at that time in my life. You have an active relationship with God, I was seeking one at that've time in my life only to feel like I wasn't being punished. I dont want to argue scripture, I don't rather trade anecdotes and see why people feel what they do. For me, I had clear reasons to feel abandoned, but you didn't and that gives you a different perspective. Was it gods plan to give you that hope but not for myself?

What is irrational about what ive described? Its definitely not something out of nothing because thats almost a necessity at some point, especially for your ideology.

The idea that a god willed the universe into existence is just as valid as the idea that the universe is a computer simulation, and the big bang was the first event of that simulation. This would seem absurd to our computing standards, but why would our computing standards apply to some outside universe that might have completely different laws and structure? Any explanation that one can fabricate is an endless rabbit hole of "well, what created THAT?". So as far as I'm concerned, it's all pointless speculation until some evidence can be presented.

Lol, and all you are saying is "A square can become a circle if some supernatural force decides to act on it". Where does this supernatural force come from?, was it always there?, how is that any more rational than the idea that the universe has always existed in one form or another? Why are the only two options "nothing forever and then something" or "nothing but god forever, and then something"? You are just finding needlessly verbose ways of saying "well, it makes sense to me so it's more true than whatever you think" I also strongly disagree with your idea that everyone is simply out to prove their own viewpoint with no regard for the truth. If that was the case would I not still be catholic? By the time I dropped religion, I came to the realisation that I was being dishonest with myself. I wasn't convinced by religion, I was simply terrified of death, so I told myself whatever I needed to internally, no matter how dissonant it became with what I understood about the world around me, so long as it allowed me to believe that my loved ones, and eventually myself, wouldn't have to just stop existing one day. But ultimately there is no religious claim out there with anything close to evidence backing it up. What good did lying to myself do?. My fate would be the same whether I denied it or not. Your viewpoint should be shaped by evidence and facts, not the other way around. Of course I want to believe in the supernatural, why would I want to live in a reality where death and non-existence are all I have to look forward to?. I challenge my viewpoint every opportunity I get, I spent my time contemplating how I could be wrong- not how I'm certainly right, because I'm more interested in trying to know the truth than following whatever I find most comforting. How is it rational in the slightest that a supreme intelligence capable of weaving the very fabric of reality with supernatural magics would choose to apply it's influence entirely on one planet, specifically the middle east of that planet, for an infinitesimally short moment in the vast expanse of the time and space, in order to tell one race of apes (particularly one of the the groups that hadn't even mastered written history yet, despite more advanced cultures existing at the time) how to behave and then vanish forever?. To look at the humbling scope of our universe and still believe it was created just for humanity makes no sense to me. And while I wouldn't want to upset you with any ~derision~ I can only describe it as arrogance. http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/537/976/57b.jpg

I'm sorry to hear you've had a lot of tragedy happen, but please know that I've had my share as well. My relationship isn't one of me getting everything I want and having nothing bad happen to me. Just as an example, I had a younger brother die to a genetic disease. I've had multiple people in my family go through cancer, with my aunt just getting diagnosed a few days ago. Growing up, my family went through times of financial hardship where my dad had lost his job for over a year and we had to make it work. I'm not trying to compete for most tragedies. For all I know, you've gone through much more difficult things than I have, but I've had plenty that could have caused me to reject it. I do wish I could have you talk to some of the people I know in my life who've gone through more suffering than any one person should ever have to. One guy at my church is Nigerian. He came to the US around the age of 30 aftering getting into a car accident and becoming paralyzed from the waist down. He still has much of his family suffering under tribal conflict in Nigeria. The man is one of the most joyful people I know. He goes back to Nigeria every year to give wheelchairs to people in need and provide free medical services.

My ~alternative~ is that I honestly don't know. I honestly struggle to comprehend the idea of reality ever having a beginning. And that's fine. The universe is incomprehensibly vast and ancient. My entire life, my entire frame of reference, wouldn't even occupy the tiniest fraction of the Universes lifespan. It's to be expected that some monkeys on a rock could struggle to grasp it's complexity. But that doesn't mean "a wizard did it". I have no idea why you feel that magic must have been involved. "At least my perspective provides answers!!" doesn't count for much when those answers are definitely wrong because you literally just accepted the wild guesses of desert nomads from a time when those cultures didn't even understand what the stars in the sky were.

I'm not sure why you would expect people to take your worldview seriously if you can't even provide a rational basis for it being possible. I'll say it for maybe the third time in this thread: I'm not asking for evidentiary evidence of what happened. I simply want a rational framework from which there can even possibly be an answer.

God of the gaps eh? We dont have a perfect answer so you substitute that which you were raised in

That seems like special pleading. Rationality is logic itself. It doesn't change. People in ancient Greece were thinking about these same issues and came to many of the same sort of conclusions. To just say that, in this specific case, rationality doesn't apply isn't just an appeal to ignorance, it's leaving behind rationality altogether.

It is such an alien concept to me that you could ask the question "where did the universe come from?" Get an the answer "We don't know exactly, but here is all the evidence we've dedicated our lives to gathering over the last 90 years and so far it all points to this." and then ignore it because some guy a few thousand years ago told a bunch of people an old man in the sky did it before they even knew what the sky actually was.

It's almost like you didn't read the thread at all.

Ok, fine, lets engage in this pointless exercise, and follow the chain of causality as far as we can go. Let's say god created the universe. Ok, what created god?

newton also probed his eye socket with a bodkin needle to see if he could figure out how it worked newton was a smart ass motherfucker but he was also patently nuts, the two aren't incompatible dog