About religion

[Jollybear]

Nah. What it shows is that the universe has properties, usually referred to as laws of nature. The order one sees is just the outworking of those properties.

There is no need to add "ghosties and ghoulies and things that go bump in the night".

Where did the "laws" of nature come from?

 

[Ancient Soul]

Silly bonzo... just because it's beyond your limited intelligence to comprehend doesn't make it a slobbering rant. Now go climb back under your bridge, you ignorant troll.

Please stop slobbering.

 

[Jollybear]

Haha... you have PROVEN that I definitely DO NOT need to think anymore about what you are saying. And this is what I am talking about with regard to the theist reputation. While it may be stereotypical, you and your words only add to the stereotypes. You don't see it, and I get that. You can say whatever you want in the end. And honestly, I am happy that you do. I am happy that you expose your beliefs for the clap-trap that they are. It is good that your ideas are convoluted, devoid of actual realistic substance, and are disconnected from the actual subject matter you try to talk about. All those things work wonderfully to dissuade people from adopting beliefs like yours - which is ultimately where I hope that humanity is going. Stepping out from under all this deluded trash-talk, and finding its heart in productive examination and interaction with the real and tangible world.

What your saying here isnt much substance to it.

But, question: why is it your hope that people turn away from belief in God?

Again, to my point above... GOOD! Do it! It will help your position to look all the more foolish. Keep it up! You're doing great, honestly.

Without refutting my position, my position only looks good, not bad. Furthermore, by not refutting it, you make your position look bad.

What you told me was garbage. It isn't even "infinite regression". You're "defining your own terms" again here... and it is because you want to sound like you have points to make, and you like the sound of some of these big terms and how they make you appear to be using your intellect. I get it.

No, you dont "get it".

But you are using the term completely incorrectly - which exposes you immediately to anyone who does know what the term means. They get a bad vibe about your words, and are a thousand times more likely to dismiss EVERYTHING you are saying.

Lets just say that anyone who already believes in God is gonna truely "get" what im saying and anyone who doesnt believe in God, will dismiss everything im saying. As for those who are UNDECIDED, both of us should let them think, talk and decide for themselves.

And this is EXACTLY what I am talking about when I mention your effect on the theist reputation. Exactly. And again... keep doing it, by all means. Theists like you are a boon to the atheistic/secular community. I know it sounds like I am being condescending... and I will readily admit that is a small part of it. However, this is completely honest as well.

So, by being condescending, what do you think your accomplishing?

As far as reputation is concerned, thats not as important as reality.

I can agree that if things did take forever to come about that they would simply never come about.

Great! Im glad you saw the logic in my point! Wonderfull. This is going to prove useful to me in the below responses.

But the rest of what you're saying MAKES NO SENSE. If the universe always existed, then it only means that there would be an infinite array of happenings and goings on throughout all of time. NOT AT ALL that things would take forever to happen.

As i said, what you said above will prove useful. You contradicted yourself but you dont see it.

If things took forever to happen, you admitted they would not happen, now your saying here they would happen.

I simply dont understand why you dont see this? Sometimes i think debating is pointless.

Where the hell do you even get that?

I got it from logic, apparently you did too, but, then, oddly, you revert back into illogic. Why? I have no idea. Thats the great mystery. YOU are a greater mystery to me then the universe.

All you'd have is an infinite stream of all possible happenings simply happening over and over and over again - throughout infinite time. That's it.

Right, without a beginning for the universe. So, a infinite stream of events would mean a infinite (forever) amount of time for each event to happen. Is it clicking yet? Got an epepheny yet my man!?

It does not, at all, imply things would "take forever" to happen. That's so dumb it hurts my brain to even try and concede you the point.

The fact you tell me it hurts your brain is a sign to me that you are being honest. So, this means theres some kind of mental block going on. I think you just need an epiphany here. What might help is to not be on the defensive with regards to me because that will strengthen the mental block.

I know you said your being condescending to me, but in this case here, im not being condescending to you. Im trying to help you see this. I see it, its very clear to me.

Nope. NOT AT ALL. You're simply, and embarrassingly wrong here. You just need to stop saying it. Er... wait... nevermind, that's right... just keep saying things like this. Go for it. And a big thanks goes out to you from non-believers everywhere. You're fighting the good fight much better than any of us probably ever do.

Lol....looks like your conflicted, just a little huh?

And I never was either. See where the confusion comes in? I don't, at all, believe that there was ever "nothing." And yet you ascribed that point to me,

Incorrect! I never ascribed that point to you. Your not paying attention. Get off the defensive, its not helping you.

pretended I DID believe that,

Incorrect again! Your not paying attention.

and then argued against a point I didn't even make.

I was making a point that there are 3 views of origins, they get rehashed, but, only 3.

And now you come to ME crying that you never said that? You're the one who brought it into the debate in the first place!

I never said you believed nothing created everything.

But where we likely disagree is that chance not existing IN NO WAY POINTS TO GOD. In no way. An idea I am sure you would refute.

Yes, id refute that.

And here is where we get into what I do only believe. I in no way know any of this for sure, and while I might defend it in debate, it is not something I can evidence, or prove, and I readily admit it, and will simply turn to the more honorable, humble response of "I don't know" if pressed. But basically, looking at the universe around us, and the fact that things happen within it all the time just via the most basic, fundamental rules that are in place (things like gravity, positive/negative polarities and attraction, the function of the vacuum, pressure, energies like heat and light, etc.) it ends up simply making sense that those things happen. That crystals form, for example, or fusion on the surface of stars due to the intense pressures and energies at play, the activity of orbital satellites like planets and moons - all of that non-conscious activity still happens, even without a hand guiding it. Just the principle rules of activity are in play and wondrous, amazing things are happening at all times. My belief is that what we call "life" is just another one of those things. That given the right circumstances (materials, levels of heat and light, time, conditions of continuous activity like storms, volcanic eruptions, etc.) life will simply arise as a part of the fundamental dealings of the universe itself. That's what I believe. I do not know. But that's what I believe.

Ok....thanks for telling me your view. Now i have a question.

Where did the "rules" or "laws" of the universe come from? What was there cause? Are they caused from nothing, chance, or God, or other mindless forces?

 

[Ancient Soul]

What your saying here isnt much substance to it.

But, question: why is it your hope that people turn away from belief in God?



Without refutting my position, my position only looks good, not bad. Furthermore, by not refutting it, you make your position look bad.



No, you dont "get it".



Lets just say that anyone who already believes in God is gonna truely "get" what im saying and anyone who doesnt believe in God, will dismiss everything im saying. As for those who are UNDECIDED, both of us should let them think, talk and decide for themselves.



So, by being condescending, what do you think your accomplishing?

As far as reputation is concerned, thats not as important as reality.



Great! Im glad you saw the logic in my point! Wonderfull. This is going to prove useful to me in the below responses.



As i said, what you said above will prove useful. You contradicted yourself but you dont see it.

If things took forever to happen, you admitted they would not happen, now your saying here they would happen.

I simply dont understand why you dont see this? Sometimes i think debating is pointless.



I got it from logic, apparently you did too, but, then, oddly, you revert back into illogic. Why? I have no idea. Thats the great mystery. YOU are a greater mystery to me then the universe.



Right, without a beginning for the universe. So, a infinite stream of events would mean a infinite (forever) amount of time for each event to happen. Is it clicking yet? Got an epepheny yet my man!?



The fact you tell me it hurts your brain is a sign to me that you are being honest. So, this means theres some kind of mental block going on. I think you just need an epiphany here. What might help is to not be on the defensive with regards to me because that will strengthen the mental block.

I know you said your being condescending to me, but in this case here, im not being condescending to you. Im trying to help you see this. I see it, its very clear to me.



Lol....looks like your conflicted, just a little huh?



Incorrect! I never ascribed that point to you. Your not paying attention. Get off the defensive, its not helping you.



Incorrect again! Your not paying attention.



I was making a point that there are 3 views of origins, they get rehashed, but, only 3.



I never said you believed nothing created everything.



Yes, id refute that.



Ok....thanks for telling me your view. Now i have a question.

Where did the "rules" or "laws" of the universe come from? What was there cause? Are they caused from nothing, chance, or God, or other mindless forces?

What your saying here isnt much substance to it.

But, question: why is it your hope that people turn away from belief in God?



Without refutting my position, my position only looks good, not bad. Furthermore, by not refutting it, you make your position look bad.



No, you dont "get it".



Lets just say that anyone who already believes in God is gonna truely "get" what im saying and anyone who doesnt believe in God, will dismiss everything im saying. As for those who are UNDECIDED, both of us should let them think, talk and decide for themselves.



So, by being condescending, what do you think your accomplishing?

As far as reputation is concerned, thats not as important as reality.



Great! Im glad you saw the logic in my point! Wonderfull. This is going to prove useful to me in the below responses.



As i said, what you said above will prove useful. You contradicted yourself but you dont see it.

If things took forever to happen, you admitted they would not happen, now your saying here they would happen.

I simply dont understand why you dont see this? Sometimes i think debating is pointless.



I got it from logic, apparently you did too, but, then, oddly, you revert back into illogic. Why? I have no idea. Thats the great mystery. YOU are a greater mystery to me then the universe.



Right, without a beginning for the universe. So, a infinite stream of events would mean a infinite (forever) amount of time for each event to happen. Is it clicking yet? Got an epepheny yet my man!?



The fact you tell me it hurts your brain is a sign to me that you are being honest. So, this means theres some kind of mental block going on. I think you just need an epiphany here. What might help is to not be on the defensive with regards to me because that will strengthen the mental block.

I know you said your being condescending to me, but in this case here, im not being condescending to you. Im trying to help you see this. I see it, its very clear to me.



Lol....looks like your conflicted, just a little huh?



Incorrect! I never ascribed that point to you. Your not paying attention. Get off the defensive, its not helping you.



Incorrect again! Your not paying attention.



I was making a point that there are 3 views of origins, they get rehashed, but, only 3.



I never said you believed nothing created everything.



Yes, id refute that.



Ok....thanks for telling me your view. Now i have a question.

Where did the "rules" or "laws" of the universe come from? What was there cause? Are they caused from nothing, chance, or God, or other mindless forces?

As to your opening line of:

" What your saying here isnt much substance to it."

I find ironic as your entire post doesn't have any substance to it. You really did not address his arguments, let alone present any facts to even make it appear that you tried at all. I don't see even one fact or even any detailed rational argument.

Why is that?

 

[Jollybear]

Have you ever seen a natural dam form along a creek? What happens is that you have a lot of different items, like sticks and limbs and other debris floating in the creek. Now individually each limb, stick, etc. functions to divert the flow of water around it. However, under the exact right conditions all of these sticks, limbs, etc. that were functioning individually to divert the flow of water can all suddenly start working together in order to create a natural dam and completely change the flow of the creek.

Now I can easily imagine some ancient peoples finding such a natural dam and concluding that it MUST have been designed to do what it did. In fact I wouldn't be surprised if they concluded that magical water fairies CLEARLY designed the dam.

I think this fairy thing is a strawman. God is outside time, matter and energy, unlike fairies.

God designed the LAWS and the laws work the dam of the river. So, indirectly, God has designed the river and dam.

Of course, they'd be wrong and would simply be imagining intended design in what are nothing more than natural patterns.

Where did the laws come from in your view? Did they come from nothing, from chance? From God? Or wer they always there?

 

[Jollybear]

As to your opening line of:

" What your saying here isnt much substance to it."

I find ironic as your entire post doesn't have any substance to it. You really did not address his arguments, let alone present any facts to even make it appear that you tried at all. I don't see even one fact or even any detailed rational argument.

Why is that?

There was no substance, all he did was accuse.

And i did address with rational points as well.

Whats your view on origins?

 

[Ancient Soul]

There was no substance, all he did was accuse.

And i did address with rational points as well.

Whats your view on origins?

I thought he gave some rather good arguments, but like all Christians, you just avoided them by giving nothing answers. That was the main point of my reply. How could you miss that? Did I use too many words?

 

[Jollybear]

I thought he gave some rather good arguments, but like all Christians, you just avoided them by giving nothing answers. That was the main point of my reply. How could you miss that? Did I use too many words?

Well i clearly pointed out his contradiction.

Didnt you see that?

 

[Looncall]

Where did the "laws" of nature come from?

No one knows. That is being worked on. Perhaps the data needed to find out is no longer accessible.

Not knowing is no excuse for turning to ancient myths that have no evidence to support them.

 

[QuestioningMind]

I think this fairy thing is a strawman. God is outside time, matter and energy, unlike fairies.

God designed the LAWS and the laws work the dam of the river. So, indirectly, God has designed the river and dam.



Where did the laws come from in your view? Did they come from nothing, from chance? From God? Or wer they always there?

I think this fairy thing is a strawman. God is outside time, matter and energy, unlike fairies.

You haven't demonstrated that God exists at all, let alone that God exists outside time, matter, and energy. And how do you know that magical fairies do not exist outside of time, matter , and energy?

God designed the LAWS and the laws work the dam of the river. So, indirectly, God has designed the river and dam.

So according to you NOTHING happens naturally and nothing EVER happens by chance. O-kay... if you say so.

Where did the laws come from in your view? Did they come from nothing, from chance? From God? Or wer they always there?

Human beings came up with the laws as a way to describe how the universe works.

 

[Ancient Soul]

Well i clearly pointed out his contradiction.

Didnt you see that?

See what contradiction?

So out of all that massive non-substance reply, THAT one tiny alleged point makes it all a "success" in your mind?

At best you pointed out a possible slip in his wording, leaving everything else you posted total non-substance.

 

[Dell]

For a God it is possible just from a thought to be anywhere anytime. or at every place at the same

The idea that God, superman, or the Incredibles can do the impossible is an easy fabrication of human imagination. Reality is outside the mind and today science is enlightening the mind of the true nature of our reality. In the real world there is no seeing forward in time, thus no prophecy, no omniscience, no miracles, and no speaking into existence.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

No one knows. That is being worked on. Perhaps the data needed to find out is no longer accessible.

Not knowing is no excuse for turning to ancient myths that have no evidence to support them.

The laws of nature existed in that very first moment of the existence of the universe. Wherever it came from, it was not the universe, just as the universe did not create itself. Nothing comes from nothing.

 

[Jollybear]

No one knows. That is being worked on. Perhaps the data needed to find out is no longer accessible.

Not knowing is no excuse for turning to ancient myths that have no evidence to support them.

Its not an excuse. There is evidence. The laws, design, complexity IS the evidence. Spiritual experiences are more evidence.

Alot of folks are just merely asleep to the evidence. They need to wake up and SEE the coffee.

 

[JJ50]

There is no proof that a deity of some sort doesn't exist, but I am of the opinion all the gods worshipped by humans are created by them.

 

[Jollybear]

See what contradiction?

So out of all that massive non-substance reply, THAT one tiny alleged point makes it all a "success" in your mind?

At best you pointed out a possible slip in his wording, leaving everything else you posted total non-substance.

A slip? Are you conceding he contradicted himself then?

Also if you read the post, youd notice all of my post dealt with this contradiction. And then i asked some questions.

All your doing is denial hand waving.

Ill ask you again. Whats your view on origins?

 

[A Vestigial Mote]

But, question: why is it your hope that people turn away from belief in God?

There is no valid base for the beliefs, and yet people use these beliefs to attempt to influence the world around them.

So, by being condescending, what do you think your accomplishing?

The goal is to get people to understand that they can't just say things without backing them up and knowing what they are talking about - or else they are going to be ridiculed, and they are going to be talked to as if they are children, and their points are going to be torn apart or ignored. Enough people indicate to you that you are a crackpot for your unsupportable ideas, hopefully you drop trying to foist those ideas off on others. As an example - take a person who irrationally claims that Elvis is still alive, and that he intends to find Elvis and put this "conspiracy" to rest. This person is not doing anything productive in holding these beliefs or following up on them and attempting to prove them. This person should, rightly, be dissuaded from holding this opinion. And if we all laugh him out of the room each time he brings this up, hopefully he'll learn that it isn't prudent to parade around such unsupportable, baseless ideas. And then the rest of us don't have to waste OUR time on it either.

Great! Im glad you saw the logic in my point! Wonderfull. This is going to prove useful to me in the below responses.

I was agreeing with your statement that if something took forever to occur, it would never occur. That only makes sense. But where you applied that idea you had no business doing so, were incorrect, and were deserving of ridicule for your ridiculous ideas. You saying that the universe existing infinitely necessarily meaning that events would take forever to occur is YOU BELIEVING ELVIS IS STILL ALIVE. That's how dumb the idea is. You're simply wrong, you have no valid explanation or demonstration of the reason you believe this to be true, and logic is NOT being employed in you saying this.

If things took forever to happen, you admitted they would not happen, now your saying here they would happen.

Yes, if something took forever to happen it wouldn't happen. HOW DO YOU GO FROM THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT TO: "If the universe has eternally existed, all events would take forever to occur." HOW DO YOU GET THERE? TELL ME. CAN YOU?? NO... YOU CANNOT. YOU HAVE NO BASIS FOR THIS STATEMENT. IT IS ASININE.

I simply dont understand why you dont see this? Sometimes i think debating is pointless.

Why do you keep pretending I am the one with the problem in reasoning or understanding here? Get your mind straight.

Right, without a beginning for the universe. So, a infinite stream of events would mean a infinite (forever) amount of time for each event to happen. Is it clicking yet? Got an epepheny yet my man!?

Not even close. You are wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. An infinite stream of events would each take their necessary time to occur, but it just means similar events would just occur over and over and over and over and over again. That's all. Cooking chicken for 40 minutes in an eternal universe WOULD STILL TAKE 40 MINUTES TO ACCOMPLISH. You would just have infinite amounts of time to cook infinite chickens... each taking 40 minutes to cook. What the hell can you possibly be thinking to state that cooking a chicken for 40 minutes would suddenly take ETERNITY in an eternal universe? Where is you brain at? Is it still in your skull? You'd better check.

Where did the "rules" or "laws" of the universe come from? What was there cause? Are they caused from nothing, chance, or God, or other mindless forces?

How do we know they "came from" anywhere, or anything? You can't know this. You haven't investigated. We may not even have a valid way to investigate. What if the universe simply "is?" What if the universe is simply the reality that exists, regardless anything else, the fundamental realities we experience are the only reality, are all there is? As far as we can tell, measure, and investigate - that is entirely plausible. And in that universe, the fundamental reality can't be escaped - and you can't even investigate "why" the fundamentals are what they are. They simply "are". If life arose in such a universe and became able to contemplate its own situation (like humans), they would do just as we do - wonder at the origin of it all. And yet there would be no origin. There would simply be what there is/was - for all of time. When there was no mind there to perceive it, it was there. When there became a mind able to perceive it, it was there. All "rules" and "laws" being fundamental to existence in general. This is just as plausible as any God explanation. But what it has OVER any god explanation is that it matches to the reality we experience and can investigate. Where god propositions DO NOT.

 

[Looncall]

The laws of nature existed in that very first moment of the existence of the universe. Wherever it came from, it was not the universe, just as the universe did not create itself. Nothing comes from nothing.

This does not get you to god(s). One can imagine other scenarios.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

This does not get you to god(s). One can imagine other scenarios.

In most of those scenarios, you simply beg the question. You push back the question of origins, but the question remains. Ultimately you still have to have a source that is eternal, that needs no creation. That, by definition, would have to be called Tao, God, the Divine, Waken Tanka, or some similar name.

 

[Jollybear]

There is no valid base for the beliefs, and yet people use these beliefs to attempt to influence the world around them.

Of course theres a valid base. I along with many people disagree with you for various reasons. Plus, your hope will never come to pass. As long as people are around, religion and spiritual experiences will too.

The goal is to get people to understand that they can't just say things without backing them up and knowing what they are talking about - or else they are going to be ridiculed,

Ridicule does not refute my point. It weakens your position.

and they are going to be talked to as if they are children, and their points are going to be torn apart or ignored.

Oh really? Ok, so you wanna go down that road? You want me to talk to you like a child back? If we go down that path, this will be unfruitfull.

Enough people indicate to you that you are a crackpot for your unsupportable ideas, hopefully you drop trying to foist those ideas off on others.

Oh so you can foist your ideas onto them instead hey? Get real.

And im sure enough people like how i believe have shown you to be a crackpot too for saying theres no God?

Its not i that is the crackpot. The truely crazy person is the one who denies all the clear evidence for a God, a spiritual realm a afterlife, ect.

As an example - take a person who irrationally claims that Elvis is still alive, and that he intends to find Elvis and put this "conspiracy" to rest.

I dont care about elvis and your comparing apples to oranges with intent to discredite belief in God as the same and its clearly not. Plus way more people believe in it then elvis being alive at that. There is evidence for God unlike elvis being alive.

This person is not doing anything productive in holding these beliefs or following up on them and attempting to prove them.

Are you being productive holding your beliefs, following up on them and trying to persuade me of them? Eat your own words pale.

Also, productive can be subjective in this case. Theres different kinds of productivity. In this area its digging for knowledge. Thats a form of productivity. But, even if it wasnt, does that make me unproductive? Hell no, i work for a living. This would make it a interesting subject to discuss. Whats wrong with that? Mr dictator here.

This person should, rightly, be dissuaded from holding this opinion.

Yea well your not doing a very good job of dissuading me thats for SURE.

And if we all laugh him out of the room each time he brings this up, hopefully he'll learn that it isn't prudent to parade around such unsupportable, baseless ideas. And then the rest of us don't have to waste OUR time on it either.

Laugh him out of the room? Man, wer on a debate forum, im not "bringing" anything up. I did not even open the thread. Im contributing to it, which i have every right too. And you can respond to me or NOT. Thats your right too. But if you think its a waste of time, then why are you wasting time then? Go do something else. Take a hike.

I was agreeing with your statement that if something took forever to occur, it would never occur. That only makes sense. But where you applied that idea you had no business doing so, were incorrect, and were deserving of ridicule for your ridiculous ideas. You saying that the universe existing infinitely necessarily meaning that events would take forever to occur is YOU BELIEVING ELVIS IS STILL ALIVE. That's how dumb the idea is. You're simply wrong, you have no valid explanation or demonstration of the reason you believe this to be true, and logic is NOT being employed in you saying this.

No, its not like believing elvis is still alive. THATS whats REALLY dumb. Not the point i made.

Yes, if something took forever to happen it wouldn't happen. HOW DO YOU GO FROM THAT SIMPLE STATEMENT TO: "If the universe has eternally existed, all events would take forever to occur." HOW DO YOU GET THERE? TELL ME. CAN YOU?? NO... YOU CANNOT. YOU HAVE NO BASIS FOR THIS STATEMENT. IT IS ASININE.

Yes, ill tell you how i got there. Picture a timeline in your brain. Now, usually with time lines they have a beginning and a ending. Then it shows the events on the timeline.

Ok....you got that much yes? Hopefully.

Now, in the case of this timeline, it has no begining point. So, if you put all the events on this timeline, no avents are going to have a starting point. Why? Because something has to start first before the stream of other events happen. But, theres no start on the timeline. What would begin? Nothing. So, all events would not begin, all events would take forever to take place. Therefore nothing would take place.

Do you know anything about logic? How it works? If not, im not gonna teach it to you. Go learn it first, then come debate me. Until then, this discussion is dead if you cant understand the logic in how i broke it down for you here.

Why do you keep pretending I am the one with the problem in reasoning or understanding here? Get your mind straight.

Oh no! Im not pretending, i KNOW for a fact your reasoning is flawed.

Not even close. You are wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong. Wrong.

I am right, right, right, right. Say it a thousand times, you think ill agree? Preach it till your blue, it won't work on me.

An infinite stream of events would each take their necessary time to occur, but it just means similar events would just occur over and over and over and over and over again. That's all. Cooking chicken for 40 minutes in an eternal universe WOULD STILL TAKE 40 MINUTES TO ACCOMPLISH. You would just have infinite amounts of time to cook infinite chickens... each taking 40 minutes to cook. What the hell can you possibly be thinking to state that cooking a chicken for 40 minutes would suddenly take ETERNITY in an eternal universe? Where is you brain at? Is it still in your skull? You'd better check.

If say the chicken event was done in the year 2018, how would it happen if theres no starting point? My brain is working just fine. Its yours that needs work. But you see, my prior post i was being nice to you. No more, you dont deserve it.

How do we know they "came from" anywhere, or anything? You can't know this. You haven't investigated. We may not even have a valid way to investigate. What if the universe simply "is?" What if the universe is simply the reality that exists, regardless anything else, the fundamental realities we experience are the only reality, are all there is? As far as we can tell, measure, and investigate - that is entirely plausible. And in that universe, the fundamental reality can't be escaped - and you can't even investigate "why" the fundamentals are what they are. They simply "are". If life arose in such a universe and became able to contemplate its own situation (like humans), they would do just as we do - wonder at the origin of it all. And yet there would be no origin. There would simply be what there is/was - for all of time. When there was no mind there to perceive it, it was there. When there became a mind able to perceive it, it was there. All "rules" and "laws" being fundamental to existence in general. This is just as plausible as any God explanation. But what it has OVER any god explanation is that it matches to the reality we experience and can investigate. Where god propositions DO NOT.

No, its not plausable, because time needs a beginning!

Furthermore, the god hypotheses is OVER your view due to the fact of evidence for order and design in the universe and due to the logic that time began, along with the universe. And also due to many spiritual experiences by the millions.

Take that for a touch down, pale!