Why do atheist believe something can come from nothing?

[Road Warrior]

Something always comes from nothing.

Only according to the Atheists. The Theists will say it came from God. The rest of us are just wondering WTF did it come from?

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Only according to the Atheists. The Theists will say it came from God. The rest of us are just wondering WTF did it come from?

Same ideas, different symbols.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

Disbelief is a belief. It is certainly not neutral. The second the Atheist adopts the position of disbelief, there are evidentiary assumptions being made, a stance adopted and an evidentiary burden being assumed.

As long as this burden is not satisfied just how can anyone deem their position to be rational?

Oh, please. Disbelief is no more "a belief" than not collecting stamps is a hobby. You are confusing "disbelief" with "denial." Disbelief is not a stance, but denial certainly is.

Let me give you an example: I don't personally do not believe that gravity is arbitrary, and can be changed. I don't require evidence for this, I am making no assumptions, and the only stance I adopt is that I will not jump off the top of a building with you, whatever you choose to do based on whatever beliefs you have (you know, maybe God will save you, though Jesus thought that unlikely when tempted by Satan).

There is something very weird about believers, they seem to think that NOT believing is the same thing as believing, and frankly, that is simply not the case. Not believing in something instantly results in no necessity to take any action or position at all, but rather to simply ignore whatever it is that is not believed.

 

[osgart]

Which makes evident the fundamental necessity all individuals have to be instructed in what is objectively good and precisely what is not.

Otherwise it's all really just narcissism.

Objective moral truth is to love every virtue and eschew every vice. Its so very simple.

Yet we see a reality where there is no moral governance inside of nature. Rather we have savage necessities for survival. Humanity is very much left to their entire own devisements.

 

[Thief]

You did not answer the questions asked of you:

and expecting me to be led about by a poor line of question...???

not going to happen

 

[Thief]

Especially if the phenomena being claimed, is of Universal Scope, i.e. the Ultimate Creator of the Universe.

substance is NOT 'self'.....motivating

Something Greater set the universe (one word) into motion

 

[Subduction Zone]

and expecting me to be led about by a poor line of question...???

not going to happen

There was nothing wrong with that line of questioning. You merely know that your reasons for belief are not rational as shown by others that asked the same sort of question to you.

 

[Subduction Zone]

substance is NOT 'self'.....motivating

Something Greater set the universe (one word) into motion

I am sure that it is comforting to repeat that claim, but without any evidence there is no rational reason to believe it.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Only according to the Atheists. The Theists will say it came from God. The rest of us are just wondering WTF did it come from?

Atheist say "We don't know yet, let's try to find out". Some theists say "I give up, it was magic". Of course there are theists that do not stop at "God did it".

 

[Hop David]

I also selected Dr Tyson because he has demonstrated the ability to simplify Cosmic Discussions, such that pretty much anyone can get what he's describing.

Like when Tyson told us there are more transcendental numbers than irrationals?

Or how about when he conflated the Observer Effect with the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle?

In many cases Tyson's audience "gets" steaming piles of bull **** served with a rich baritone voice. That so many people regard him as an authority is a good indication America's sliding down hill when it comes to science literacy.

 

[Maximilian]

Not to mention that it's a disputed quotation lacking any actual evidence that Epicurus actually wrote it: Epicurus - Wikiquote

Note the irony of someone who constantly demands hard evidence of everything using a disputed quote which lacks evidence of being real as his signature.

Hypocrisy at it's best, lol

 

[Maximilian]

Something always comes from nothing.

If this is true, why don’t all kinds of things come from nothingness? Just why aren't dinosaurs, for example, suddenly appearing and devouring everyone in sight? Why aren't we terrified of elephants suddenly popping into being and crushing us as they rained down on us from the skies? If nothing can in fact yield anything exactly why would it discriminate?

 

[Maximilian]

Oh, please. Disbelief is no more "a belief" than not collecting stamps is a hobby. You are confusing "disbelief" with "denial." Disbelief is not a stance, but denial certainly is.

"Atheism [is] a direct answer to one of the most important metaphysical questions in philosophy of religion, namely, “Is there a God?” There are only two possible direct answers to this question: “yes”, which is theism, and “no”, which is atheism." -Stanford Encyclopedia (Bracket mine.)

 

[Maximilian]

Objective moral truth is to love every virtue and eschew every vice. Its so very simple.

Yet we see a reality where there is no moral governance inside of nature. Rather we have savage necessities for survival. Humanity is very much left to their entire own devisements.

And what happens when that innate moral sense gets mangled beyond all recognition?

 

[Maximilian]

Except that NONE of these ... ahem... "prophecies" are accurate or even prophetic!

This is an argumentum ad lapidem fallacy.

Try again.

 

[Maximilian]

A mere human parent?

Would never permit his child to be killed, or tortured or other harm, if the parent had the ability to prevent that.

Right because parents never allow their children to be slaughtered in gruesome wars where they mercilessly slaughter the children of other parents . . . oh . . . wait . . .

Try again.

 

[Maximilian]

Shifting The Burden Of Proof Logical Fallacy.

False charge of fallacy. Try again.

 

[Maximilian]

God is not real.

This is an argumentum ad assertio fallacy.

Try again.

 

[Maximilian]

But you ought to consider what YOU are doing when you try to label others, as you are.

And when atheist after atheist after atheist confirms for me that they do in fact have ASD? Exactly how is that me "labeling" them?

 

[Maximilian]

You feel that God does exist, but the truth is, you also don't have any evidence that supports your belief.

Are you asking to perlustrate the concrete evidence which has helped billions of neurotypical individuals the world over recognize Almighty God's necessary existence or are you being argumentative?