Atheism
The rational atheist (such as I aim to be), is not often gotten the better of in a debate about religion. You see, the atheist can and will prove that god really does not exist using that supreme weapon called Logic. He will call upon the arguments the Raving Atheist uses to disprove god. (Thanks Yaz, for the timely help) He will stand true to his (lack of) beliefs. He will create paradoxes, such as the Invisible Pink Unicorn, to describe the god the theist believes in.
When the theist asks the atheist the nature of life and the purpose and all those long words that really don’t mean anything, the atheist will call upon the gods of science – Mr. Einstein, Mr. Newton, Mr. Fleming, and rubbish everything the theist throws at him.
But it so happens, once in a while, that the theist gains the upper hand. Leaving the atheist rational floundering for a logical, scientific explanation.
So it was a day or so back. A good cousin reacted to my post on the Tamil Brahmanan issue. What started off as a simple chat online soon descended into name calling the supreme being. I calling that entity nature, he calling it god.
When the cousin asked me “Who created the beautiful universe, the stars, the sun, the earth and all?” pat came my answer – “The Big Bang theory really. A huge, compressed mass of gas lets rip, and over a period of time, crystallises into the heavenly bodies”. There was even a smirk on my face when I said this, though my cousin couldn’t see it.
Well then, he asks, who created the gas? And there folks, I am stumped. Who, really, created the gas that created our universe? Is it really, dare I say the word, God?
RSS/XML
February 20th, 2005 at 6:08 am
Testing comments – they work fine, MadMan
February 21st, 2005 at 1:15 am
Why is it that the theist doesn’t ask “Who created God?”
Because then you could go into a recursive loop about who then created the creator of God ad infinitum. The theist demands a creator for creation of matter in the universe, yet is content with the eternal existence of a much more complex being. If the theist says, “God has always existed”, it is just as easy to say, “Matter has always existed”. In fact, it is a far lesser leap of faith to postulate the existence of matter than to postulate the existence of an even more complex and intelligent being – God – capable of creating so much.
The correct answer to that theist’s question, of course, is simply “we don’t know yet”, which is not as weak an answer as you might think, because human knowledge has been expanding over time. A few hundred years ago, they thought lightning was seen when the Gods were angry. Today we know it’s due to a difference in potential. Attributing simply the unknown to a supernatural entity is known as the “God of the Gaps” argument.
February 21st, 2005 at 10:32 am
There is only one truth. But there are a billion ways of looking at it. :-))) Everyone’s right, if you see things from their point of view.
February 22nd, 2005 at 9:12 am
Dear Chandru,
Your question of “If there was nothing then what did bang?” has been answered for more than 75 years now.
The fact that most morons do not understand quantum mechanics and how that nothing can bang is the reason for such a large number of theists around.
For more read Brian Greene.
February 23rd, 2005 at 6:10 am
Someone once told me being a Hindu is actually being an atheist. If you ponder on it, you’ll realise its quite true. Hinduism does not say you have only one path to god or one set of rules. Actually there’s no rules just logic. Whatever rules that are in existence now were man made.
So does that make you a Hindu? rofl
February 25th, 2005 at 1:29 am
Ever read an Asimov short stiry calle “The Final Question”? (I think I’ve got the name right). A very logical and interesting take on how things begin… and end!