Why I am am athiest

[Cypress]

Why do you sound so much like a Creationist? Seriously. Non-life and life share the same chemistry. Why can't one come from the other? But more importantly where did life come from if from non-life?



So you can't explain anything but you think it is a "gotcha" when others can't tell you exactly how something happened.


In your imagination does God make life using non-life chemistry, so why does he have to do that? Why doesn't your God make life using magic?

Just asserting that irreducibly complex cellular biology spontaneously arises from inanimate chemicals is not a scientific explanation.

It's a leap of faith.

I'm agnostic, so I don't owe you explanations.

It's the Bible thumpers and the atheists who need to explain their irrational and illogical leaps of faith.

 

[ZenMode]

Science explains a lot less than most laypersons realize.

Science has also continuously proved religion wrong. There has been nothing that science claimed that religion disproved.

God of the Gaps is an atheist creation that no reputable Christian apologist ever spawned.

Regardless of the source, it's existed for millenia.

God of the Gaps rests on the massive assumption that the laws of nature preclude God

No, it's the act of explaining, by default, anything unexplainable with "God must have done it".

No one knows why the mathematical laws of physics exist or where they came from. That is a philosophical question. To people like Isaac Newton, it was crystal clear that the laws of nature were a reflection of God.

Yep and it's shocking that people TODAY are approaching the unexplained in the same way someone did in the 16th century.

 

[Cypress]

Science has also continuously proved religion wrong. There has been nothing that science claimed that religion disproved.

Regardless of the source, it's existed for millenia.

No, it's the act of explaining, by default, anything unexplainable with "God must have done it".

Yep and it's shocking that people TODAY are approaching the unexplained in the same way someone did in the 16th century.

Newton himself said that all his equations of physics did was make accurate predictions of how things move.

He never claimed his physics were the definitive explanation for why a lawfully organized and mathematically rational universe exists.

 

[ZenMode]

Newton himself said that all his equations of physics did was make accurate predictions of how things move.

He never claimed his physics were the definitive explanation for why a lawfully organized and mathematically rational universe exists.

Right, there are lots of unknowns in the universe. There are two ways to approach that. One is to say we don't know and then wait for science to explain it or the other is to assume anything that's not explained now is explained by God.

 

[Cypress]

Right, there are lots of unknowns in the universe. There are two ways to approach that. One is to say we don't know and then wait for science to explain it or the other is to assume anything that's not explained now is explained by God.

Many things are not testable and are not scientific questions.

I agree with pushing the boundaries of science and knowledge, but I also think we are deluding ourselves if we think the scientific method answers all questions.

 

[ZenMode]

Many things are not testable and are not scientific questions.

Such as?

I agree with pushing the boundaries of science and knowledge, but I also think we are deluding ourselves if we think the scientific method answers all questions.

Like I said earlier, science has disproved many religious claims. The opposite has never happened.