Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?
Some people, even preachers, say that everything that happens in the world – good, bad, or otherwise – is the will of God. Is it? But often, people wonder, “Why do tragic things happen to good people?”
“I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For they suffer no pain; their bodies are healthy and sleek. They are free of the burdens of life; they are not afflicted like others” (Psalm 73:3-5 NAB). The realities of this life often just don’t seem to make any sense, even as they didn’t to Bible writer Asaph 3,000 years ago. The opposite of what common sense would tell us is what often happens. Why?
People often say that when something bad happens to a person, it’s because they’re getting their “karma.” But when something bad happens to a good person, what is it then? The idea of “karma” is derived from the Eastern philosophy of Buddhism and Hinduism, and is popularly believed in the West. Christian preachers and others often say that “God took” the good person from earth to be with him in heaven. Did he?
The story is all too familiar. Someone driving who is grossly irresponsible and negligent, often under the influence of alcohol/drugs, causes a terrible accident which kills and/or seriously injures one or more innocent victims, while he suffers little or no harm. The victim(s) is/are described as a very good person, who was always helping others. Why?
“There is something else meaningless that occurs on earth: the righteous who get what the wicked deserve, and the wicked who get what the righteous deserve. This too, I say, is meaningless” (Ecclesiastes 8:14 NIV). Three thousand years ago, this paradox was observed by wise King Solomon.
Then there is the good person who gets a very debilitating disease, and suffers horribly, and dies at a relatively young age, while many who are unkind and cruel to others and live only for themselves, continue to live to old age. Why?
“Why do the wicked live on, growing old and increasing in power?” (Job 21:7 NIV). The righteous man Job noted this same perplexity 3,500 years ago.
“I saw something else under the sun: In the place of judgment–wickedness was there. In the place of justice–wickedness was there. If you see the poor oppressed in a district, and justice and rights denied, do not be surprised at such things; for one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them are others higher still” (Ecclesiastes 3:16; 5:6 NIV). In this world, people don’t always get true justice. Good, innocent people are often slighted, even mistreated, in judicial decisions, while corrupt, rich and influential people and corporations are favored. Why?
Many thousands of innocent victims are killed or harmed in wars, conflicts, shootings, and natural disasters every year. Why?
“We call the arrogant blessed; for evildoers not only prosper, but even test God and escape” (Malachi 3:15 NAB). Twenty-four hundred years ago, the prophet Malachi reported such injustices. Why do they happen?
The Creator, Almighty God, informed the first humans that they were essentially “free”, but that obedience to his principles for living was vital for their well-being, in fact, their life (Genesis 2:15-17 NIV). The rebellious angel called Satan the Devil influenced them to violate the Creator’s law, claiming that God was withholding good things from them, and that they would be better off to disobey God (Genesis 3:1-6; Revelation 12:9). Afterward the Creator foretold the tragic and disastrous results that would follow after the first humans rejected God’s law (Genesis 3:16-19).
The result has been that, “just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12 NIV). All humans born since (except Jesus) have been born “sinful” (Psalm 51:5 NIV). Thus, we live in a very sinful world, in which everyone makes mistakes, does bad things, and some, of course, much worse than others. The Bible realistically explains what happens in this world:
“We do not know when our time will come; like fish caught in the treacherous net, like birds caught in the snare, just so are we all trapped by misfortune when it suddenly overtakes us” (Ecclesiastes 9:12 NJB). While we certainly do have quite a bit of control over our individual “actions” (Galatians 6:4 NIV), the stark reality is that there are many things in this life that we simply have no control over.
“In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness, and the wicked living long in their wickedness” (Ecclesiastes 7:15 NIV). Only the Bible accurately explains the reasons behind the harsh realities of this life, such as why bad things happen to good people.
“When I applied my mind to know wisdom and to observe the labor that is done on earth — people getting no sleep day or night — then I saw all that God has done. No one can comprehend what goes on under the sun. Despite all their efforts to search it out, no one can discover its meaning. Even if the wise claim to know it, they really cannot comprehend it” (Ecclesiastes 8:16,17 NIV). While God has “revealed” (Deuteron0my 29:29 NIV) the basic things that we really need to know, there are many other things that we don’t know, and will not be able to find out, or figure out, in this world.
“The same destiny overtakes all . . . they join the dead.” “Death is the destiny of everyone; the living should take this to heart” (Ecclesiastes 9:2,3; 7:3 NIV). Everyone, good or bad, is facing death, sooner or later. There is no escape from it in this world.
“The whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one” (1 John 5:19 NKJV), because God has allowed him to be the temporary “ruler of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 NKJV), which helps to explain why bad things happen to good people now. Satan exerts powerful negative influence in this sinful world, with some limitations, as the Bible indicates (Job 1,2; James 4:7). Will God ever do anything about it?
“The Son of God was revealed to destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8 NAB), including sin. “What has been written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory'” (1 Corinthians 15:54 NIV). In his due time, God will eliminate death and all its effects, and “will crush Satan (Romans 16:20 NKJV). “There will be no more death . . . these words are trustworthy and true” (Revelation 21:4,5 NIV). In the eternity that God has in store for those who serve him no more bad things will happen.
That’s all well and good, one wonders, but what about all the depressing thoughts and haunting memories of terrible things that have happened in the past?
“The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind” (Isaiah 65:17 NIV). For those who are given eternal life by God, they will have no bad memories or depressing thoughts, nor any “mourning or crying or pain” (Revelation 21:4 NIV).
In this article, we have reviewed why good people often experience terrible things, because of God’s allowance of: (1) sin; and (2) Satan’s challenge to God’s rulership to be settled; and (3) Satan’s rulership over the world. We’ve also reviewed what God is going to do about it.
112 thoughts on “Why Do Bad Things Happen To Good People?”
GW1: This is a very long essay, and so my rebuttal will necessarily be long too. Sorry about that.
BA1: Some people, even preachers, say that everything that happens in the world – good, bad, or otherwise – is the will of God. Is it?
GW1: I think that if God did exist (he doesn’t of course), every event in the world would stem from the will of God in one way or another. So, God would either allow, enable, authorize, facilitate, or cause every event. The first of these, the “allowing,” is perhaps the most often misunderstood. If God did exist, he would have created the cosmos to work as a mostly deterministic (or sometimes random) machine. However, God would know ahead of time the movement of every atom, and he could decide to allow the natural movement of the atom or to alter it. (Altering it would actually constitute a miracle.) Causing is at the other extreme. If God did exist, he could actually push any atom or group of atoms in any way he willed.
BA1: “I saw the prosperity of the wicked. For they suffer no pain; their bodies are healthy and sleek. They are free of the burdens of life; they are not afflicted like others” (Psalm 73:3-5 NAB).
GW1: This certainly happens some of the time, as does the opposite. Sometimes we see the demise of the righteous.
BA1: The realities of this life often just don’t seem to make any sense, even as they didn’t to Bible writer Asaph 3,000 years ago. The opposite of what common sense would tell us is what often happens. Why?
GW1: The realities of this life do make sense, if you try to understand them from a scientific perspective. They don’t make sense, if you try to make sense from a moral or religious perspective. I believe that if God did exist, we would necessarily see that he implemented perfect justice, e.g. every bad act would be punished in a perfect way. We don’t see this. And so, this is one more reason that God does not exist.
BA1: People often say that when something bad happens to a person, it’s because they’re getting their “karma.” But when something bad happens to a good person, what is it then?
GW1: The idea of karma covers that also.
BA1: The idea of “karma” is derived from the Eastern philosophy of Buddhism and Hinduism, and is popularly believed in the West. Christian preachers and others often say that “God took” the good person from earth to be with him in heaven. Did he?
GW1: No, of course he did not! God does not exist, and this has been proven. Also, there is no good evidence for an afterlife, heaven, hell, or karma.
BA1: The story is all too familiar. Someone driving who is grossly irresponsible and negligent, often under the influence of alcohol/drugs, causes a terrible accident which kills and/or seriously injures one or more innocent victims, while he suffers little or no harm. The victim(s) is/are described as a very good person, who was always helping others. Why?
GW1: Why does this happen? Because the forces and laws of nature caused these outcomes. As I said earlier, if God did exist, the drunk driver would be perfectly punished for his bad behavior by God and/or by men.
BA1: “There is something else meaningless that occurs on earth: the righteous who get what the wicked deserve, and the wicked who get what the righteous deserve. This too, I say, is meaningless” (Ecclesiastes 8:14 NIV). Three thousand years ago, this paradox was observed by wise King Solomon.
GW1: See above for my interpretation of this.
BA1: Then there is the good person who gets a very debilitating disease, and suffers horribly, and dies at a relatively young age, while many who are unkind and cruel to others and live only for themselves, continue to live to old age. Why?
GW1: Asked and answered.
BA1: “Why do the wicked live on, growing old and increasing in power?” (Job 21:7 NIV). The righteous man Job noted this same perplexity 3,500 years ago.
GW1: The character Job asked the right questions, but the character God never gave him any good answers. Job didn’t know that God immorally made a bet with the devil.
BA1: “I saw something else under the sun: In the place of judgment–wickedness was there. In the place of justice–wickedness was there. If you see the poor oppressed in a district, and justice and rights denied, do not be surprised at such things; for one official is eyed by a higher one, and over them are others higher still” (Ecclesiastes 3:16; 5:6 NIV). In this world, people don’t always get true justice. Good, innocent people are often slighted, even mistreated, in judicial decisions, while corrupt, rich and influential people and corporations are favored. Why?
GW1: No kdding! Yes, this is the way it is, but it would not be this way if God did exist.
BA1: Many thousands of innocent victims are killed or harmed in wars, conflicts, shootings, and natural disasters every year. Why?
GW1: If God did exist, he would not allow humans the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide. Why? If he did, then he would be enabling these bad acts and thus he would be partly responsible for them occurring. But by his nature, God would be perfectly moral. And so, it would be impossible that he would allow these acts.
BA1: “We call the arrogant blessed; for evildoers not only prosper, but even test God and escape” (Malachi 3:15 NAB). Twenty-four hundred years ago, the prophet Malachi reported such injustices. Why do they happen?
GW1: You keep repeating the same question, which I have answered. No need for this redundancy. See above.
BA1: The Creator, Almighty God, informed the first humans that they were essentially “free”, but that obedience to his principles for living was vital for their well-being, in fact, their life (Genesis 2:15-17 NIV).
GW1: This is a story of fiction. God does not exist, and this has been proven. But if God did exist, he would not give humans certain kinds of free will, e.g. the free will to commit assault, murder, or genocide. See my previous comments.
BA1: The rebellious angel called Satan the Devil influenced them to violate the Creator’s law, claiming that God was withholding good things from them, and that they would be better off to disobey God (Genesis 3:1-6; Revelation 12:9).
GW1: Again, this is a story of fiction. If God did exist, he would have created everything. Wouldn’t everything include Satan? But God does not exist, and so he could not have created Satan. There is no good evidence that Satan exists. God would not create Satan or even an angel with the free will to tempt human beings to do wrong. That would be ridiculous. It would be enabling and facilitating wrong doing by humans. God wouldn’t create Satan or he would soon destroy Satan after his first bit of mischief.
BA1: Afterward the Creator foretold the tragic and disastrous results that would follow after the first humans rejected God’s law (Genesis 3:16-19).
GW1: Why do you use the term “Creator” here when you mean God? Don’t do that! If God did exist, he would necessarily be the creator of the cosmos. If God did not exist, there would be no creation. The cosmos would be eternal.
GW1: Also, in the fictitious story of Adam and Eve, not only does God punish them, he also punishes the descendants of Adam and Eve for their bad acts. But that is ridiculous. It would be immoral, and God would be perfectly moral. So, the story makes no rational sense.
BA1: The result has been that, “just as sin entered the world through one man, and death through sin, and in this way death came to all people, because all sinned” (Romans 5:12 NIV).
GW1: That would never happen if God did exist. See above for why.
BA1: All humans born since (except Jesus) have been born “sinful” (Psalm 51:5 NIV).
GW1: Absolutely false! Nobody is born sinful. Nobody is sinful until they BEHAVE in a sinful way, which is to disobey an alleged command or rule of God. Babies and young children have no ideas of God, rules, obedience, or sin.
BA1: Thus, we live in a very sinful world, in which everyone makes mistakes, does bad things, and some, of course, much worse than others.
GW1: Absolutely false! Because God does not exist, sin does not exist since sin is defined as “disobedience of a command or rule issued by God.” But yes, humans are fallible and sometimes they behave immorally. Sin and God have nothing to do with this.
BA1: The Bible realistically explains what happens in this world: “We do not know when our time will come; like fish caught in the treacherous net, like birds caught in the snare, just so are we all trapped by misfortune when it suddenly overtakes us” (Ecclesiastes 9:12 NJB).
GW1: Most people do not know when misfortune or death will occur for them.
BA1: While we certainly do have quite a bit of control over our individual “actions” (Galatians 6:4 NIV), the stark reality is that there are many things in this life that we simply have no control over.
GW1: There is a very strong case which has been made for determinism (instead of free will) in human decisions, choices, and behaviors. I am currently reading Robert Sopolsky’s new book “Determined,” in which he makes the best case for this.
BA1: “In this meaningless life of mine I have seen both of these: the righteous perishing in their righteousness, and the wicked living long in their wickedness” (Ecclesiastes 7:15 NIV).
GW1: Redundant again.
BA1: Only the Bible accurately explains the reasons behind the harsh realities of this life, such as why bad things happen to good people.
GW1: The Bible gives an inaccurate explanation. If God did exist, we would not see people being assaulted, murdered, and exterminated.
BA1: “When I applied my mind to know wisdom and to observe the labor that is done on earth — people getting no sleep day or night — then I saw all that God has done. No one can comprehend what goes on under the sun.
GW1: God does not exist, and this has been proven. Notice the phrase “under the sun.” Isn’t that funny? It shows the mistaken ancient view of the solar system. There is no “under the sun.” There is just “around the sun.” Still, we do comprehend some of the facts and laws of the universe.
BA1: Despite all their efforts to search it out, no one can discover its meaning.
GW1: The cosmos itself has no meaning! It just exists. It is very likely eternal. (I have given you the four reasons for thinking this many times.)
BA1: Even if the wise claim to know it, they really cannot comprehend it” (Ecclesiastes 8:16,17 NIV).
GW1: False. We know and comprehend some of it, but not yet all of it.
BA1: While God has “revealed” (Deuteron0my 29:29 NIV) the basic things that we really need to know, there are many other things that we don’t know, and will not be able to find out, or figure out, in this world.
GW1: God has not revealed anything. Why? Because God does not exist; this has been proven. How do you know that we “will not be able to find out” some things? You don’t know this! Nobody knows what we will and will not be able to learn in the future. Don’t claim to know things you do not know.
BA1: “The same destiny overtakes all . . . they join the dead.” “Death is the destiny of everyone; the living should take this to heart” (Ecclesiastes 9:2,3; 7:3 NIV). Everyone, good or bad, is facing death, sooner or later. There is no escape from it in this world.
GW1: There is no escape from death at this time, period. There is no good evidence for any afterlife, and in fact there is much good evidence against it. Study the brain! (It is possible that one day scientists and engineers will invent a way to “download” the mind of humans into an electronic medium, and this advancement will achieve a kind of near immortality.)
BA1: “The whole world lies under the sway of the wicked one” (1 John 5:19 NKJV), because God has allowed him to be the temporary “ruler of this world” (John 12:31; 14:30; 16:11 NKJV), which helps to explain why bad things happen to good people now.
GW1: Absolutely false! If God does not exist, then Satan does not exist. If God does exist, then Satan does not exist. So, Satan does not exist, period. If God did exist, he would never allow any “temporary ruler” over the Earth! What a ridiculous idea. If he did, that would be immoral. God would not share rulership of the cosmos or even the Earth.
BA1: Satan exerts powerful negative influence in this sinful world, with some limitations, as the Bible indicates (Job 1,2; James 4:7). Will God ever do anything about it?
GW1: God does not exist, and Satan does not exist. This has been proven.
BA1: “The Son of God was revealed to destroy the works of the devil” (1 John 3:8 NAB), including sin.
GW1: Complete nonsense! If God did exist, he would not have children or employ messengers, prophets, angels, other gods or demons, or assistants of any kind. He would do his own work and communication. Also, if he did have a son, he would not arrange for his humiliation, torture, and murder or for him to “pay for the sins of all of humanity.” These are all ancient superstitions, not supported by reason.
BA1: “What has been written will come true: ‘Death has been swallowed up in victory'” (1 Corinthians 15:54 NIV).
GW1: Death continues. It has not been swallowed up. Just look around.
BA1: In his due time, God will eliminate death and all its effects, and “will crush Satan (Romans 16:20 NKJV).
GW1: What a joke! If God did exist, either he would have not created Satan or he would have destroyed him after his first misbehavior. Or maybe locked him up for eternity or a very long time.
BA1: “There will be no more death . . . these words are trustworthy and true” (Revelation 21:4,5 NIV).
GW1: Haven’t you heard of the “heat death” of the universe? At that time, death will come to all living things. Only after that will there be no death. But why? Because there won’t be any life. Duh.
BA1: In the eternity that God has in store for those who serve him no more bad things will happen.
GW1: There is no good evidence for any afterlife, and we now know that God does not and cannot exist. Just read my Holocaust argument.
BA1: That’s all well and good, one wonders, but what about all the depressing thoughts and haunting memories of terrible things that have happened in the past?
GW1: Yes, what about them?
BA1: “The former things will not be remembered, nor will they come to mind” (Isaiah 65:17 NIV). For those who are given eternal life by God, they will have no bad memories or depressing thoughts, nor any “mourning or crying or pain” (Revelation 21:4 NIV).
GW1: So, God would remove Post Traumatic Stress Disorder from those he sends to Heaven? How sweet of him. But wait. If he did exist, wouldn’t he do that for people in this life on Earth? Hmm.
BA1: In this article, we have reviewed why bad things happen to good people, because of God’s allowance of: (1) sin;
GW1: God would not allow assault, murder, and genocide. But we have them anyway. The logical conclusion is that God does not exist. If God does not exist, then sin does not exist. See above.
BA1: and (2) Satan’s challenge to God’s rulership to be settled; and (3) Satan’s rulership over the world.
GW1: Satan does not exist, whether God exists or not.
BA1: We’ve also reviewed what God is going to do about it.
GW1: God is not going to do anything at all. Why? Because he doesn’t exit. This has been proven by my own Holocaust argument and by many others. Guess what? It is up to us to work for the improvement of our world – increasing benefits and reducing harms. That’s just the way it works. God, belief in God, and religion do not help us.
“Thus says God, Yahweh, who created the heavens and spread them out” (Isaiah 42:5 NJB).
The fact that the universe has been constantly expanding since the “Big Bang” proves that it had a “beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
BA2: “Thus says God, Yahweh, who created the heavens and spread them out” (Isaiah 42:5 NJB).
GW2: If this were true, it would mean that God created a world in which he allowed everything to occur which has occurred, even the Holocaust. But if he did exist, God would not have allowed the Holocaust to occur because of his own nature. He would have prevented it. But the Holocaust did occur. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.
BA2: The fact that the universe has been constantly expanding since the “Big Bang” proves that it had a “beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
GW2: Beginning of what? The Big Bang was probably the beginning of a new phase in the eternal universe. As I have said many times, there are at least four good reasons to conclude that the universe is eternal.
GW2: Just yesterday, I devised a new argument against the existence of God. I’d like to share it with you and get your comments and questions. So, here it is:
Argument from Free Will Against the Existence of God: 1-5-2024
1. Definition: God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.
2. If God did exist, then all his decisions, actions, and withholdings of actions would be morally correct.
3. If God did exist, then he gave us free will, some types and not others.
4. If God did exist, then it was morally correct for him to give us some types of free will and to withhold other types.
5. But we have the free will to choose assault, murder, and genocide, which are themselves immoral acts. And if God gave us these types of free will, then he would have enabled these immoral acts to occur. And God’s giving us these types of free will would itself be immoral.
6. On the other hand, we don’t have the free will to choose between living in World A WITHOUT assault, murder, and genocide (all immoral acts) and living in World B WITH those immoral acts, all other things being equal. We are forced to live in World B. And God’s withholding of this type of free will from us would itself be immoral.
7. Therefore, God does not exist and cannot exist.
Your “the universe is probably eternal” flies in the face of the facts. It’s like trying to prove the earth is flat. The constant expansion of the universe since the Big Bang proves the universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1; Psalm 104:2; Zechariah 12:1). You’ll never convince us otherwise.
Your point #1 about God is mostly accurate. However, “the true God” (John 17:3) is not just hypothetical at all, he is real! “God is a spirit” (John 4:24 GWT), who is always “invisible” (Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17), “whom no one has seen or can see” (1 Timothy 6:15 NIV).
Your point #2 is true.
On points #3 & 4 – Human free will exists only within the parameters of human abilities, which have limits
Your points #5 & 6 contradict points #1 & 2, so they are demonstrably false. “Far be it from God to do wrong, from the Almighty to do wrong” (Job 34:10 NIV).
Your # 7 is false. God’s existence is obvious to the reasonable mind (Romans 1:20). Only fools deny it (Psalm 14:1; 53:1).
More on your contention about God designing humans to commit evil. – He didn’t! He made humans “perfect,” but they chose to deviate (Deuteronomy 32:4; Ecclesiastes 7:29). All creatures have brains, but humans have much more complex brains than any others. Other creatures operate primarily by instinct, whereas humans operate primarily by mental processes. This enables humans to have minds, which can build on acquired knowledge. The human mind has unlimited capacity to develop ideas and actions throughout life. Most humans use only a minute fraction of this capacity.
Your assertion, therefore, that God is responsible for humans committing evils makes about as much sense as blaming Boeing for its planes being used to fly into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001.
God is Almighty and did not need to share life by creating anyone or anything else. But,”God is love” (1 John 4:8), so he created other creatures in the spirit world, and the universe and creatures in the physical world, to share life. This was magnanimous on God’s part. Intelligent creatures, such as humans, have a responsibility to use their lives in harmony with the Creator’s standards (Matthew 22:37-39). But humans have a free will choice to live responsibly or irresponsible. “God is a righteous judge” (Psalm 7:11 NIV).
BA3: Your “the universe is probably eternal” flies in the face of the facts.
GW3: My universe is the same as your universe, and it is our universe, the one we live in which resulted from the primordial particle of the Big Bang. There are four good reasons that our universe is probably eternal, and I have shared those with you many times. Would you like to hear them again? These reasons do not fly in the face of any facts. They are either facts themselves or consistent with the facts.
BA3: It’s like trying to prove the earth is flat.
GW3: False. It’s not like that at all. We have proven that the Earth is spherical, but we have not yet proven that the universe is eternal, yet. We have good reasons to think it is. It is more likely eternal than not.
BA3: The constant expansion of the universe since the Big Bang proves the universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1; Psalm 104:2; Zechariah 12:1). You’ll never convince us otherwise.
GW3: False again. The Big Bang was the initiation of the expansion, not the existence of the universe. The primordial particle was already there.
BA1: Your point #1 about God is mostly accurate.
GW1: False. It is totally accurate. If you think not, then identify a part of it which you think is inaccurate and defend your position.
BA1: However, “the true God” (John 17:3) is not just hypothetical at all, he is real!
GW1: False. God is not real. He has now been proven to not exist by many arguments, including my own.
BA1: “God is a spirit” (John 4:24 GWT), who is always “invisible” (Colossians 1:15; 1 Timothy 1:17),…
GW1: The standard definition includes “spiritual, normally invisible person…”
BA1: “whom no one has seen or can see” (1 Timothy 6:15 NIV).
GW1: There are verses in the Bible which say that God was visible at particular times and places. Also, because he would be all-powerful, he could make himself visible to human persons at any time, although he might choose to be invisible most of the time. In addition, he would NECESSARILY present himself to all persons and to do this he would need to make himself visible to be credible.
BA1: Your point #2 is true.
GW1: Thank you for your agreement.
BA1: On points #3 & 4 – Human free will exists only within the parameters of human abilities, which have limits.
GW1: Of course, if we had free will it would be under such parameters. However, we may not have free will at all! This is a current areas of controversy which has not been fully resolved. I assume you believe free will exists.
BA1: Your points #5 & 6 contradict points #1 & 2, so they are demonstrably false.
GW1: No, there is no contradiction there. If you think there is, then identify and explain it.
BA1: “Far be it from God to do wrong, from the Almighty to do wrong” (Job 34:10 NIV).
GW1: If God did exist, he would be perfectly moral (See Step #1). And so, he would not enable human persons to do the wrongs of assault, murder, and genocide by giving them the free will to commit these acts. But we commit these acts. And so, God does not and cannot exist.
BA1: Your # 7 is false. God’s existence is obvious to the reasonable mind (Romans 1:20). Only fools deny it (Psalm 14:1; 53:1).
GA1: No, #7 is true. It is the logical conclusion of the preceding steps. You just can’t declare it false. You must find an error in the argument, which you haven’t done.
BA1: More on your contention about God designing humans to commit evil. – He didn’t!
GW1: If God did exist, then he designed all things, period. If human persons have the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide, then God would have designed them that way. But this idea leads to a contradiction, and so we know that God cannot exist.
BA1: He made humans “perfect,” but they chose to deviate (Deuteronomy 32:4; Ecclesiastes 7:29).
GW1: False. A human person with the free will to commit assault, murder, or genocide is certainly not perfect.
BA1: All creatures have brains, but humans have much more complex brains than any others.
GW1: I agree.
BA1: Other creatures operate primarily by instinct, whereas humans operate primarily by mental processes.
GW1: False. All animals, including humans, operate by brain processes. But these processes are less dominated by instinct in humans than in other animals.
BA1: This enables humans to have minds, which can build on acquired knowledge.
GW1: This is true, but most other animals have minds and can build on acquired knowledge also. I think we can agree that humans are more advanced in their brains and minds than other animals. But so what? How is that pertinent to our discussion here?
BA1: The human mind has unlimited capacity to develop ideas and actions throughout life. Most humans use only a minute fraction of this capacity.
GW1: Your first claim here is false. The human mind does not have unlimited capacity to develop ideas and actions. These capacities are limited, especially by the size of the brain and the number of interconnections of its neurons.
BA1: Your assertion, therefore, that God is responsible for humans committing evils makes about as much sense as blaming Boeing for its planes being used to fly into the World Trade Center and the Pentagon in 2001.
GW1: False. It makes much more sense than that. You do believe God would have free will, right? If he existed, God would have the free will to either give human persons the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide or not give them those kinds of free wills. Agree? But if God chose to give them these kinds of free will, he ENABLED humans to commit these acts, and therefore he would be PARTLY RESPONSIBLE for every one of these acts which occurred. A better example than yours would be this: Smith and Wesson makes lethal weapons and sells them to the public. S&W therefore ENABLES customers to murder other people. S&W is therefore PARTLY RESPONSIBLE for any murder committed with a weapon they made and sold. They could have made and sold nonlethal weapons, but they chose by their own free will to make and sell the lethal ones. Now, just generalize this reasoning to God, and you will be enlightened.
BA1: God is Almighty and did not need to share life by creating anyone or anything else.
GW1: But if God existed and chose to create other persons, then he must now behave perfectly morally towards them. That is his nature.
BA1: But,”God is love” (1 John 4:8),…
GW1: No, God is not love. God is a person, not an emotion or a behavior. See the standard definition of God in Step #1. The assumption, however, that God would be all-loving is contradicted by the evidence in our world. This is one way we know that God does not exist.
BA1: so he created other creatures in the spirit world,…
GW1: There is no good evidence that any spirit creatures exist.
BA1: and the universe and creatures in the physical world, to share life.
GW1: So what? If he created other persons, whether spiritual, physical, or both, his nature requires that he treat them in a perfectly moral way. God would not behave contrary to his nature! Duh.
BA1: This was magnanimous on God’s part.
GW1: Not necessarily. He would be magnanimous only if he treated persons morally after he created them. He would not be magnanimous if he treated persons immorally after he created them.
BA1: Intelligent creatures, such as humans, have a responsibility to use their lives in harmony with the Creator’s standards (Matthew 22:37-39).
GW1: All persons, including God himself, have the responsibility to use their lives or existences in harmony and compliance with Correct Universal Ethics for Persons (CUE-P). If God did this, then he would not impart to human persons the free will to assault, murder, and commit genocide. If the Nazis did not have those kinds of free will, then they never would have perpetrated the Holocaust. But the Holocaust occurred. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.
BA1: But humans have a free will choice to live responsibly or irresponsible.
GW1: Who gave them that free will? If God did, then he enabled them to commit assault, murder, and genocide and so live irresponsibly. Do you see now how he would be PARTLY RESPONSIBLE?
BA1: “God is a righteous judge” (Psalm 7:11 NIV).
GW1: False. God does not judge or do anything since he does not exist. This has been proven.
GW1: Thank you for studying my new argument and giving me feedback on it. You have not found any error in it, and so the conclusion stands.
Your “new argument” is seriously flawed. For example, God is no more responsible for the evils committed in this world than Boeing is for planes it manufactured being used to kill, injure and destroy. Boeing manufactured planes with the capacity to be flown into buildings or deliberately crashed. Is the company responsible for such actions?
Also, the human mind goes way beyond the brain organ.For example, a man possessed by a demon acted crazy, but after Jesus expelled the demon, the man was said to be “in his right mind” (Mark 5:15 NIV) acting normally. His brain was the same, but his mind was different. Minds can be “changed” (Matthew 21:29 NIV).
Humans have a high degree of control over how they use their minds, for good or bad. The human mind can be highly developed through effort, but it doesn’t have to be. Some people become experts in various fields, through the use of their minds. Others don’t have much opportunity, or choose not to learn very much, by comparison. Some people become experts in devious, criminal matters. This is their own choice.
Some use the internet for terrible ideas and activities. “Surely the human mind and heart are cunning” (Psalm 64:6 NIV). Can those who designed and developed the internet be blamed for such devious behavior, since the internet they created has such capability? Are these designers and developers responsible for the behavior of those who use it for bad things?
If there is no free will, why is their rehabilitation available for people with bad behaviors?
Your “new argument” is just as illogical and flawed as your old argument!
BA2: Your “new argument” is seriously flawed.
GW2: No, it is not flawed. If you think there is a flaw in it, identify the flaw and defend your position. So far, you haven’t.
BA2: For example, God is no more responsible for the evils committed in this world than Boeing is for planes it manufactured being used to kill, injure and destroy. Boeing manufactured planes with the capacity to be flown into buildings or deliberately crashed. Is the company responsible for such actions?
GW2: Already refuted this. Argue against my example of Smith and Wesson.
GW2: One big difference is that S&W made a product very likely to be used in murder, whereas Boeing did not. Whereas Boeing would have a small percentage of responsibility for 9-11, it would be less than what responsibility S&W would have for any murder. You must consider DEGREES OF ENABLING and DEGREES OF RESPONSIBILITY. Boeing had the choice of building planes which COULD NOT be used for murder. It could have designed them differently. Also keep in mind that God would be all-powerful and perfectly moral, unlike either S&W or Boeing. You must take that into account also.
BA2: Also, the human mind goes way beyond the brain organ.
GW2: I don’t know what you mean by “goes way beyond.” The human mind is completely dependent on and is an emergent property of the human brain.
BA2: For example, a man possessed by a demon acted crazy, but after Jesus expelled the demon, the man was said to be “in his right mind” (Mark 5:15 NIV) acting normally. His brain was the same, but his mind was different. Minds can be “changed” (Matthew 21:29 NIV).
GW2: This story is fiction. There is no good evidence for the existence of demons. The story may be totally fabricated or it may be based on a misunderstanding of an actual event. Since minds are completely dependent on brains, they can’t be changed unless brains are changed.
BA2: Humans have a high degree of control over how they use their minds, for good or bad.
GW2: I disagree. Control resides in the brain. But the mind just reflects or represents what the brain does. If determinism is true for human decisions (it probably is), then the control exercised by the brain is completely caused by prior factors and conditions (or in rare circumstances, randomly).
BA2: The human mind can be highly developed through effort, but it doesn’t have to be.
GW2: What exercises the effort? The brain uses energy when it is operating.
BA2: Some people become experts in various fields, through the use of their minds.
GW2: No, the brain does all the work. The mind is just a free rider.
BA2: Others don’t have much opportunity, or choose not to learn very much, by comparison. Some people become experts in devious, criminal matters. This is their own choice.
GW2: But their choices may be completely determined. Also, if God does exist and free will exists, then God gave human persons the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide, which actions the Nazis committed. But this leads to a contradiction, which I already pointed out. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.
BA2: Some use the internet for terrible ideas and activities. “Surely the human mind and heart are cunning” (Psalm 64:6 NIV).
GW2: Brains can be cunning and can cause immoral actions.
BA2: Can those who designed and developed the internet be blamed for such devious behavior, since the internet they created has such capability?
GW2: Yes, they are PARTLY RESPONSIBLE. Did they do everything in their power (they are not all-powerful as God would be) to reduce the probability that their invention would not be used for immoral purposes? No.
BA2: Are these designers and developers responsible for the behavior of those who use it for bad things?
GW2: Yes, PARTLY RESPONSIBLE.
BA2: If there is no free will, why is their rehabilitation available for people with bad behaviors?
GW2: Because rehabilitation creates NEW determinants for the people who behaved badly in the past.
BA2: Your “new argument” is just as illogical and flawed as your old argument!
GW2: False. So far you have found no error or flaw. The conclusion stands.
Atheism is “throwing you into confusion” (Galatians 1:7; 5:10 NIV) mentally.
The manufacturers of kitchen knives, hammers, screwdrivers, ice picks, shovels, axes, vehicles, towels, etc. are absolutely not responsible when someone misuses their product to harm someone else. Neither is God responsible when someone misuses their exercise of free will to harm someone else (Deuteronomy 32:4,5; Ecclesiastes 7:29; Job 34:10).
BS5: Atheism is “throwing you into confusion” (Galatians 1:7; 5:10 NIV) mentally.
GW5: Absolutely not! An atheist is just a person who does not believe in any gods. Nothing confusing about that.
BS5: The manufacturers of kitchen knives, hammers, screwdrivers, ice picks, shovels, axes, vehicles, towels, etc. are absolutely not responsible when someone misuses their product to harm someone else.
GW5: Sometimes they are, and you are failing to understand the subtleties and contingencies of ENABLING. It depends on many factors: 1) How much did the producer-giver know in advance about how the tool would be used by the receiver? 2) How likely is the tool to be used for harming others? 3) How many uses does the tool have besides causing harm? 4) What did the producer-giver do in advance to reduce the probability that the tool would be used for harm? 5) Could the producer-giver designed a different tool with helpful uses and no harmful uses? 6) Would the giver have other opportunities to prevent the tool from being used for harm? So, every situation must be evaluated individually.
BS5: Neither is God responsible when someone misuses their exercise of free will to harm someone else (Deuteronomy 32:4,5; Ecclesiastes 7:29; Job 34:10).
GW5: Absolutely false! If he did exist, God would know in advance that the free will to assault, murder, and commit genocide would be used to do those acts. He could withhold that kind of free will. And in fact, he would withhold it because he would be perfectly moral. Then there would be no assaults, murders, or genocides. Human persons would not even think of these actions, let alone choose them or do them. But they occur everyday. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist. You have found no error in the argument.
GW5: Try this thought experiment: A male teenager says to you “I want to kill myself and I need a gun to do it.” You give him the gun and he kills himself with it. Did you enable the act? Are you at least partly responsible for the act? Yes and Yes. Isn’t this obvious? Yes, it is.
“You are wrong, because you understand neither the scriptures nor the power of God”—Matthew 22:29 NJB
You’re using the reasoning fallacies of misrepresentation, equivocation, and straw man, because your argument is seriously flawed. Giving the suicidal male teenager a gun is a completely irrelevant rabbit trail.
Most people use towels in their daily life. Very innocent, and also a good thing! but if someone uses a towel to smother another person to death, the manufacturer is not responsible.
Similarly, God is not responsible for people’s misuse of free will (Job 34:10).
Although I already responded to your comment here, I have thought about it more and would like to add to the rebuttal.
You said “For example, God is no more responsible for the evils committed in this world than Boeing is for planes it manufactured being used to kill, injure and destroy. Boeing manufactured planes with the capacity to be flown into buildings or deliberately crashed. Is the company responsible for such actions?”
If an all-knowing and all-powerful deity did exist, he would be PARTLY responsible for the Holocaust, just as Boeing was PARTLY responsible for the 9-11 attacks. Why?
If some person, group of persons, or company X designs, creates, produces, and sells or gives a product or tool to other persons Y, and then Y uses the product to cause a horrible harm, then X is PARTLY responsible for the harm done by Y if X failed to do everything in its power to prevent or reduce the probability that its product would be used to cause horrible harm. This is the ethical rule, so let’s see how it applies to Boeing first and then to God.
In 2001, Boeing could have designed, produced, and sold planes which could not be intentionally flown into buildings to cause death and damage, but it did not, and so it is PARTLY responsible for the 9-11 attacks in which all four planes used were made by Boeing.
A. Boeing could have made the planes with impenetrable doors to the cockpit.
B. Boeing could have made the planes so that if they went far off course or if they were heading towards buildings, then the planes would automatically be switched to ground control, essentially becoming drones.
If it had made these design decisions, then perhaps Boeing would not have been PARTLY responsible for the 9-11 tragedy.
In similar manner, if an all-knowing, all-powerful creator god did exist and designed and created human beings, then he could have made them without the free will to choose assault, murder, or genocide, and then these acts would not occur. But obviously, they occurred in the Holocaust. Thus, any such god would be PARTLY responsible for the Holocaust, and this would be immoral. But if God did exist, he would be perfectly moral. And therefore, we know that God does not exist and cannot exist in our reality.
No, your reasoning is flawed! Boeing was NOT responsible for the misuse of its planes!
The producers of alcoholic drinks and vehicles are not responsible if someone misuses their products, i.e., gets intoxicated and causes a vehicular accident which harms someone.
“God made mankind upright, but they have gone in search of many schemes”—Ecclesiastes 7:29 ESV
BA: No, your reasoning is flawed! Boeing was NOT responsible for the misuse of its planes!
GW: No, my reasoning is correct. Boeing was PARTLY RESPONSIBLE for the 9-11 tragedies. You have voiced your disagreement, but you have presented no evidence, reasons, or arguments to support your conclusion or refute my assertion and reasons.
BA: The producers of alcoholic drinks and vehicles are not responsible if someone misuses their products, i.e., gets intoxicated and causes a vehicular accident which harms someone.
GW: After much thought, I do agree that some producers of some products are not necessarily responsible for the misuse of their product, but many are, and here I think you have chosen just another example which fits the “partial responsibility” pattern which I described. Once again, you must apply the ethical rule: “If some person, group of persons, or company X designs, creates, produces, and sells or gives a product or tool to other persons Y, and then Y uses the product to cause a horrible harm, then X is PARTLY responsible for the harm done by Y if X failed to do everything in its power to prevent or reduce the probability that its product would be used to cause horrible harm.”
GW: Let’s take a clear example of a death caused by an intoxicated driver. So, do producers of alcoholic drinks do everything in their power to prevent or reduce the probability that their product would be used to cause death by an intoxicated driver? I think the answer is clearly NO.
A. The alcohol makers could produce and sell only alcohol with lower “proof.”
B. The makers could mix a chemical with the alcohol which reduced its duration of effect.
C. The makers could cooperate with the auto makers in design, production, and sale of vehicles which won’t start until the potential driver passes a breathalyzer test at the moment. This cooperation would include investment of money.
BA: “God made mankind upright, but they have gone in search of many schemes”—Ecclesiastes 7:29 ESV
GW: God does not exist, and this has been proven. Human persons who produce products have come up with many schemes to make and sell products which are dangerous and play a role in horrible harms. Businesses have a moral duty to make their products and services less dangerous for the public. They are partly responsible for harms when they do not fulfill this duty.
GW: Here is a relevant article for you:
NTSB Calls for Alcohol Detection Systems in All New Vehicles. NTSB, 9/20/2022
https://www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/NR20220920.aspx#:~:text=WASHINGTON%20(Sept.,to%20new%20recommendations%20released%20Tuesday
GW: This argument is still sound:
1. If God did exist, he would not give human persons the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide. Why? Because then he would be partly responsible for any of these acts occurring. And God would not be responsible at all for any horrible harms because he would be perfectly moral.
2. If God did exist, then assault, murder, and genocide would never occur.
3. But assault, murder, and genocide do occur! The clearest example of this is the Holocaust.
4. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist in our reality.
There is responsibility on the part of owners and makers to do what they reasonably can to prevent problems. For example, “If . . . the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not penned it up and it kills a man or woman, the bull is to be stoned and its owner is to be out to death” (Exodus 21:29 NIV).
However, God is not responsible for humans’ misuse of their freedom. He warned them about what not to do (Genesis 2:15-17). “The Rock–how faultless are his deeds, how right all his ways! A faithful God, without deceit, just and upright is he! Yet his degenerate children have treated him basely, a crooked and twisted generation” (Deuteronomy 32:4,5 NAB).
Hammers, knives, screwdrivers, crowbars, etc., have proper uses, but they have been misused to harm people. The makers are not responsible.
BA6: “You are wrong, because you understand neither the scriptures nor the power of God”—Matthew 22:29 NJB
GW6: I understand what the Bible says and that the Bible is mostly false. I know that God does not exist. This has been proven.
BA6: You’re using the reasoning fallacies of misrepresentation, equivocation, and straw man, because your argument is seriously flawed.
GW6: Nope. You have not identified any of these errors in my argument.
BA6: Giving the suicidal male teenager a gun is a completely irrelevant rabbit trail.
GW6: False. It is a relevant example. Giving the teenager the gun is a perfect example of enabling the bad act, in this case a suicide. God giving humans (or Nazis in particular) the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide is another perfect example of enabling the Holocaust. If God did exist, he would not act in that way. It would be morally wrong. And by his nature, God would be perfectly moral. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist.
BA6: Most people use towels in their daily life. Very innocent, and also a good thing! but if someone uses a towel to smother another person to death, the manufacturer is not responsible.
GW6: Maybe not. I am claiming that there are very clear situations in which the designer, producer, and/or giver is enabling the bad act and is partly responsible for it. I have given you at least three clear examples where this is the case, despite your examples where it might not be the case.
BA6: Similarly, God is not responsible for people’s misuse of free will (Job 34:10).
GW6: The free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide can only be misused! Duh. If God did exist, he could have withheld that kind of free will and he would have. Why? Because he would have been an all-powerful, all-knowing, all-loving, perfectly moral creator. Then, these acts would never occur. But they do occur! So, it is obvious that God does not exist and cannot exist. I don’t know why you can’t understand this. (Well, I actually do know, but no need to go there.)
BA: There is responsibility on the part of owners and makers to do what they reasonably can to prevent problems.
GW: YES! I agree. Producers have a responsibility to design their products to be the best they can be, the safest they can be. Producers must either anticipate misuse and design properly OR they must react to misuse and redesign. If they do not, then they are PARTLY RESPONSIBLE for any misuse of the product which occurs, especially any major harm.
BA: For example, “If . . . the bull has had the habit of goring and the owner has been warned but has not penned it up and it kills a man or woman, the bull is to be stoned and its owner is to be out to death” (Exodus 21:29 NIV).
GW: YES! This verse supports my position. Thanks for presenting it. It shows that the owner or producer of the bull was at least PARTLY RESPONSIBLE for the death of a human person caused by the bull. The only thing wrong with the prescription here is that the bull should not be killed. It should just be kept away from people.
BA: However, God is not responsible for humans’ misuse of their freedom. He warned them about what not to do (Genesis 2:15-17).
GW: A warning from God would not excuse him from being partly responsible for the harm his “free creatures” would do! If an all-knowing all-powerful god designs and produces human beings with the free will to commit murder, but warns them that if they commit murder they will be punished, and then some do commit murder, the human being is at least 75% responsible for the murder and the god would be responsible for up to 25%. Why? Because the god knew in advance that some human beings would misuse their free will and murder and so that god could have and should have withheld that kind of free will from the creature.
GW: We humans are now building robots to help us in our daily lives. Shall we build them to have the free will to murder human beings? Well of course not! That would be immoral. A god who built human beings with the free will to murder would be acting immorally. If he did exist, God would not do that. Why? Because he would be perfectly moral. He would build human beings without the free will to murder. This is obvious.
BA: “The Rock–how faultless are his deeds, how right all his ways! A faithful God, without deceit, just and upright is he!
GW: YES! That is the way God would be if he did exist. He would be “right” by not giving the free will to murder to his creatures – human beings.
BA: Yet his degenerate children have treated him basely, a crooked and twisted generation” (Deuteronomy 32:4,5 NAB).
GW: God’s children might choose to disobey him, but if he did not give them the free will to commit murder, then they would not commit murder. Any god who gives the free will to commit murder to his human creatures would be partly responsible for every murder they commit. Of course, God, if he did exist, would not do that. It has become clear that the god you worship is not God.
BA: Hammers, knives, screwdrivers, crowbars, etc., have proper uses, but they have been misused to harm people. The makers are not responsible.
GW: This is a straw man argument since I have stated to you, more than once, that NOT ALL producers are partly responsible for the harmful use of their products. But some of them are! As we have seen, Boeing, Smith & Wesson, and Bicardi are producers which are partly responsible for the harm done by the misuse of their products. They have the ability to prevent, correct, or reduce defects in or problems with their products. If one did exist, an all-knowing and all-powerful god would also be partly responsible (up to 25% responsible) for the harm done by designing and producing human beings with the free will to commit murder. This is obvious. And this is another way how we know that God does not exist. He would be a very special god. He would be all-knowing, all-powerful, and perfectly moral. Perfectly moral beings do not impart the free will to murder to their creatures. Duh.
“He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind”—Job 36:27,28 NIV
The surface of the earth is 71% water. Where did it come from?
“See how he scatters his lightning about him”—Job 36:30 NIV
“What is the way to the place where lightning is dispersed . . .?” (Job 38:24 NIV)
How does air go from being an insulator to being a conduit?
Scientists don’t know the answers to these questions, and neither do you!
When you have the answers to questions such as these, you’ll be in a better position to question, or criticize, Almighty God.
BA: “He draws up the drops of water, which distill as rain to the streams; the clouds pour down their moisture and abundant showers fall on mankind”—Job 36:27,28 NIV
GW: He does? No, God does not exist, and this has been proven. Also, if God did exist, he wouldn’t be involved in the day to day affairs of nature. He would have created a world which operates pretty much on automatic. For example, he would create human beings without the free will to murder.
BA: The surface of the earth is 71% water. Where did it come from?
GW: The current consensus among experts is that the water came to the Earth from meteors, asteroids, and another small planet which collided with the Earth long ago.
BA: “See how he scatters his lightning about him”—Job 36:30 NIV “What is the way to the place where lightning is dispersed . . .?” (Job 38:24 NIV)
GW: False. God does not exist. This has been proven many times.
BA: How does air go from being an insulator to being a conduit?
GW: I don’t know what you mean by that.
BA: Scientists don’t know the answers to these questions, and neither do you!
GW: Scientists do have a good answer to your question about water. Your other one is vague.
BA: When you have the answers to questions such as these, you’ll be in a better position to question, or criticize, Almighty God.
GW: God doesn’t exist to be criticized. If he did exist, I probably would have nothing to criticize about him. My criticism is directed at false beliefs and irrational thinking. Some false beliefs are: “God exists.” “If God did exist, he would allow the Holocaust.” “If God did exist he would give human beings the free will to murder.” “If God did exist, he would torture some people in hell for eternity.” “If God did exist, he would allow hurricanes in Florida to kill people.” “If God did exist, he would allow his own son to be humiliated, tortured, and murdered.” So many ridiculous and false ideas!
GW: Here is today’s Bible verse for you to ponder about: “I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster; I, the Lord, do all these things.” Isaiah 45:7, NIV. How does this relate to the discussion we have been having?
In answer to your question about Isaiah 45:7, the wider context (Isaiah 40-46) shows Yahweh has the ultimate control of the universe in contrast to idols, who are nothing, and he brings blessings and disasters as he pleases. In the more localized context of Isaiah 45:1-7, Yahweh, 200 years in advanced, foretells that he will use future Persian king Cyrus, who will not even know who Yahweh is, to overthrow the Neo-Babylonian Empire, and release its prisoners, including the Jews, to return to their homeland
BA: In answer to your question about Isaiah 45:7, the wider context (Isaiah 40-46) shows Yahweh has the ultimate control of the universe in contrast to idols, who are nothing, and he brings blessings and disasters as he pleases.
GW: So, according to your interpretation of the verses here, if God did exist (he doesn’t), then he sometimes would allow, enable, authorize, facilitate, and/or cause HORRIBLE HARMS! I think that is false. He would not do that. Instead, he would PREVENT them! You are just thinking of the deity you worship, who is not God.
GW: Who is God? Just examine the standard definition: “God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.”
BA: In the more localized context of Isaiah 45:1-7, Yahweh, 200 years in advanced, foretells that he will use future Persian king Cyrus, who will not even know who Yahweh is, to overthrow the Neo-Babylonian Empire, and release its prisoners, including the Jews, to return to their homeland.
GW: “Use” huh? That sounds like a case of facilitation. So, you believe that if he did exist, God would facilitate Cyrus to commit war, murder, atrocities, and horrible harms? That is pure nonsense! God would not do that because he would be perfectly moral. For goodness sakes, just read the standard definition!
You have parroted some speculations about how so much water came to be on earth, however, scientists admit they do not how it happened. Water cannot exist in the vacuum of outer space.
Electricity needs a conduit through which to travel, and it cannot travel through air, because air acts as an insulator. However, in the case of lightning, air becomes a conduit through which it travels. Scientists do not know why.
These are only two of innumerable mysteries which human “experts” do know have the answers.
BA: You have parroted some speculations about how so much water came to be on earth, however, scientists admit they do not [know] how it happened. Water cannot exist in the vacuum of outer space.
GW: I haven’t parroted, but I have informed you. The consensus of relevant scientists is what I told you. Here are some relevant quotes:
“There are numerous theories about how Earth got its water. Most fall into two categories: Either Earth was born with the molecular precursors of water already present, or water-laden space rocks like asteroids and comets brought water here after the planet’s formation.”
“That leaves asteroids and meteorites as the culprit. An analysis of asteroid Ryugu samples returned to Earth by Hayabusa2 showed that water locked in the asteroid’s rocks matches the type of water found in Earth’s oceans.”
Here is the link: https://www.planetary.org/articles/how-did-earth-get-its-water?gad_source=1&gclid=CjwKCAiAkp6tBhB5EiwANTCx1CU6XKF5yGWmx8iLDSpFmGZYp_eCGbd3fD6CvwUiwrQjje7p4BJDxRoCUMsQAvD_BwE
BA: Electricity needs a conduit through which to travel, and it cannot travel through air, because air acts as an insulator.
GW: In lightning, electricity travels through air.
BA: However, in the case of lightning, air becomes a conduit through which it travels. Scientists do not know why.
GW: So, you’ve contradicted your own earlier claim. Sometimes the answer is “That’s just the way the universe works.”
BA: These are only two of innumerable mysteries which human “experts” do know have the answers.
GW: Well sure, there are still some mysteries, but the existence of God is no longer one of them. We now know that God does not exist. This has been proven by many arguments, a few devised by yours truly.
GW: You are implying the traditional God of the Gaps Argument. If we don’t know something, just fill in the gap with God and say “God did it.” That no longer works because now we know that God does not exist.
“Do you know how God . . . makes his lightning flash?”—Job 36:15 NIV
Yes, there is much that human experts do not know about why things work the they do, and why things exist as they do, including lightning and the existence of water.
Humans still don’t know where all the water on earth came from, numerous theories notwithstanding.
The lack of knowledge doesn’t mean these things don’t exist.
The point is that you don’t know or understand everything about God, so you claim he doesn’t exist, which is absurd.
BA: “Do you know how God . . . makes his lightning flash?”—Job 36:15 NIV
GW: God has not made anything do anything. Why? Because he doesn’t exist. This has been proven.
BA: Yes, there is much that human experts do not know about why things work the they do, and why things exist as they do, including lightning and the existence of water.
GW: Actually, experts know quite a bit about lightning and water. Lightning is basically the flow of electrons. Water is H2O. But sure, there are still things to be learned about our reality. But one thing we do know now for certain is that God is not part of this reality.
BA: Humans still don’t know where all the water on earth came from, numerous theories notwithstanding.
GW: There are two evidence-based beliefs about that, and neither has anything to do with God who doesn’t exist.
BA: The lack of knowledge doesn’t mean these things don’t exist.
GW: We don’t lack knowledge about God’s existence. We have knowledge that he does not exist!
BA: The point is that you don’t know or understand everything about God, so you claim he doesn’t exist, which is absurd.
GW: I know the most important fact about God – he doesn’t exist! What is knowledge? “Knowledge of facts, also called propositional knowledge, is often characterized as true belief that is distinct from opinion or guesswork by virtue of justification.” (Wikipedia) I believe that God does not exist. It is true that he doesn’t exist. And this fact is justified by the many arguments I have presented to you, in which you have not found even a single error.
“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature –have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made so that people are without excuse”—Romans 1:20 NIV
Organization doesn’t result from random events. It comes about only through intelligent design and effort. The fact that the universe began in a highly ordered state, and remains in a highly ordered state proves there is a Creator God. You have not, and cannot, disprove these truths an facts.
BA: “Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature –have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made so that people are without excuse”—Romans 1:20 NIV
GW: This is a claim which the author never proved. And now we actually know that God does not exist. This has been proven. The author was not aware of these proofs against the existence of God at the time he wrote his claim. I wish I could time travel to speak with him and enlighten him.
BA: Organization doesn’t result from random events.
GW: Organization doesn’t result from JUST random events! But only partly from random events. It requires at least one other thing – natural tendencies toward certain combinations. For example, hydrogen and oxygen are produced by stars, but water (H2O) is not produced by stars. Water was once a new organization of matter. It probably resulted because of RANDOM collisions of atoms of hydrogen and oxygen AND because of the NATURAL BONDING TENDENCIES of hydrogen and oxygen in a certain ratio under certain conditions, e.g. on asteroids.
BA: It comes about only through intelligent design and effort.
GW: “Only”? That is just your claim which is not supported by the evidence. Anytime you use the word “only,” I love to challenge you. I refuted your claim above by presenting one counter example. That’s all it takes.
BA: The fact that the universe began in a highly ordered state, and remains in a highly ordered state proves there is a Creator God.
GW: Nonsense! You are using the word “ordered” in an equivocal way, and this undermines your claim. In one sense, the “order” of our universe has decreased over the course of 14.8 billion years. This is called “entropy.” And yet at the same time, there were “natural laws” at the time of the Big Bang that are still evident today. This is a different type of “order.”
GW: The existence of order in the universe is consistent with the existence of God, but it certainly does not prove his existence. It is more rational to believe that the order therein is intrinsic and eternal. That’s just the way it is! Adding God is just an extra unnecessary assumption. And besides, we now have proofs that God does not exist. You are welcome.
BA: You have not, and cannot, disprove these truths an facts.
GW: I have already proven that God does not exist. You have found no error in any of my arguments for this. But thanks for trying.
Oxygen and hydrogen molecules are highly organized. Where did they come from? You have no answers.
Saying something “just is” makes much less sense than acknowledging God’s existence.
There is no evidence that the order in the universe is decreasing.
BA: Oxygen and hydrogen molecules are highly organized.
GW: Yes, they both are. Not only that, they combine to form water which is even more highly organized!
BA: Where did they come from? You have no answers.
GW: I gave you the answers of experts and you just don’t like them, even though they are probably true. You don’t like them because they conflict with the answers in your holy book into which you were indoctrinated as a youth.
BA: Saying something “just is” makes much less sense than acknowledging God’s existence.
GW: Oh come on, give me a break! If I ask you “Where did your god come from?” your answer will be “He didn’t come from anywhere or anything. He just is.” My belief is that the universe JUST IS. Orderliness and chance are both intrinsic and eternal features of it. Complex or organized objects result from these two basic factors. Adding a premise of God is unneeded, irrelevant, and useless. Remember Ockham’s Razor? Besides, we now know that God doesn’t exist. This has been proven.
BA: There is no evidence that the order in the universe is decreasing.
GW: False. The decreasing order is called “entropy.” This is documented by overwhelming evidence. It’s called “science.”
We are well aware of the definition of entropy. The 2nd law of Thermodynamics says that anything left to itself will increase in entropy. However, there is no proof of an increase in entropy in universe, which indicates the universe has not been left to itself. Jesus words give us a clue why: “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working” (John 5:17 NIV).
Glad that this is your favorite website, but ads and promotions are not allowed here.
BA: We are well aware of the definition of entropy. The 2nd law of Thermodynamics says that anything left to itself will increase in entropy.
GW: No, the 2nd Law does not say that.
BA: However, there is no proof of an increase in entropy in universe, which indicates the universe has not been left to itself.
GW: There is proof of an increase in entropy in our universe, independently of whether it has been “left to itself” or not.
BA: Jesus words give us a clue why: “My Father is always at his work to this very day, and I too am working” (John 5:17 NIV).
GW: Here “Father” refers to God. But God does not exist, and this has been proven. (One reference in support of this conclusion is the book “God, Evil, and Morality: A Debate”.) So, Jesus was just mistaken here. Also, Jesus is dead. He is no longer working.
You’re the one who is mistaken.
You are apparently unaware of the full application of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Do some research.
No, it has not, and cannot, be proven that there has been any increase in entropy in the universe.
“Jesus . . . After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days” (Acts 1:1-3 NIV).
BA: You’re the one who is mistaken.
GW: Prove your claim.
BA: You are apparently unaware of the full application of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Do some research.
GW: I am aware enough of this Law to know that you are mistaken about it.
BA: No, it has not, and cannot, be proven that there has been any increase in entropy in the universe.
GW: Prove your claim.
BA: “Jesus . . . After his suffering, he presented himself to them and gave many convincing proofs he was alive. He appeared to them over a period of forty days” (Acts 1:1-3 NIV).
GW: This is just a story. As I have noted before, there is no first-person, author-identified, low bias, promptly written, eye witness report of anything in the life of Jesus. Not one! Some men probably came to believe, mistakenly, that Jesus came back to life. But their beliefs probably came from grief hallucinations, illusions, dreams, misunderstandings, rumors, etc.
Prove your claim.
Which claim. I’ll prove one — God does not exist.
Notice: After you read the argument below, please provide answers to these questions:
1. Do you understand the argument? If not, what specifically do you not understand?
2. Is there an error in the argument? If so, what is it?
3. Do you agree that the argument and its conclusion are correct? If not, why not?
The Three-Way Argument Against the Existence of God Based on the Holocaust: By Gary Whittenberger, Copyright 1-29-2023, 7-13-2023, 7-29-2023, 8-14-2023
1. Definition: God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.
The First Way
2. If God can and does exist, because of his nature he would have attempted to prevent the Holocaust and he would have succeeded. Consequently, the Holocaust would not have occurred.
3. But the Holocaust did occur.
4. Therefore, God cannot and does not exist.
The Second Way
5. If God can and does exist, and if the Holocaust did occur, then because of his nature God had at least one morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust.
6. The Holocaust did occur.
7. Thus, if God can and does exist, then he had at least one morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust.
8. There are specific morally justified reasons for some persons to allow the horrible harm of the Holocaust to occur, but God would not have any of them; none would be available to him.
A. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they did not know that the Holocaust was going to occur. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be all-knowing.
B. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they did not have the power to prevent it or immediately stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be all-powerful.
C. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they knew that somebody else was in the process of preventing it and the other was likely to succeed. But this could not be a reason for God since he would know about the Holocaust ready to happen before anyone else would know since he would be all-knowing. Also, God would know that a successful prevention of the Holocaust by human beings was very unlikely. (Note that there were at least 15 attempts to assassinate Hitler and they were all unsuccessful.)
D. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they would have been killed in an attempt to prevent or stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be invulnerable, all-powerful, and eternal.
E. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they would have been significantly injured in an attempt to prevent or stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be invulnerable and all-powerful.
F. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they would have significantly suffered in an attempt to prevent or stop it. But this could not be a reason for God since he would be invulnerable and all-powerful.
G. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because allowing it would be necessary for them to prevent some greater harm than the Holocaust itself. But this could not be a reason for God since nothing at all would be necessary for him to allow in order to prevent some greater harm since he would be all-powerful. God would have dominion over all metaphysical and natural necessities, contingencies, and laws.
H. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because allowing it would be necessary for them to produce a benefit which outweighed the Holocaust. But this could not be a reason for God since nothing at all would be necessary for him to allow in order to produce some benefit that would outweigh the Holocaust since he would be all-powerful. God would have dominion over all metaphysical and natural necessities, contingencies, and laws.
I. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because it resulted in perfect punishments for all the victims for their past immoral behaviors. But the Holocaust did not have the features of perfect punishments for all victims. For example, it lacked advance rule declaration, administration by proper authority, individualized proportional severity, and the least severity effective for all victims. Since the Holocaust harms did not exhibit the features of perfect punishments for all victims, the harms could not have been punishments from God. Hitler thought that annihilation of the Jewish people would be a morally justified and deserved punishment. He was wrong, and God would never agree with him on this point.
J. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust if they pre-arranged for all potential victims to experience benefits after the Holocaust which were logically contingent on the harms (e.g. care, character development, criminal justice, and compensation), which outweighed any harms from the Holocaust, and which occurred in life on Earth. But after the Holocaust, a substantial proportion of the victims received no logically contingent benefits and for most of them who did, the benefits were outweighed by the harms. And so, God would have had no involvement with this.
K. Other persons might justly allow the Holocaust because they acquired the advance informed consent of all potential victims to experience the harms of the Holocaust in exchange for assured consequent benefits. But there is no good evidence that such consent was acquired by anyone, even God, from any victim.
9. And so, God could not and did not have even one morally justified reason to allow the Holocaust.
10. Therefore, God cannot and does not exist.
The Third Way
11. Furthermore, if any tribunal is investigating or evaluating the occurrence of any horrible harm to a group of persons, then any person who has knowledge of any detail related to that occurrence should offer or present their testimony about what they know. Every person knowledgeable of the occurrence has a moral duty to come forward to the tribunal and testify to what they know, telling the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
12. The Nuremberg Trials constituted a tribunal investigating or evaluating the occurrence of the Holocaust.
13. And so, if God can exist and does exist, because he would be both omni-powerful and omni-moral, then at the Nuremberg Trials he would have testified as a witness, sworn to tell “the whole truth and nothing but the truth, so help me myself,” and this truth would have included any reasons for his allowing the Holocaust.
14. But God did not testify at the Nuremberg Trials.
15. Once again, therefore, God cannot and does not exist.
Now, prove that there is an error in it.
You make a number of the same erroneous speculations and assumptions about what God would or wouldn’t do if he was real, and all these have been refuted previously on this site.
BA: You make a number of the same erroneous speculations and assumptions about what God would or wouldn’t do if he was real,
GW: Absolutely not! I have made one major rational inference about what God would and would not do, if he were real. He would PREVENT the Holocaust and he would NOT ALLOW it. On the other hand, apparently you believe that he would ALLOW the Holocaust and would NOT PREVENT it. So, what is the difference in our positions? I have provided good evidence, reasons, and arguments for my position, but you have not. My inference is rational and correct, whereas your inference is irrational and incorrect. For the most part you just evade the main issues, talk in circles, or cite irrelevant and ancient Bible verses. That is not helpful.
BA: and all these have been refuted previously on this site.
GW: Absolutely not! You have refuted nothing I have said on this site. Not one thing.
GW: Just address the First Way in my argument. The basic idea is this:
1. If God did exist, he would PREVENT the Holocaust and it would never have occurred.
2. But the Holocaust did occur.
3. Therefore, God does not exist.
What could be more obvious than that? What could be more simple than that? The conclusion at #3 follows logically from the two premises. Agree? Yes, it does. The second premise is obviously true. Agree? Yes, it is. So, your only hope of refutation lies in the first premise. You have given us no reason whatsoever to think that this premise is false. You have either evaded a discussion of it or have given some foggy circular thinking. Can you do any better?
The existence of the universe proves God’s existence (Psalm 19:1-4). God warned that eating from one tree would cause death (Genesis 2:17). Thus, your 1st premise is false on the face of it.
BA: The existence of the universe proves God’s existence (Psalm 19:1-4).
GW: No, it doesn’t. The existence of the universe is consistent with many hypotheses, including the hypothesis “God created the universe,” but it does not prove that hypothesis. The existence of the universe is also consistent with the hypothesis “The universe has always existed and was never created.” But that one is not proven either. However, as I have mentioned to you many times, there are four good reasons to believe that the universe is eternal. And there are many sound arguments proving that God does not exist. So the claim of the Psalmist and you is just mistaken.
BA: God warned that eating from one tree would cause death (Genesis 2:17).
GW: But God doesn’t exist! This has been proven. So, any statement in the Bible which says, implies, or assumes that God exists is just mistaken. Ancient peoples invented god concepts. They were doing the best they could to try to explain, predict, and control the world in which they lived. Now we know better. Now we know that God does not exist and that there are no good reasons to believe in the other gods.
BA: Thus, your 1st premise is false on the face of it.
GW: You didn’t identify the premise or the argument which you are referring to here, but for now I will just assume that it is this one: “1. If God did exist, he would PREVENT the Holocaust and it would never have occurred.” You have not proven that this premise is false. You either refuse to discuss it or you talk in a vague circles.
GW: You apparently believe that if God did exist, he would ALLOW the Holocaust. Please present your case for that. BTW, the Bible does not even mention the Holocaust. The earliest part of it was written in roughly 1300 BCE, whereas the Holocaust occurred in the 1930s and 1940s CE. The Bible is irrelevant. You are on your own.
The design in the universe is obvious (Romans 1:20). Design only comes from intelligence (Hebrews 3:4).
You’re in denial of these facts (Psalm 14:1).
Your theories are seriously flawed.
BA: The design in the universe is obvious (Romans 1:20).
GW: The orderliness in the universe is obvious, but we do not know that it was designed by a designer. Probably not. Certainly not by God since we now know that he doesn’t exist.
BA: Design only comes from intelligence (Hebrews 3:4).
GW: Yes, I agree. But not all orderliness was designed.
BA: You’re in denial of these facts (Psalm 14:1).
GW: You are confused. Not all orderliness was designed.
BA: Your theories are seriously flawed.
GW: Nope. None is flawed. You have found no error in my Holocaust argument, and whenever I bring it up, you evade.
“Not all orderliness was designed”???? — You have got to be kidding!!!!
Your argument is insane! You’re wasting your time here.
BA: “Not all orderliness was designed”???? — You have got to be kidding!!!!
GW: No, I’m not kidding. The only orderliness we know to have been designed is the orderliness made by human beings. The rest of orderliness is just intrinsic to the universe. For example, our solar system is orderly. There is no proof it was made to be that way by any intelligent being. Also, we know that God doesn’t exist.
BA: Your argument is insane! You’re wasting your time here.
GW: Nope. My argument is correct. You have found no errors in it, so far. My argument is correct, even if you think I am wasting my time presenting it. It is the truth that matters, and I am happy to present it.
Humans did not design or make the universe. The orderliness in the universe long predates humans. Design only comes from intelligence. This super intelligence predates the universe. Your arguments are hopelessly deficient.
BA: Humans did not design or make the universe.
GW: Well of course they did not. Duh.
BA: The orderliness in the universe long predates humans.
GW: Well of course it did. Duh.
BA: Design only comes from intelligence.
GW: Yes, that is true. Design assumes a designer. A designer causes design.
BA: This super intelligence predates the universe.
GW: That’s where your train leaves the tracks. There is no good evidence that any super intelligence predates the universe. The universe is definitely orderly, but there is no proof that this orderliness was made, installed, or created by an intelligent being. You are just speculating. It’s ok to speculate as long as you don’t believe your mere speculations.
BA: Your arguments are hopelessly deficient.
GW: My arguments are all correct and rational. You have found no error in any of them. You assume that if God did exist, he would allow the Holocaust, but you have presented no rational argument for that. Your belief in God relies on faith, not reason.
Here is a new question for you and our readers: If some person, natural or supernatural, did create our universe, would that person be moral, immoral, or amoral, and why do you think so?
I’m not interested in the answers of ancient men from ancient books. I am interested in your independent opinion.
We don’t give any ‘independent opinions’ on this website. If that’s what you want, you need to go somewhere else.
This website is “BIBLE authenticity.” And that is is our perspective. Period. The Bible has all the answers we need.
If you don’t like that, you’re in the wrong place. We’re not wasting our time on ours, or others, opinions.
BA: We don’t give any ‘independent opinions’ on this website. If that’s what you want, you need to go somewhere else.
GW: Well, just give the opinion of Bible Authenticity!
BA: This website is “BIBLE authenticity.” And that is is our perspective. Period.
GW: Well, just give the opinion of Bible Authenticity. That’s all you do anyway, right?
BA: The Bible has all the answers we need.
GW: Apparently not, because you frequently drag in answers from science, philosophy, and history – you know, the disciplines with the good answers.
BA: If you don’t like that, you’re in the wrong place.
GW: No, I am exactly in the right place.
BA: We’re not wasting our time on ours, or others, opinions.
GW: You state the opinions of Bible Authenticity all the time and you challenge the opinions of others all the time. Is that a waste of your time?
GW: I will slightly revise the question to this: “If some person, natural or supernatural, did create our universe, would that person be moral, immoral, or amoral, and why does Bible Authenticity conclude so?” Perfectly good question. Why do you evade it? Why do you fear it?
“The Lord God almighty . . . created all things”—Revelation 4:8
“His works are perfect and all his ways are just”—Deuteronomy 32:4 NIV
“God’s way is unerring”—2 Samuel 22:31 NAB
“God . . . abounding in love and fidelity”—Exodus 34:6 NAB
BA: “The Lord God almighty . . . created all things”—Revelation 4:8
GW: We now know that this claim is false. “God does not exist” has now been proven by many arguments in which you have found no errors.
BA: “His works are perfect and all his ways are just”—Deuteronomy 32:4 NIV
GW: Although God does not exist, if he did exist, his ways would be perfect and just. The Holocaust would not have occurred.
BA: “God’s way is unerring”—2 Samuel 22:31 NAB
GW: Yes, if God did exist, he would make no moral errors – like allow the Holocaust.
BA: “God . . . abounding in love and fidelity”—Exodus 34:6 NAB
GW: Yes, if God did exist, he would be all-loving and he would not allow the Holocaust to occur.
GW: But you are not addressing the new question I raised: “If some person, natural or supernatural, did create our universe, would that person be moral, immoral, or amoral, and why does Bible Authenticity conclude so?” Perfectly good question.
Based on the scriptures provided to you in the last response, how would you answer your question?
BA: Based on the scriptures provided to you in the last response, how would you answer your question?
GW: Those scriptures you cited are just the written opinions of ancient authors, and they happen to be MISTAKEN. But I will answer my own question now.
GW: Here is today’s big question: “If some person, natural or supernatural, did create our universe, would that person be moral, immoral, or amoral, and why would you reach that conclusion?” While some people refuse to answer this question, especially religious people, I am happy to answer it.
If some person, natural or supernatural, did create our universe, then it is likely that the person would be MORAL, either mostly so or perfectly so. Why? Because this person would have to be very intelligent, rational, creative, and knowledgeable in order to be able to create a universe. And people who are like that, who have all those advanced qualities, are also very likely to be moral. Being empathetic is part of being moral, and empathy is really a type of knowledge. Being rational is part of being moral because a person needs to figure out the best ways of being respectfully cooperative. So this hypothetical creator person would be likely to make moral decisions in his/her/its design and production of a universe. For example, this person would design the universe in such a way that a Holocaust would never occur.
But the nature of our universe is incompatible with a MORAL creator. And thus we may conclude that it is very unlikely that some person, natural or supernatural, created our universe. Instead, there are at least four good reasons to conclude that our universe is probably eternal and was never created at all.
You’re in denial of the fact that both science and God’s Word, the Bible agree that the universe had a beginning, and the Bible says it was created by God (Genesis 1:1).
Design and organization only come from intelligence (Hebrews 3:4).
BA: You’re in denial of the fact that both science and God’s Word, the Bible agree that the universe had a beginning, and the Bible says it was created by God (Genesis 1:1).
GW: That is not a proven fact to accept or deny.
BA: Design and organization only come from intelligence (Hebrews 3:4).
GW: Once again, you are confusing order and design. We know that some order has been designed. Human persons design. But the order in the universe, evident even before human persons evolved, may not have be the result of design and probably was not. There are at least four good reasons to conclude that our universe is eternal and thus was never designed or created by a person, natural or supernatural.
GW: But anyway, you did not present an answer to the question of the day: ““If some person, natural or supernatural, did create our universe, would that person be moral, immoral, or amoral, and why would you reach that conclusion?”
Based on the scriptures shared with you, what do you think?
If you take all the verses of the Bible as a starting point and see how they are related to the question I posed, you will find that the verses can be classified into four groups: 1) those that imply that a creator would be moral, 2) those that imply that a creator would be immoral, 3) those that imply that a creator would be amoral, and 4) those which are just irrelevant to or neutral with respect to the question. The different authors wrote different stories and claims which lead to very different conclusions about the moral character of a hypothetical creator. So, the Bible as a whole gets you nowhere on the question or it gets you contradictory or inconsistent answers.
And so, I have selected science as the tool to give the best answer to the question. So far, the only persons we KNOW to exist are human persons. We can define and measure traits in human persons, and when we do this we find a significant and moderate positive correlation among these traits: intelligence, rationality, knowledge, empathy, creativity, and morality. Of course there are exceptions or outliers. For example, there are very intelligent people who are not very rational. Those who believe that Trump won the election in 2020 are good examples of this. However, in general, a human person who is high on any one of these six traits is likely to be high on the others. These six traits are intercorrelated to a significant and at least moderate degree. All of them might also be positively correlated with the number of synapses among neurons in the brain, but that part is speculative.
And so, from our sample of human persons we can generalize to a person we do not know to exist, i.e. a creator of our universe. In order to perform the great feat of creating a universe, this person would probably be highly intelligent, rational, knowledgeable, empathetic, and creative. That makes perfectly good sense. I say “probably” because we don’t know for sure. Nevertheless, if this person, this creator, is high on all five of these traits, then he/she/it is also probably going to be high on the trait of being moral. This is how I use science to reach my conclusion. You use what you know to predict what you don’t know. You use probabilities.
So, if there were a creator, it would probably be moral in its design, production, and creation of our universe. It would for example create human persons without the free will to commit assault, murder, and genocide. And so, the result would be no Holocaust. But we had a Holocaust, and there are millions of other horrible harms in our world that would not have occurred with the highly moral creator we would be likely to have, if there was a creator at all.
In the end, this is one more reason to think that there was no creator at all of our universe. Our universe is probably eternal, not created by any person, natural or supernatural.
I hope that addresses your question about the relation of the scriptures to the question I posed.
“All Scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB), the “God, who does not lie” (Titus 1:2 NAB). Therefore, all 31,000 verses, from Genesis through Revelation, are one harmonious whole, without any contradictions.
“Far be it from God to do wickedness; from the Almighty to do wrong! Surely, God cannot act wickedly, the Almighty cannot pervert justice” (Job 34:10,12 NAB). “His works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God, who does no wrong” (Deuteronomy 32:4 NIV).
“God is not subject to temptation to evil, and he himself tempts no one. Rather, each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire conceives and brings forth sin” (James 1:13,14 NAB).
Therefore, the Almighty Creator, Yahweh, is perfectly moral.
BA: “All Scripture is inspired by God” (2 Timothy 3:16 NAB), the “God, who does not lie” (Titus 1:2 NAB).
GW: First, this claim was written by a man nearly two millennia ago, and he was just mistaken. We now know that God does not exist, and so scripture could not have been written by God. Essentially, the man is saying “What I say here is from God.” He did not prove that. Secondly, this has no relevance to the question I posed.
BA: Therefore, all 31,000 verses, from Genesis through Revelation, are one harmonious whole, without any contradictions.
GW: This is a false statement. I have identified contradictions in the Bible to you previously. Also, even the first verse of the Bible is false. It says “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…” We know that verse to be false since God does not exist, as proven by many modern arguments, including my own. And so, we cannot trust the Bible. If you want me to come to trust the Bible, then you will need to do three things in this order: 1) Find a fatal error in any of my arguments against the existence of God, 2) Prove to me conclusively that God does exist, and 3) Prove what I have identified to be contradictions in the Bible are not actually contradictions. Start at #1 and we’ll go from there.
BA: “Far be it from God to do wickedness; from the Almighty to do wrong! Surely, God cannot act wickedly, the Almighty cannot pervert justice” (Job 34:10,12 NAB). “His works are perfect, and all his ways are just. A faithful God, who does no wrong” (Deuteronomy 32:4 NIV).
GW: Here you present verses from the Bible which fall into the first category I mentioned earlier, i.e. verses which depict God as moral, even perfectly moral. But there are other verses which depict God as IMMORAL and other verses which depict God as AMORAL. Taken altogether, God is depicted as a person with a kind of mental illness known as “split personality,” or “Multiple Personality Disorder” or “Dissociative Personality Disorder.” Sometimes he is moral. Sometimes he is immoral. And sometimes he is amoral. (Do you know what “amoral” is?)
BA: God is not subject to temptation to evil, and he himself tempts no one.
GW: If God did exist, I believe that claim would be true.
BA: Rather, each person is tempted when he is lured and enticed by his own desire. Then desire conceives and brings forth sin” (James 1:13,14 NAB).
GW: But if God would be perfectly moral if he existed, as you and I both apparently believe, then he would not create human persons who could be and would be tempted to commit assault, murder, and genocide. Those acts would never come to our minds. Do you see the problem? But those acts do come to the minds of some of us, and some of us choose to engage in them. Therefore, God does not and cannot exist. The evidence of our world falsifies the existence of God. To me this is obvious.
BA: Therefore, the Almighty Creator, Yahweh, is perfectly moral.
GW: We agree that if God did exist, he would be perfectly moral. But now we can see that he does not and cannot exist. In fact, I have shown that any creator of our universe, natural or supernatural, would be very likely to be moral rather than immoral or amoral.
GW: You have not given an answer relevant to any possible creator of our universe. And so, you really haven’t answered the question.
“To Sheol the wicked will depart, all the nations [and people] that forget God” (Psalm 9:18 NAB) [9:17]).
God calls those who deny his existence fools (Psalm 14:1).
“The wicked perish . . . like smoke they disappear” (Psalm 37:20 NAB).
The future for atheists is like smoke that has vanished, and disappeared forever.
BA: “To Sheol the wicked will depart, all the nations [and people] that forget God” (Psalm 9:18 NAB) [9:17]).
GW: This is an opinion of a now deceased man who wrote roughly 2000 years ago. He is not here to defend his opinion. Also, even at the time he wrote he never proved his opinion to be correct. So, I’m just going to call these kinds of statements “Ancient, undefended, and unproven.”
GW: Also, we now know that God does not exist. I have defended and proven this claim.
BA: God calls those who deny his existence fools (Psalm 14:1).
“The wicked perish . . . like smoke they disappear” (Psalm 37:20 NAB).
GW: Ancient, undefended, and unproven.
BA: The future for atheists is like smoke that has vanished, and disappeared forever.
GW: Each year for about the last 20, the percentage of atheists in the western world has been increasing. It is Christianity which is fading. This will continue since we atheists now have the better arguments, Christians are behaving so badly in many areas, e.g. sexual and financial scandals,, and the supporters of abortion and gay marriage are increasing.
Jesus said that “those who find” “the road that leads to life” “are few” (Matthew 7:13,14 NAB).
Also, as 1 Timothy 4:1 predicted, “The Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will turn away from the faith” (NAB), prophecy is being fulfilled. Some of these former “Christians” support unscriptural things as abortion (murder of unborn humans), and homosexual marriage, and are described further in the prophecy as “paying attention to deceitful spirits and demonic instructions” (1 Timothy 4:1 NAB).
Some professing Christians are described in Titus 1:16, “They claim to know God, but by their deeds they deny him. They are vile and disobedient and unqualified for any good deed” (NAB).
None of this, however, changes the truth about God, including his existence. “Nevertheless, God’s solid foundation stands” (2 Timothy 2:19 NAB). If something is true, it doesn’t depend on how many people believe it. Truth is truth, and is not determined by popular opinion.
In fact, “What if some were unfaithful? Will their infidelity nullify the fidelity of God? Of Course not! God must be true, even though every human being is a liar” (Romans 3:3,4 NAB).
The fact is that there is more factual support for God’s existence than ever before, and discoveries have strengthened the argument for God’s existence. The exact opposite is true of atheism.
Genesis 1:1 has more supporting evidence than ever!
BA: Jesus said that “those who find” “the road that leads to life” “are few” (Matthew 7:13,14 NAB).
GW: Ancient, undefended, and unproven. Also, for all human persons, even you and me, the road of life always leads to death.
BA: Also, as 1 Timothy 4:1 predicted, “The Spirit explicitly says that in the last times some will turn away from the faith” (NAB), prophecy is being fulfilled.
GW: Ancient, undefended, and unproven. The real “last times” will probably occur with the “heat death of our universe” which is now predicted to occur at least a hundred billion years in the future. If God did exist, would he create our universe to trend that way? No, of course not.
BA: Some of these former “Christians” support unscriptural things as abortion (murder of unborn humans), and homosexual marriage, and are described further in the prophecy as “paying attention to deceitful spirits and demonic instructions” (1 Timothy 4:1 NAB).
GW: Almost all verses of the Bible are ancient, undefended, and unproven, as is the case here. Here you are using an incorrect definition of “abortion”. Here is the correct one: “Abortion is the INTENTIONAL PREMATURE removal of a human zygote, embryo, or fetus (ZEF) living, growing, and developing inside a woman by any of a variety of means and for any of a variety of reasons, which would produce an elevated probability of harm and/or death to the ZEF. In essence abortion is a removal of an indwelling human organism which may or may not be killed in the process. However, abortion may be necessary or unnecessary, rational or irrational, moral or immoral, or legal or illegal, depending on the circumstances, especially the reasons for removal and the status of the ZEF as a person or a nonperson.” There you go.
GW: Gay marriage and abortion are ethical in most circumstances when they now occur.
BA: Some professing Christians are described in Titus 1:16, “They claim to know God, but by their deeds they deny him. They are vile and disobedient and unqualified for any good deed” (NAB).
GW: Almost all verses of the Bible are ancient, undefended, and unproven, as is the case here. The nature of God is described in the standard definition as follows: “God is 1) the hypothetical, unique, exclusive, supernatural, independent, spiritual, normally invisible person, conscious intelligent agent, or sentient entity. He is OMNI lasting (eternal), present, knowing, powerful, intelligent, rational, creative, and resilient (invincible). He is also OMNI loving, compassionate, and moral with respect to other persons. He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator), occasional interventionist in the world, and afterlife manager who decides the favorable or unfavorable disposition of human souls after they die. or 2) the greatest imaginable possible person (the “GIPPer”) who, if he existed, would possess all desirable traits to their highest degrees and no undesirable traits, and who would be worthy of our greatest respect, admiration, and worship.” However, we now know that God does not exist.
BA: None of this, however, changes the truth about God, including his existence.
GW: You cannot prove that 2+2=5 because 2+2 does not equal 5! Duh. I know that 2+2 does not equal 5. I know that it equals 4. Many persons have proven this. In an analogous manner, you cannot prove that God exists because God does not exist. I know that God does not exist. Many persons have proven this.
BA: “Nevertheless, God’s solid foundation stands” (2 Timothy 2:19 NAB).
GW: Almost all verses of the Bible are ancient, undefended, and unproven, as is the case here.
BA: If something is true, it doesn’t depend on how many people believe it. Truth is truth, and is not determined by popular opinion.
GW: I agree with your point here, but how do you determine if a proposition is true or false? You determine this by using Reason, as I do and as God would do, if he existed. If he existed, God would be perfectly rational, as stated in the standard definition. But you and the Bible authors do not use Reason to determine the truth value of propositions. So, let us reason together to find the truth.
BA: In fact, “What if some were unfaithful? Will their infidelity nullify the fidelity of God? Of Course not! God must be true, even though every human being is a liar” (Romans 3:3,4 NAB).
GW: Almost all verses of the Bible are ancient, undefended, and unproven, as is the case here. Also, God is not true. Only descriptive propositions are true or false. God is not a proposition; he is a hypothetical person, now proven to not exist. Clear language is so important in discussions like these.
BA: The fact is that there is more factual support for God’s existence than ever before, and discoveries have strengthened the argument for God’s existence. The exact opposite is true of atheism.
GW: I guess I must repeat this: You cannot prove that 2+2=5 because 2+2 does not equal 5. Duh. I know that 2+2 does not equal 5. I know that it equals 4. Many persons have proven this. In an analogous manner, you cannot prove that God exists because God does not exist. I know that God does not exist. Many persons have proven this. We may ignore all your supposed arguments for God’s existence until you prove that there are fatal errors in all the arguments against the existence of God which I have presented to you. You have not come close to doing that. In fact, you mostly evade the challenge.
BA: Genesis 1:1 has more supporting evidence than ever!
GW: Genesis 1:1 makes a claim. Unfortunately, it does not provide any supporting evidence for the claim. We already know that the claim is false since God does not exist. See above for more detail.
This website promotes the truth “that the scriptures may be fulfilled” (Mark 14:49 NAB). If you don’t like it, you’re at the wrong website.
BA: This website promotes the truth “that the scriptures may be fulfilled” (Mark 14:49 NAB). If you don’t like it, you’re at the wrong website.
GW: I always promote the truth. But “Houston, we have a problem.” The problem is that I disagree with you and the Bible authors about what the truth is. I like it that you TRY to promote the truth. I am at the right website.
GW: Informal Argument Against the Existence of God by Mathematical Analogy: 1-31-2024
1. Can you prove that “2+2=5″ is true?
2. No, you cannot.
3. Why not?
4. Because “2+2=5″ is a falsehood and you cannot prove a falsehood to be true.
5. We know that “2+2=4,” and it has been proven to be true.
6. Because “2+2=5″ is contradictory to “2+2=4,” then “2+2=5″ must necessarily be false.
7. No wonder you cannot prove that “2+2=5″ is true!
8. Can you prove that “God exists” is true?
9. No, you cannot.
10. Why not?
11. Because “God exists” is a falsehood and you cannot prove a falsehood to be true.
12. We know that “God does not exist,” and it has been proven to be true.
13. Because “God exists” is contradictory to “God does not exist,” then “God exists” must necessarily be false.
14. No wonder you cannot prove that “God exists” is true!
15. If you want to make any progress at all in supporting your WISH that “God exists,” then you must find at least one fatal error in one of the sound arguments proving that God does not exist.
16. But you will not be able to find a fatal error.
17. And so your WISH that “God exists” is hopeless. “God exists” is a falsehood. God does not exist!
“Avoid profane and silly myths”—1 Timothy 4:7 NAB
Where did “the laws of the universe” (Job 38:33 NLT) come from? Why do they exist? – They had to pre-date the universe.
Gravity, the speed of light, the speed of sound, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, etc., are not just theories. These forces actually exist. If these forces were not exactly what they are, our universe would not exist.
Laws can only come from a “lawgiver” (Isaiah 33:22).
Where did DNA, the blueprint of life, come from? – Could it have originated by chance? – Information can only come from intelligence.
“By faith we understand that the universe was ordered by the word of God, so that what is visible came into being through what is invisible”—Hebrews 11:3 NAB
Your mantra, “God does not exist,” is a myth.
Can something come from nothing?
Can life arise from non-life?
Could reproduction of species arise from chance?
See the edited version of our response to you on the website.
See the response I just made above.
BA: “Avoid profane and silly myths”—1 Timothy 4:7 NAB
GW: Yes, like the profane and silly myth that God exists. Avoid that one.
BA: Where did “the laws of the universe” (Job 38:33 NLT) come from? Why do they exist? – They had to pre-date the universe.
GW: If God did exist (he doesn’t), then he would have planned the laws of the universe before he created the universe. Duh! Isn’t this obvious? We agree on this point, so why do you keep bringing it up? Focus your mind on the points on which we disagree – on the existence of God.
BA: Gravity, the speed of light, the speed of sound, electromagnetism, the strong nuclear force, the weak nuclear force, etc., are not just theories. These forces actually exist.
GW: They are forces of nature. Your error is in assuming that some intelligence established them. You have no good evidence for that.
BA: If these forces were not exactly what they are, our universe would not exist.
GW: That is a useless tautology – “if the forces were not what the forces are, then the forces of our universe wouldn’t be here.” Completely useless.
BA: Laws can only come from a “lawgiver” (Isaiah 33:22).
GW: False. Once again, you are confusing the two types of laws (or the two definitions of “law”). One type of law is “a regular way in which the universe works.” Another type of law is “a prescription for behavior of persons which is decided by a person or group of persons.” Your error is in assuming that the regular ways in which the universe works were decided by one supernatural person, a creator god. You have no good evidence to support this hypothesis. But even it were true, this god would not be God. It has been proven that God does not exist.
BA: Where did DNA, the blueprint of life, come from? – Could it have originated by chance? –
GW: DNA came from the combination of the inherent chance and inherent orderliness of the universe, almost certainly.
BA: Information can only come from intelligence.
GW: You are confused. Information is an abstract concept which can be used to describe the patterns, structure, and orderliness of the universe. But this does not mean at all that universe was given orderliness by some supernatural being. You keep making the same error. You have no good evidence that there was a creator of the order in the universe. That is just speculation. But even if there were such a being, it would not be God. We have now proven that God does not exist. I gave you a new argument against the existence of God yesterday, and once again you have engaged in EVASION.
BA: “By faith we understand that the universe was ordered by the word of God, so that what is visible came into being through what is invisible”—Hebrews 11:3 NAB
GW: Ancient, undefended, and unproven. Let’s look at this more closely. The verse was authored by ancient men. They lived roughly two thousand years ago. They did not have the great tools we now have for thinking about reality, e.g. science. These men are dead. They cannot be here to defend their beliefs. If you are going to quote them, then it is your duty to defend them, but you never do. You are just satisfied with parroting them. And finally, these ancient men made claims which they never proved. So, we are under no obligation to accept anything they said. Ancient, undefended, and unproven.
BA: Your mantra, “God does not exist,” is a myth.
GW: Your mantra “God exists” is a myth, a delusion, a false belief. As I presented in my argument yesterday, it is impossible for you to prove that God exists, just as it is impossible for you to prove that 2+2=5. Why? Because both propositions are false and their contraries have been proven to be true! The only way for you to make any headway is for you to find a fatal error in any of the proofs against the existence of God which I have presented to you. But not only have you not done that, you even EVADE these proofs. You won’t deal with them directly. You dance around them.
BA: Can something come from nothing?
GW: Why do you keep brining up this question? We have agreed on the answer many times. Of course, something cannot come from nothing! Duh. Isn’t this obvious?
BA: Can life arise from non-life?
GW: Yes it can and it has! Non-living matter is not nothing! We learn this in the middle school years.
BA: Could reproduction of species arise from chance?
GW: No, not by chance alone! How many times do I need to tell you this? The process of reproduction can and did arise from a combination of chance AND orderliness, which are both intrinsic and eternal to the universe. I recommend that you go back to the simple example of H2O which I presented to you a couple of weeks ago. Think about how water came to exist through chance AND order. Then generalize that idea to life and DNA.
Why does order exist in the universe?
BA: Why does order exist in the universe?
GW: The “why” question here is irrelevant or inapplicable. If something cannot be any way other than the way it is, then there are no reasons or causes for it to be otherwise. Order just does exist in the universe. This is a brute fact. The order is intrinsic and eternal.
GW: BTW, if God did exist, you would say the same thing if I asked you “Why does God exist?” You would say that it’s just a brute fact which could not be otherwise. You would say God is intrinsic to reality and eternal.
GW: What is our universe? Our universe is the total of all dynamic-orderly energy-matter in space-time stemming from the primordial particle which was the subject of the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago. And God does not exist, as I and others have shown by our proofs.
You admit the universe is “orderly.” Order cannot, and does not, exist without design.
Where did the primordial particle come from?
BA: You admit the universe is “orderly.”
GW: Yes, of course it is orderly. We have always agreed on that point.
BA: Order cannot, and does not, exist without design.
GW: Do you claim to hypothesize this, believe this, or know this? Have you proven this claim? If so, let’s see the proof. I think your claim here is absolutely mistaken! Order can and does exist without design. Some examples are: stars, solar systems, plants, animals, human persons, brains, water, atoms, black holes, and all the patterns and regularities of our universe.
GW: We observe that human beings design and produce orderly objects. You mistakenly generalize this fact to the natural objects of the universe. You are making a serious category error. Some order is the result of design, but some order is not. Some orderliness is intrinsic and eternal to the universe.
BA: Where did the primordial particle come from?
GW: Where? It was right there! The particle was in its unique location. Actually, the particle was the universe itself, just in a different form from what it is now in. Remember: Something, even the primordial particle, cannot come from nothing.
No order can exist without intelligent design, including the “stars, solars systems . . . ,” etc., that you name.
So, “the primordial particle” came from “right there,” you say, and go on to contradict your claim by saying, “something, even the primordial particle, cannot come from nothing.”
That’s right! E=MC2. Energy transformed into matter at the start of the universe. Why? There is a cause for every effect. “By his great might and the strength of his power” (Isaiah 40:26 NAB), “In the beginning, when God created the heavens” (Genesis 1:1 NAB). This energy had to come from God. Remember, ‘something cannot come from nothing.’
You admit that “the particle was the universe itself.”
This singularity lasted only the tiniest fraction of a second, and the universe has been expanding ever since. “God . . . created the heavens and stretched them out” (Isaiah 42:5 NAB).
Scientific discoveries have supported what the Bible stated thousands of years ago, and have backed Atheism into a corner that it can’t get out of!
BA: No order can exist without intelligent design, including the “stars, solars systems . . . ,” etc., that you name.
GW: That is YOUR claim with which I totally disagree. So now, I challenge you to prove your claim. You can’t. You won’t. You can’t prove a falsehood to be true. For example, you can’t prove that 2+2=5 and you can’t prove that God exists. Why? Because they are false from the start.
BA: So, “the primordial particle” came from “right there,” you say, and go on to contradict your claim by saying, “something, even the primordial particle, cannot come from nothing.”
GW: What is the contradiction? Note your use of the word “where”. That word refers to location. At the time of the primordial particle, the universe was compressed into one small location smaller than an atom. But the energy within the primordial particle always existed and always will.
BA: That’s right! E=MC2. Energy transformed into matter at the start of the universe.
GW: No. Energy was not transformed into matter at the “start of the universe.” Apparently you mean the Big Bang which was the start of a new PHASE of our universe, not the start of its existence. This transition of some energy into matter did not occur till at least 250 thousand years after the Big Bang.
BA: Why? There is a cause for every effect.
GW: We agree that there is orderliness in the universe, and this orderliness includes a cause-effect network. But you mistakenly think that the orderliness was installed by a supernatural being. I think that the orderliness is intrinsic to the universe. That’s just the way the universe works! I am far more likely to be correct than you are. My view is supported by Reason, while your view is supported by Faith which is a vice.
BA: “By his great might and the strength of his power” (Isaiah 40:26 NAB), “In the beginning, when God created the heavens” (Genesis 1:1 NAB).
GW: You and the authors of these verses agree with each other. So what? You are both mistaken. Neither of you can prove your claim.
BA: This energy had to come from God.
GW: No, it didn’t have to. In fact, it didn’t. God does not exist. We know this.
BA: Remember, ‘something cannot come from nothing.’
GW: Of course I remember that! We have agreed on that point for a very long time. Energy did not come from nothing, and it did not come from God. It has always existed and always will exist. Remember the First Law of Thermodynamics?
BA: You admit that “the particle was the universe itself.”
GW: Of course I do. Do we also agree on this point? Probably.
BA: This singularity lasted only the tiniest fraction of a second,…
GW: You don’t know this. In fact, nobody knows this. If you think otherwise, then prove it. Actually, there was no “singularity.” That is just a mathematical concept referring to a geometrical point. It is not a physical concept. There was, however, a primordial particle. That is a physical concept.
BA: and the universe has been expanding ever since.
GW: We agree that the universe has been continuously expanding from the primordial particle to what it is now.
BA: “God . . . created the heavens and stretched them out” (Isaiah 42:5 NAB).
GW: This is a false verse. Maybe the author can be excused for not knowing any better, but you can’t. We now know that God does not exist. This has been proven by many arguments, some of them my own, in which you have found no errors. So, you have no excuse.
BA: Scientific discoveries have supported what the Bible stated thousands of years ago, and have backed Atheism into a corner that it can’t get out of!
GW: False. The first verse of the Bible is this: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…” This verse has been falsified by a combination of the disciplines of science, philosophy, and history. God does not exist.
GW: It is theism that is in the corner and is in decline. Just look at the polls showing the rise of the “Nones” and of atheists over the last 20 years. In a hundred years the atheists will constitute about 95% and the theists about 5% of the population. The trend is in that direction.
The Bible and science agree that:
1. The universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1).
2. Energy changed into matter to form the universe (Isaiah 40:26).
3. The universe has been expanding ever since (Isaiah 42:5).
4. Life only comes from life (Hebrews 3:4).
Science did not discover any of this until the last 150 years. The Bible said it thousands of years ago.
BA: The Bible and science agree that:
1. The universe had a beginning (Genesis 1:1).
GW: If you are referring to a beginning of existence, then your claim is false. Science does not know if the universe is eternal or had a beginning of its existence. Even the Bible is ambiguous on this point. Some verses point to a beginning out of nothing, and other verses point to a beginning out of something, some raw material. Since we agree that something cannot come from nothing, if God did exist, then he would have created our universe from himself, like starting new plants from cuttings.
BA: The Bible and science agree that:
2. Energy changed into matter to form the universe (Isaiah 40:26).
GW: False. According to science the universe consisted of energy in the primordial particle and already existed at that time, and so the universe was not formed by a change of energy to matter. The Bible does not mention energy and matter.
BA: The Bible and science agree that:
3. The universe has been expanding ever since (Isaiah 42:5).
GW: Maybe. Ever since what? According to science the expansion of our universe began with the Big Bang, and the expansion has continued. I believe that there is one verse in the Bible which might be loosely interpreted to indicate an expansion, although the ancients did not understand the nature of the universe at the time they wrote.
BA: The Bible and science agree that:
4. Life only comes from life (Hebrews 3:4).
GW: False. According to science the first life on Earth probably came from nonliving matter, but all life since then has come from life. According to the Bible, the first life on Earth was created by God either from nothing or from pre-existing materials, but all life since then has come from life.
BA: Science did not discover any of this until the last 150 years. The Bible said it thousands of years ago.
GW: False. Science discovered many facts in the last 150 years, but did not discover some of the things you mentioned above during that time. The Bible is full of false claims. For example, the first verse of that book is “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth…” We have recently discovered that God does not exist. Therefore, any statement in the Bible which mentions God is false. Sorry to rain on your parade.
“In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”—Genesis 1:1
“What is visible came into being through the invisible”—Hebrews 11:3 NAB
“Discoveries in the early 20th century have suggested that the universe had a beginning . . . ” (Wikipedia).
Hmmm . . . sounds like science discovered what God revealed thousands of years ago.
“He alone stretches out the heavens”—Job 9:8 NIV
“This is what God the LORD says–the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out”—Isaiah 42:5
“My own hands stretched out the heavens”—Isaiah 45:12 NIV
“My right hand spread out the heavens”—Isaiah 48:13 NIV
“God . . . stretched out the heavens by his understanding”—Jeremiah 10:12 NIV
“The LORD Almighty . . . stretched out the heavens by his understanding”—Jeremiah 51:14,15 NJB
“The LORD, who stretches out the heavens”–Zechariah 12:1 NIV
” . . . and has been expanding ever since”—Wikipedia
Hmmm . . . looks like science has discovered what God revealed through four different Bible writers and 7 Bible verses thousands of years ago about the expansion of the universe.
BA1: “In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth”—Genesis 1:1
GW1: False. God does not exist, and this has been proven.
BA1: “What is visible came into being through the invisible”—Hebrews 11:3 NAB
GW1: Maybe, maybe not. Matter is visible. Matter came from energy about 300K years after the Big Bang. Is energy visible? In some forms yes, in other forms no. You must consider the electromagnetic spectrum to determine which part of the continuum of energy is visible to human persons. However, keep in mind that there were no human persons when some energy was first converted to matter. If God did exist at that time, does this mean he had eyes? And maybe a brain? A body composed of matter? Hmmm.
BA1: “Discoveries in the early 20th century have suggested that the universe had a beginning . . . ” (Wikipedia).
GW1: The discoveries did not “suggest” anything. In the early 20th century, some scientists suggested that the universe may have had a beginning of its existence. However, since that time this hypothesis has received no evidentiary support. Some scientists, probably more than half, now believe that the universe is probably eternal. I agree with them. As we have said before, something cannot come from nothing.
BA1: Hmmm . . . sounds like science discovered what God revealed thousands of years ago.
GW1: But God does not exist. This has been proven by me and several other persons.
BA1: “He alone stretches out the heavens”—Job 9:8 NIV
GW1: False. He does not exist.
BA1: “This is what God the LORD says–the Creator of the heavens, who stretches them out”—Isaiah 42:5
GW1: False. God does not exist. This has been proven.
BA1: “My own hands stretched out the heavens”—Isaiah 45:12 NIV “God . . . stretched out the heavens by his understanding”—Jeremiah 10:12 NIV “The LORD Almighty . . . stretched out the heavens by his understanding”—Jeremiah 51:14,15 NJB “The LORD, who stretches out the heavens”–Zechariah 12:1 NIV
GW1: God does no stretching since he does not exist.
BA1: “My right hand spread out the heavens”—Isaiah 48:13 NIV
GW1: God does no spreading since he does not exist.
BA1: ” . . . and has been expanding ever since”—Wikipedia
GW1: Yes, our universe has been expanding since the Big Bang. But what happened before the Big Bang? Hmmm. We don’t know. You believe that God caused our universe to magically come into existence from nothing. This is known as a “God of the Gaps.” Whenever we don’t know something, i.e. there is a gap in our knowledge, you stuff God into the gap and say “God did it.” But that’s not how Reason works.
BA1: Hmmm . . . looks like science has discovered what God revealed through four different Bible writers and 7 Bible verses thousands of years ago about the expansion of the universe.
GW1: No, looks like those Bible verses contradict the findings of science, philosophy, and reason.
GW1: Do you agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.”
Bible principles agree in principle with your hypothesis. For example:
“Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die”—Romans 5:7 NIV
BA2: Bible principles agree in principle with your hypothesis.
GW2: I asked if you agree with the moral rule. You evaded my question. Please give an honest, open, clear, and direct answer.
BA2: For example: “Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die”—Romans 5:7 NIV
GW2: Irrelevant. The moral rule I presented said nothing about dying for anyone.
No, we answered your question, openly, honestly and directly. We use the Bible here on this website. Person opinions pale in comparison to God’s view.
Romans 5:7 gives the principle in a human perspective. But God’s “ways [are] higher than [human] ways, [God’s] thoughts [are] higher than [human] thoughts” (Isaiah 55:9). this is borne out by:
“But God proves his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us”—Romans 5:8 NAB
How was this?
It was by “Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people” (1 Timothy 2:5 NIV). Thus, “for those who are in Christ Jesus . . . Christ Jesus has freed [them] from the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:1,2 NAB).
Thus, God has “freed” all humans who wish to partake of it, from the most horrible harm of all, eternal death.
Therein is the epitome of your principle!
BA3: No, we answered your question, openly, honestly and directly. We use the Bible here on this website.
GW3: Nope. You present the opinions of the authors who wrote the verses of the Bible which you cite. You are just parroting their views. You aren’t thinking for yourself.
BA3: Person opinions pale in comparison to God’s view.
GW3: False. Opinions of hypothetical persons, proven to NOT exist, pale in comparison to opinions of real current persons. God doesn’t have a view since he does not exist. This has been proven.
BA3: Romans 5:7 gives the principle in a human perspective. But God’s “ways [are] higher than [human] ways, [God’s] thoughts [are] higher than [human] thoughts” (Isaiah 55:9).
GW3: This verse would be true, if God did exist, but unfortunately he doesn’t. You are begging the question of God’s existence.
BA3: this is borne out by: “But God proves his love for us in that while we were yet sinners Christ died for us”—Romans 5:8 NAB
GW3: Pure nonsense. If God did exist and he loved us, as you and the author here claimed, then God would have prevented the Holocaust. Allowing this horrible harm is hardly a display of love or morality. Duh.
BA3: How was this? It was by “Christ Jesus, who gave himself as a ransom for all people” (1 Timothy 2:5 NIV).
GW3: Absolutely pure nonsense! If God did exist, he would never arrange for the torture and murder of his own son as an atonement for the sins of others. Instead, he would protect his own son and would justly punish all sinners in accordance with the number and severity of their sins. You just don’t understand the hypothetical God.
GW3: Arranging for the torture and murder of your own son is immoral and illegal.
BA3: Thus, “for those who are in Christ Jesus . . . Christ Jesus has freed [them] from the law of sin and death” (Romans 8:1,2 NAB).
GW3: Absolutely not! If God did exist, he would not free anyone from “the law of sin and death.” All people would die and would go to hell for a period of time exactly proportional to the number and severity of their wrongful acts, and this would include you and me, no exceptions. You just don’t understand the hypothetical God.
BA3: Thus, God has “freed” all humans who wish to partake of it, from the most horrible harm of all, eternal death.
GW3: False. Nobody escapes death, not even you or me.
BA3: Therein is the epitome of your principle!
GW3: Not even close.
GW3: Try again. Do you agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.”
We already answered your question!
By the way, have you read the last article posted on this site, “When, and by whom, was the book of Isaiah written?”
GW4: I’ll start with your last question here.
BA4: By the way, have you read the last article posted on this site, “When, and by whom, was the book of Isaiah written?”
GW4: I scanned that article. It is about a minor point in which I am not interested.
BA4: We already answered your question!
GW4: But your answer was not your own! It belonged to somebody else. It belonged to a man who is dead, who lived and wrote a few thousand years ago. You were just parroting his answer. And ironically, it was irrelevant to the question itself.
GW4: When I ask you for an answer, an opinion, or a belief, I am asking for YOUR OWN, honest, open, clear, and direct one. Typically, you just quote the Bible. That is an EVASION! Your response demonstrates one of the reasons why Christianity is on the decline – the pastors, priests, leaders, and dilletants representing the cult – can’t or don’t think for themselves. They have been brainwashed. I know because I was once a member of the cult.
GW4: I’ll try again. Do YOU agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.” The four proper answers are: Yes, No, Maybe, or I don’t know. However, after presenting one of those, it is also proper to explain yourself. So, please tell us WHY you agree or disagree with the stated moral rule.
GW4: By the way, as an experiment I asked this question to ChatGPT: “Do you agree with this moral rule? ‘Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.’ Please explain your answer.”
GW4: Here is the answer I received from ChatGPT:
“As an AI language model, I don’t hold personal opinions or beliefs. However, I can offer analysis on the moral rule you presented.
The moral rule you’ve stated appears to align with a form of consequentialism, particularly a utilitarian perspective, which asserts that actions should be judged based on their consequences and seeks to maximize overall well-being or minimize suffering.
In this rule, the principle is to prevent horrible harm to any group of persons if one is able, with only a few exceptions. This reflects a strong commitment to preventing suffering and promoting well-being.
However, like any moral rule, it’s subject to scrutiny and critique. Some potential points of consideration might include:
Feasibility: It’s crucial to assess whether a person, X, is genuinely able to prevent the horrible harm. Sometimes what seems feasible might not be in reality due to various constraints such as resources, knowledge, or capabilities.
Definition of “Horrible Harm”: What constitutes “horrible harm” could be subjective and context-dependent. Different individuals or groups may have varying interpretations of what constitutes “horrible harm,” leading to potential conflicts or challenges in applying the rule universally.
Exceptions: The rule mentions “only a few exceptions,” but determining what those exceptions are and who gets to decide them can be complex. It raises questions about whose perspectives and values are prioritized in defining these exceptions.
Trade-offs: Preventing harm in one scenario might lead to harm elsewhere or have unintended consequences. The rule doesn’t explicitly address how to navigate such trade-offs, which are common in moral decision-making.
Individual vs. Group: The rule prioritizes the prevention of harm to groups of persons. This may raise questions about the treatment of individuals within those groups and how their rights or well-being are considered in the decision-making process.
Overall, while the moral rule presented emphasizes a commitment to preventing harm and promoting well-being, its practical application and universal acceptance may be subject to debate and interpretation due to the complexities inherent in moral reasoning and decision-making.”
GW4: Pretty cool, huh? This answer is far more relevant and intelligent than the one you gave in which you quoted antiquated Bible verses. All the issues raised by ChatGPT in its answer are worthy of discussion. Would you like to discuss them?
You’re over-awed by an answer given by a human designed and programmed AI website. This website is Bible Authenticity, and all the articles and answers we provide on this website are built around this viewpoint. If you don’t like it, perhaps you’re at the wrong site.
Albert Einstein is considered to have been a very intelligent man. Your comments remind us of something he said:
“The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation . . . His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement the harmony natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.”
Even though we, at this website are not scientists, we feel the same way as Einstein expressed in his statement.
“Shall what is formed say to the who formed it, ‘You did not make me’? Can the pot say to the potter, ‘You know nothing’?—Isaiah 29:16 NIV
This is why we do not express any personal opinions on this website. “The nations are like a drop in a bucket” to God (Isaiah 40:15 NIV).
“‘Who has known the mind of the Lord, so to instruct him?’ But we do have the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16 NIV) in the Bible. This the perspective of this website, which diametrically contrasts with your perspective.
The recently posted article about the book of Isaiah provides much evidence it was written by the prophet Isaiah in the 8th century BCE, and therefore accurately predicted the overthrow of the Neo-Babylonian Empire by the Persian leader Cyrus in the 6th century BCE, and accurately foretold many details about Jesus’ life.
BA5: You’re over-awed by an answer given by a human designed and programmed AI website.
GW5: False. I am appropriately awed by ChatGPT. You are under-awed by it. The answer to my question which I received from it is far superior in relevance, depth, intelligence, and knowledge to the answer I got from you.
BA5: This website is Bible Authenticity, and all the articles and answers we provide on this website are built around this viewpoint. If you don’t like it, perhaps you’re at the wrong site.
GW5: If you don’t like my complaints, perhaps you should modify the way you answer our questions. You know, it is possible for you to give YOUR OWN, honest, open, clear, and direct answers to questions WITHOUT parroting the ancient Bible authors WHILE STILL being influenced by them. In addition, you aren’t even selecting RELEVANT quotes. Sometimes there are not RELEVANT quotes to be found in the Bible on some important philosophical or religious questions.
BA5: Albert Einstein is considered to have been a very intelligent man. Your comments remind us of something he said: “The scientist is possessed by the sense of universal causation . . . His religious feeling takes the form of a rapturous amazement the harmony natural law, which reveals an intelligence of such superiority that, compared with it, all the systematic thinking and acting of human beings is an utterly insignificant reflection.”
GW5: Well first, Albert Einstein was an atheist for most of his life. Secondly, in the quote you offered here (provide reference) Einstein may have made the same error you make – assuming the orderliness in our universe was put there by some person, natural or supernatural.
BA5: Even though we, at this website are not scientists, we feel the same way as Einstein expressed in his statement.
GW5: Well, do you feel the same way as Einstein expressed in the following quotes?
“The word god is for me nothing more than the expression and product of human weaknesses, the Bible a collection of honourable, but still primitive legends which are nevertheless pretty childish. No interpretation no matter how subtle can (for me) change this.”
Letter to philosopher Eric Gutkind, January 3, 1954
“It was, of course, a lie what you read about my religious convictions, a lie which is being systematically repeated. I do not believe in a personal God and I have never denied this but have expressed it clearly. If something is in me which can be called religious then it is the unbounded admiration for the structure of the world so far as our science can reveal it.”
Albert Einstein, letter to an atheist (1954), quoted in Albert Einstein: The Human Side, edited by Helen Dukas & Banesh Hoffman.
“I cannot imagine a God who rewards and punishes the objects of his creation, whose purposes are modeled after his own–a God, in short, who is but a reflection of human frailty. Neither can I believe that the individual survives the death of his body, although feeble souls harbor such thoughts through fear or ridiculous egoism.”
from “Religion and science,” New York Times Magazine, November 9, 1930.
BA5: “Shall what is formed say to the who formed it, ‘You did not make me’? Can the pot say to the potter, ‘You know nothing’?—Isaiah 29:16 NIV
GW5: This is irrelevant to the question I asked you. You are still evading.
BA5: This is why we do not express any personal opinions on this website. “The nations are like a drop in a bucket” to God (Isaiah 40:15 NIV).
GW5: False. You often express your personal opinions in addition to obsessively quoting Bible verses, some of which are irrelevant and most of which are false and/or irrational. Also, God does not exist, as I and several other persons have proven.
BA5: “‘Who has known the mind of the Lord, so to instruct him?’ But we do have the mind of Christ” (1 Corinthians 2:16 NIV) in the Bible. This the perspective of this website, which diametrically contrasts with your perspective.
GW5: This quote is also irrelevant to my question. I’ll try again. Do YOU agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.” The four proper answers are: “Yes, No, Maybe, or I don’t know.” However, after presenting one of those, it is also proper to explain yourself. So, please tell us WHY you agree or disagree with the stated moral rule.
You say, “Einstein may have made the same error . . . assuming the orderliness in the universe was put there by some person.”
If you’re walking for miles through a large forest and unexpectedly come upon a house, would it be safe to assume it “was put there by some person[s]”?
BA6: You say, “Einstein may have made the same error . . . assuming the orderliness in the universe was put there by some person.”
GW6: Yes, I said that. You provided no reference or link for that alleged Einstein quote, so I am uncertain that it is accurate. But if it is accurate, then it appears that at some time in Einstein’s life, probably when he was younger, he mistakenly thought they way you think – that the orderliness of the universe was designed and installed by some super intelligent person. This would have been a mistake in his thinking, just as it is a mistake in your thinking. It is more rational to think and it is more likely that the orderliness of the universe is intrinsic and eternal, that this is just a brute fact.
BA6: If you’re walking for miles through a large forest and unexpectedly come upon a house, would it be safe to assume it “was put there by some person[s]”?
GW6: Yes, it would! But why would it be safe to assume this? Because we have overwhelming evidence of or knowledge of the process of human persons designing and constructing houses. On the other hand, we do not have knowledge of any person or persons designing, creating, or producing any object in nature, such as an atom, a water molecule, a human being, a bacterium, a solar system, the Earth, or our universe. We have evidence that all these things existed BEFORE human persons existed and we have no evidence that any other person or persons even existed before human persons. In addition, of course, we know that God does not exist; this has been proven.
GW6: The Argument from Design for the Existence of God is very old and was popularized by William Paley’s version known as “The Watchmaker Argument” in the 1800s. However, all versions of this argument are based on an analogy to human design and production and they have no corroborating evidence.
GW6: And still you continue to evade my question: Do YOU agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.” The four proper answers are: “Yes, No, Maybe, or I don’t know.” However, after presenting one of those, it is also proper to explain yourself. So, please tell us WHY you agree or disagree with the stated moral rule.
If there is no God, and the universe is eternally old, the universe would be at maximum entropy and all temperatures in it would be equalized.
Since the facts show that the entropy in the universe is at or near zero, and there are vast temperature differences, the universe cannot be eternally old, and there must a God who maintains it to keep it at or near zero entropy.
BA7: If there is no God, and the universe is eternally old, the universe would be at maximum entropy and all temperatures in it would be equalized.
GW7: This is an irrational conclusion. First, God does not exist, and this has been already proven. Secondly, the universe is probably eternal, and there are four good reasons to think so, which I have presented to you before. Thirdly, we only know that entropy began increasing at the Big Bang, has continued to increase, and is expected to reach a maximum over a trillion years from now. At that time the universe won’t cease to exist; it will just be in a different state from the way it is now. Life, intelligence, machines, and useful work will all be impossible. Fourthly, if God did exist, he would never create a universe with its process leading to the extinction of humanity, as would occur with this “heat death.” And lastly, it is possible that increasing entropy will flip to decreasing entropy and the universe will have a Big Crunch.
GW7: Relevant quote: “The time for all ordinary matter to disappear has been calculated to be 10^40 years from now. Beyond this, only black holes will remain. And even they will evaporate away after some 10^100 years…At this point, the universe will be nearly a vacuum. Particles that remain, like electrons and light particles (photons), are then very far apart due to the universe’s expansion and rarely – if at all – interact. This is the true death of the universe, dubbed the ‘heat death’”.
https://phys.org/news/2015-09-fate-universeheat-death-big-rip.html
BA7: Since the facts show that the entropy in the universe is at or near zero, and there are vast temperature differences, the universe cannot be eternally old, and there must a God who maintains it to keep it at or near zero entropy.
GW7: False. Entropy is not now and will never be “at or near zero.” It was very low just before the Big Bang and is expected to reach a maximum at the “heat death.” All this change in entropy occurs within a universe which is probably eternal, so the Big Bang did not mark the beginning of the existence of the universe and the Heat Death will not mark the end of the existence of the universe. God is not required for any of this. In fact, if God did exist, entropy would not increase to a point where all life would become extinct. So the process of entropy is actually evidence against the existence of God.
GW7: Just a few days ago, I discovered this very good video about entropy.
“I don’t believe the 2nd law of thermodynamics. (The most uplifting video I’ll ever make.)” By Sabine Hossenfelder
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=89Mq6gmPo0s
GW7: Once again, you avoided my question: Do YOU agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.” The four proper answers are: “Yes, No, Maybe, or I don’t know.” However, after presenting one of those, it is also proper for you to explain yourself. So, please tell us WHY you agree or disagree with the stated moral rule.
GW7: Why do you continue to evade this particular question? I actually know why.
Your statement, “entropy began at the Big Bang,” is an admission that the universe had a beginning. (Genesis 1:1)
BA8: Your statement, “entropy began at the Big Bang,” is an admission that the universe had a beginning. (Genesis 1:1)
GW8: False. You are misrepresenting my view. Please don’t do that. I neither admit nor believe that the universe had a beginning. Genesis 1:1 is absolutely false. I believe that the universe is eternal. This means it never began to exist and will never end its existence. (It is the same as you believe for God. You believe that he not only exists but is eternal.) It is my correct belief that entropy was at some finite level just before the Big Bang and then it began to increase at the Big Bang, has continued to increase, and will continue to increase to some maximum level, resulting in the “Heat Death.” See the quote and the video on entropy I presented last time.
GW8: Once again, you evaded my question: Do YOU agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.” The four proper answers are: “Yes, No, Maybe, or I don’t know.” However, after presenting one of those, it is also proper for you to explain yourself. So, please tell us WHY you agree or disagree with the stated moral rule.
GW8: Why do you continue to evade this particular question? I actually know why.
Of course, you don’t want to openly admit the universe had a beginning, because that would seriously undermine your atheism. So, we’ll clarify our last comment to you by adding the adverb, “inadvertently” into the statement that ‘you admitted the inverse had a beginning.’
You perhaps do not realize it, but your statement about entropy increasing in the from the point of the ‘Big Bang’ until a ‘heat death’ occurs, is such a backhanded admission, whether you like it or not, because if the universe is eternally old, this would already have occurred.
You see, the facts all support a Creator God, and prove atheism false!
BA9: Of course, you don’t want to openly admit the universe had a beginning, because that would seriously undermine your atheism.
GW9: Actually it would not undermine my atheism at all! My atheism is now based on sound proofs that God does not exist, NONE of which depend on the eternity of the universe. However, if the universe had a beginning, then there are several nontheistic explanations, one of which would be true: 1) A natural force in another universe caused the beginning of our universe. 2) A powerful person or group of persons in another universe caused the beginning of our own. 3) Something unknown caused our universe to begin. 4) Our universe began to exist without any cause at all.
GW9: On the other hand, you don’t want to admit that the universe is probably eternal because if that is true, it destroys any belief in the existence of God. Why? Because part of the standard definition of “God” is this: “He fills the roles of cosmos designer and producer (creator)…” No beginning, no creation. No creation, no creator!
BA9: So, we’ll clarify our last comment to you by adding the adverb, “inadvertently” into the statement that ‘you admitted the inverse had a beginning.’
GW9: That makes no sense.
BA9: You perhaps do not realize it, but your statement about entropy increasing in the from the point of the ‘Big Bang’ until a ‘heat death’ occurs, is such a backhanded admission, whether you like it or not, because if the universe is eternally old, this would already have occurred.
GW9: False. You are misunderstanding the topics of our universe, eternity, Big Bang, increasing entropy, and The Big Freeze. I’ll try my best to explain this to you. Our universe has probably existed infinitely into the past, although we do not know what events occurred in it before the Big Bang. This Big Bang was an event which marked a new phase in our universe. At the beginning of this phase entropy was at a finite low level. But with the Big Bang, not only did the universe begin expansion, the entropy also began to increase. Most scientists now predict that entropy will increase so much in over a trillion years that the universe will reach a new phase sometimes called “The Heat Death” and sometimes called “The Big Freeze.” This is when all galaxies, black holes, stars, planet, and even atoms themselves have broken down and thinned out. No life of work will be possible. And it will be very cold. We have no idea what would happen after that, if anything. But the universe would go on existing into the infinite future.
GW9: Try this thought experiment: Imagine that you are eternal. Your birth would be analogous to the Big Bang. Your apparent death would be analogous to The Big Freeze. And yet, somehow you would have an infinite life before your birth and an infinite life after your apparent death. Your life would have events and phases in it, just like the universe does.
GW9: Here is a new argument for you:
1. If God did exist, entropy would not increase and The Big Freeze would never occur. Why? Because God would never commit genocide. That would be immoral, and God would be perfectly moral.
2. But entropy is increasing and The Big Freeze is now predicted to occur by most scientists.
3. Therefore, God does not exist.
BA9: You see, the facts all support a Creator God, and prove atheism false!
GW9: False. Just the opposite is the case. There are now many proofs that God does not exist. In addition, there is no good evidence that the universe began to exist or was created. No creation, no creator. No creator, no God.
GW9: The validity of the moral rule on prevention of horrible harm is actually more important than the existence of God, and that is why I keep asking you about your view of it. And yet you keep evading it. We know why. But I’ll try again: Do YOU agree with this moral rule? “Any person X should prevent any horrible harm to any group of persons Z, if X is able, with only a few exceptions.” The four proper answers are: “Yes, No, Maybe, or I don’t know.” However, after presenting one of those, it is also proper for you to explain yourself. So, please tell us WHY you agree or disagree with the stated moral rule.
Let’s see if we can figure this out . . .
“If the universe had a beginning . . . ” something from another universe may have caused it to begin. Please tell us about all the other universes that have been discovered.
“Something unknown may caused our universe to exist.” Hmmmm . . . brilliant!
Maybe “our universe began to exist without any cause.” Really? Name one thing that began to exist that didn’t have a cause.
You love fiction obviously!
BA10: Let’s see if we can figure this out . . .
GW10: Yes, of course. I am glad to help you figure it out.
GW9: “If the universe had a beginning . . . ” something from another universe may have caused it to begin.
BA10: Please tell us about all the other universes that have been discovered.
GW10: So far, no other universes have been discovered, but it is possible that some will be, and many cosmologists believe that they will be. And so, it is a viable hypothesis which I listed. Nothing wrong with that.
BA10: “Something unknown may caused our universe to exist.” Hmmmm . . . brilliant!
GW10: Yes, it is brilliant! Why? Because it acknowledges that sometimes the best answer to a question is “We don’t know.” So, listing an unknown cause is also a legitimate hypothesis.
BA10: Maybe “our universe began to exist without any cause.” Really?
GW10: Yes, really! This is a logical possibility, so it is fine to list it as a legitimate hypothesis.
BA10: Name one thing that began to exist that didn’t have a cause.
GW10: I don’t know of any such thing, but since it is a logical possibility, it is a legitimate hypothesis.
BA10: You love fiction obviously!
GW10: I love legitimate logically possible hypotheses! These are not fiction! What is fiction? It is a story known to be false and written to entertain. However, of the four hypotheses I listed, I think these two are the most likely to be true, if our universe is not eternal: 1) A natural force in another universe caused the beginning of our universe. 2) A powerful person or group of persons in another universe caused the beginning of our own. In the latter, the person or group of persons could be natural or possibly supernatural. However, we know it could not be God. Why? Because we have proven that God does not exist! A natural very advanced alien could do it, if any exists. The problem here is that when you latch your mind onto a false hypothesis, i.e. that God exists, then you close your mind to other possibilities. That’s how the closed mind works.
GW10: So far, you have not resolved a contradiction in your own account of the universe. On the one hand, you have claimed that something cannot come from nothing, but on the other hand you have also claimed that God created something out of nothing, i.e. our universe out of nothing. Please address this contradiction.
GW10: You love to criticize the hypotheses of other people, but you whine when somebody criticizes your favorite hypothesis – that God exists.
GW10: And you still evaded the moral question.
So, without any evidence, you believe that there are other universes somewhere, that our universe may have been caused by something unknown, or that perhaps our universe exists without any cause, but you have proof that the Almighty Creator God of the Bible does not exist!
As Jesus said, “‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’ In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them'” (Matthew 13:13-15 NIV).
BA11: So, without any evidence, you believe that there are other universes somewhere, that our universe may have been caused by something unknown, or that perhaps our universe exists without any cause, but you have proof that the Almighty Creator God of the Bible does not exist!
GW11: The first part of your claim here is absolutely false and the second part is mostly true. Let’s unpack it.
GW11: I have consistently asserted that I believe that the universe is eternal and I have given you four good reasons to think so. You completely ignored my primary belief on the eternal universe in your claim above. So you are MISREPRESENTING what I have clearly said for a long time.
GW11: Next, I presented four possibilities, options, or hypotheses for the scenario in which the universe is not eternal but came into existence. Here they are again: “1) A natural force in another universe caused the beginning of our universe. 2) A powerful person or group of persons in another universe caused the beginning of our own. 3) Something unknown caused our universe to begin. 4) Our universe began to exist without any cause at all.” I DO NOT BELIEVE ANY OF THESE! So, for you to say that I believe any of them is another MISREPRESENTATION of my conclusions. STOP doing that! It is UNETHICAL for you to make these MISREPRESENTATIONS. However, if the universe is not eternal (remember that I believe it is), then I think #1 above is the most likely possibility. Which do you think is the most likely of the four?
GW11: There are many philosophers and cosmologists who do believe that there are many universes besides our own. They call all these universes together “the multiverse”. This is not my view, but you need to be aware of this hypothesis and belief.
GW11: I have proof, actually many proofs, that God does not exist. Neither you nor anyone else has found a single error in any of these proofs. And so, if the universe is not eternal (remember that I believe it is), then God as creator is off the table. That is impossible. We know that God does not exist!
BA11: As Jesus said, “‘Though seeing, they do not see; though hearing, they do not hear or understand.’ In them is fulfilled the prophecy of Isaiah: ‘You will be ever hearing but never understanding; you will be ever seeing but never perceiving. For this people’s heart has become calloused; they hardly hear with their ears, and they have closed their eyes. Otherwise they might see with their eyes, hear with their ears, understand with their hearts and turn, and I would heal them’” (Matthew 13:13-15 NIV).
GW11: If Jesus ever said this (we don’t know he did since our sources are so poor), then he was just mistaken. Jesus probably believed that God did exist and that he had a special relationship with God – either his son, his equal, his associate, his prophet, or his messenger. And he was simply wrong. His religious beliefs were common for his era, but they have been proven to be false. We now know, beyond any reasonable doubt, that God does not exist. Sure, we all wish that God did exist, but wishing doesn’t make it so.
GW11: Oh, BTW, you still avoided the moral question I posed. We know why.
Thanks for clarifying your beliefs. Your firm belief, we gather from your statements here, is that the universe is eternal. What proof do you have of this?
BA12: Thanks for clarifying your beliefs.
GW12: You are welcome.
BA12: Your firm belief, we gather from your statements here, is that the universe is eternal. What proof do you have of this?
GW12: Good question. I want to start by defining some terms:
A “belief” is a descriptive or normative proposition which a person holds to be true, probably true, correct, or probably correct and which may or may not be grounded in reason. Belief is not the same as knowledge or faith.
Our “universe” is the totality of orderly-dynamic-random energy-matter in space-time resulting from the primordial particle and the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago.
“Eternal” is everlasting or infinitely existing into the past, the present, and the future.
A “proof” is an organized demonstration by the use of conceptual analysis, logic, evidence, and proper inference that a given proposition is either true or false, either to a certainty or beyond a reasonable doubt.
Based on these definitions I will answer your question.
GW12: It is my belief that our universe is probably eternal, but I do not have a proof of this. On the other hand, I have knowledge that God does not exist, and I do have proof of this.
GW12: To believe a proposition it is not necessary to have a proof of it, but for the belief to be rational you must have good evidence, reasons, and/or arguments to support it. This is the case with my belief that the universe is eternal.
GW12: Although not yet known for certain, there are at least four good reasons why our universe is likely to be eternal:
1. The First Law of Thermodynamics: “Energy-matter can be neither created nor destroyed.” Since energy is the most basic component of our universe and it cannot be created, then it must be eternal.
2. Ockham’s Razor: “The simplest explanation is usually the best.” Or “The explanation with the fewest necessary assumptions is the most likely to be true.” Our universe exists, and assuming it to be eternal is the simplest explanation which entails the fewest assumptions. Assumptions not required are “The universe had a beginning.” “The beginning of the universe had a cause.” “The cause of the beginning of the universe was a person or intelligent agent.” “God was the person or intelligent agent which caused the beginning of the universe.”
3. Rational Inference: Because each moment in time or each event, among trillions of them, since the Big Bang has been preceded by another, it is highly likely that the Big Bang itself was preceded by another moment in time or event, and that one preceded by another, and by another, infinitum.
4. The Hume-Sagan Dictum: “Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.” It is an extraordinary claim that the universe began to exist from nothing. No extraordinary evidence has yet been presented in support or confirmation of this extraordinary claim.
GW12: If our universe is eternal, then no creation, no creator. And no creator, no God.
Scientists have discovered the Cosmic Background Radiation, which proves the universe had a beginning.
The expansion of the universe also proves the universe had a beginning.
Also, you believe that entropy in the universe is increasing. This, if it were true, proves the universe has not existed eternally, but had a beginning, since entropy has not reached its maximum.
You believe that energy is eternal, which is in agreement with the Bible. It refers to “God’s . . . eternal power” (energy). Notice:
“Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature –have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse”—Romans 1:20 NIV
“The Eternal God” (Genesis 21:33 NIV) has “eternal power” (energy), which he transformed into matter at the start of the universe.
“Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens. Who created all these? Hw who brings out the starry host one by one and calls each of them by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing”—Isaiah 40:26 NIV
God created and maintains the universe by his “great power” and “stretches out the heavens” (Psalm 104:2 NIV), causing the universe to expand forever at the critically perfect rate, so that the universe will last eternally into the future.
BA13: Scientists have discovered the Cosmic Background Radiation, which proves the universe had a beginning.
GW13: Half true and half false. Yes, scientists discovered the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), but this discovery proved that our universe has been expanding since the Big Bang 13.7 billion years ago. The universe existed before the BB and is probably eternal for the reasons I stated last time.
BA13: The expansion of the universe also proves the universe had a beginning.
GW13: False. The expansion could have and would have occurred whether the universe had a beginning or not. So, it is compatible with either hypothesis. The more likely hypothesis, however, is that the universe is eternal and so had no beginning, and the expansion just started at the moment of the BB, one finite point in time within eternity.
BA13: Also, you believe that entropy in the universe is increasing.
GW13: I don’t merely believe this, I know it! The scientists who study this kind of thing know it. If you do not know it, then you are ill informed.
BA13: This, if it were true, proves the universe has not existed eternally, but had a beginning, since entropy has not reached its maximum.
GW13: False. The time between two moments is finite, not infinite. The time between the Big Bang and Maximum Entropy is finite. This finite period has not yet ended. And so, our universe is probably eternal, and this specific time period, which we might call “The Increasing Entropy Phase,” falls WITHIN the eternal history of our universe.
BA13: You believe that energy is eternal,…
GW13: I don’t merely believe this, I know it! The scientists who study this kind of thing know it. If you do not know it, then you are ill informed.
BA13: which is in agreement with the Bible. It refers to “God’s . . . eternal power” (energy).
GW13: If God did exist, yes, he would be all-powerful and eternal, but unfortunately he does not exist. I don’t merely believe this, I know it! We rational experts who have studied this kind of thing know it. If you do not know it, then you are ill informed.
BA13: Notice: “Since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities–his eternal power and divine nature –have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that people are without excuse”—Romans 1:20 NIV
GW13: False again! The world is probably eternal. No beginning, no creation. No creation, no creator. No creator, no God. It’s really that simple. However, we have independent proofs that God does not exist. We can tell that God does not exist because of what events have and have not occurred in our universe.
BA13: “The Eternal God” (Genesis 21:33 NIV) has “eternal power” (energy), which he transformed into matter at the start of the universe.
GW13: We all wish that God did exist. Life would be so much better. If God did exist, I would worship him and follow his moral code. Wouldn’t we all? But sadly, God does not exist. This has been proven. We are on our own, my fellow citizens of the universe! Let’s work together to make our Earth a better place.
BA13: “Lift up your eyes and look to the heavens. Who created all these?
GW13: Who? Eternal universe, no creation. No creation, no creator. But even if there were a creator, we know it wasn’t God. The nature of our universe proves it could not have been God. Also, if God did exist, he would have revealed himself to ALL of us many times. I think it would be every seven years. At my age of 74 I would have interacted with God about 11 times! Pretty cool, huh? You can estimate this for yourself. Just take your current chronological age and divide by 7. That is the number of times you would have seen God and listened to his lecture, if he existed.
BA13: Hw[He] who brings out the starry host one by one and calls each of them by name. Because of his great power and mighty strength, not one of them is missing”—Isaiah 40:26 NIV
GW13: False. The current finite number of stars in our universe changes all the time. Every star has a “lifespan.” Every day, some stars are “born” and some stars “die.” So, there are no “missing stars.” And besides, God does not exist. We now know this.
BA13: God created and maintains the universe by his “great power” and “stretches out the heavens” (Psalm 104:2 NIV), causing the universe to expand forever at the critically perfect rate, so that the universe will last eternally into the future.
GW13: Yes, the universe will last forever into the future and has lasted forever into the past, but God does not exist.
GW13: New Argument: 1) If God did exist, then we would ALL know that he exists. Why? Because he would reveal himself to ALL of us at the SIMULTANEOUSLY about every 7 years. 2) But some of us believe that he exists and some of us know that he doesn’t exist. So, NOT ALL of us know that God exists. 3) Therefore, God does not exist. Pretty cool, huh? I have at least a dozen proofs now that God does not exist. I have been producing them since about 2010 when my first book came out.
GW13: And you still evaded analysis and comment on the moral rule. We know why.
The CMB records the leftover sound of the Big Bang at the beginning of the universe, and the redshift of light waves from distant galaxies proves the expansion of the universe from the Big Bang, both of which prove the universe had a beginning.
Science thus agrees with the Bible that the universe had a “beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
BA14: The CMB records the leftover sound of the Big Bang at the beginning of the universe,
GW14: That is not quite right. It records the leftover electromagnetic radiation, not sound.
BA14: and the redshift of light waves from distant galaxies proves the expansion of the universe from the Big Bang,
GW14: Not only the expansion, but also the increase in the rate of expansion.
BA14: both of which prove the universe had a beginning.
GW14: Yes, they both show the beginning of a NEW PHASE of our universe, but probably not the beginning of the existence of our universe. Those are two very different beginnings. I think you are asserting the latter, i.e. that the CMB and redshift together prove the beginning of the existence of the universe. I would call the evidence consistent with your hypothesis, but not still equivocal and inconclusive. If you think they prove the beginning of the existence of our universe, then let’s see your proof. Show your work.
BA14: Science thus agrees with the Bible that the universe had a “beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
GW14: I must give you credit for holding the methods and conclusions of science in high regard. About 25% of theists don’t do that. They simply reject science and “put all their eggs into the basket” of the Bible. Your approach is different. You try to show that some Bible verses are consistent with or actually corroborate science. But that just doesn’t work. In some cases we find a contradiction. The best example of this is the idea of special creation from the Bible vs. the idea of evolution from science. These are contradictory. But beyond that, the Bible seems to imply a beginning of the existence of our universe, but science points to a Big Bang which is consistent with an eternal universe OR the beginning of the universe’s existence. So, this is equivocal. On the other hand, we know that even if our universe came into existence, God had nothing to do with it. God doesn’t exist, as proven by other arguments.
GW14: You have still evaded the moral issues.
“The heavens declare the glory of God”—Psalm 19:1
The static heard on AM radio, for example, is one example of the leftover CMB radiation, which is the sound left over from the BB.
This, plus the increasing redshift of the galaxies in the universe proves its expansion, and these are two of the many unequivocal proofs the universe had a beginning. Neither points to any “new phase of the universe.”
The work has been done by scientists, and is publicly available.
All living things reproduce “after their own kinds” (Genesis 1:11,12,21, 24,25). No one doubts micro-evolution. But it is limited to the “kinds” that God established. For example, there are many varieties of dogs and cats, but dogs and cats cannot produce offspring together. Oak trees and pine trees do not hybridize together.
“God will always be true even if no human being can be relied on”—Romans 3:4 NJB
Most scientists assume and assert macro-evolution, but have no proof of it, and even though they have tried, they have never been able to demonstrate how life can come from non-living matter. Even worse, they know that something cannot come from nothing.
“The word of our God remains forever”—Isaiah 40:8 NJB
The Bible is in perfect harmony with all proven science, without contradictions.
BA15: “The heavens declare the glory of God”—Psalm 19:1
GW15: Actually, the heavens declare that God does not exist! This declaration comes from increasing entropy and the eventual Deep Freeze of our universe. If God did exist, he would not tune the universe to cause this genocide.
BA15: The static heard on AM radio, for example, is one example of the leftover CMB radiation, which is the sound left over from the BB.
GW15: I believe that is correct.
BA15: This, plus the increasing redshift of the galaxies in the universe proves its expansion,
GA15: I believe that is correct.
BA15: and these are two of the many unequivocal proofs the universe had a beginning. Neither points to any “new phase of the universe.”
GW15: False. Those two facts are consistent with either hypothesis: “The universe had a beginning to its existence” vs. “The universe is eternal.” So, there is no proof of either hypothesis here. However, there are sound proofs that God does not exist. I presented several to you.
BA15: The work has been done by scientists, and is publicly available.
GW15: Yes, the work has been done, but you are not clearly distinguishing between evidence, facts, knowledge, inferences, hypotheses, speculations, and beliefs. You mix them all up. For example, “the Big Bang occurred” is a fact, but “the universe had a beginning” is a speculation and a hypothesis.
BA15: All living things reproduce “after their own kinds” (Genesis 1:11,12,21, 24,25).
GW15: That is a poorly stated and misleading statement. Living things produce offspring similar to themselves, but which are still different, in a long chain of succession from the origin of life on Earth about 3.5 billion years ago till now. In the long chain of reproduction, over long periods of time the new organisms are so different from their ancestors that we are justified in identifying and defining a new species. This is how evolution works.
BA15: No one doubts micro-evolution.
GW15: That is probably false. There is very likely a small percentage of people who doubt and deny this, and they are fundamentalist religious people.
BA15: But it is limited to the “kinds” that God established.
GW15: False. God does not exist. This has been proven. If you think not, then identify an error in any of my arguments for this. You can’t. You haven’t.
BA15: For example, there are many varieties of dogs and cats, but dogs and cats cannot produce offspring together. Oak trees and pine trees do not hybridize together.
GW15: This is true, but it does not negate the fact I presented earlier about the evolution of species. Charles Darwin was the first person to clearly explain this process.
BA15: “God will always be true even if no human being can be relied on”—Romans 3:4 NJB
GW15: God is not a proposition which can be true or false. However, the proposition “God does not exist” is true. It has been proven.
BA15: Most scientists assume and assert macro-evolution, but have no proof of it,
GW15: Half true. Most scientists accept macro- evolution and there is proof of it. For more on evolution, I recommend these excellent books:
Why Evolution Is True? By Jerry Coyne
The Greatest Show on Earth. By Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene. By Richard Dawkins
On the Origin of Species. By Charles Darwin
The Book of Life: An Illustrated History of the Evolution of Life on Earth. by Stephen Jay Gould
BA15: and even though they have tried, they have never been able to demonstrate how life can come from non-living matter.
GW15: Here you are confusing the fact of evolution with the hypothesis of abiogenesis, when they are not the same thing. There is proof of evolution, but there is no proof of abiogenesis, so far. It is likely that life came from nonlife 3.5 billion years ago on the Earth, but we do not yet know that for a fact or know exactly how it happened. It is likely, however, that in the next hundred years scientists will discover how it happened. It has probably happened on other planets too.
BA15: Even worse, they know that something cannot come from nothing.
GW15: Only a small percentage of people believe in magic – that something can come from nothing. Why are you one of them? You have the ridiculous idea that God created our universe out of nothing. Please explain how that could occur.
BA15: “The word of our God remains forever”—Isaiah 40:8 NJB
GW15: False. God does not have a word, even a single word, because he does not exist. As I said recently, if God did exist, he would have revealed himself to me and all persons living at the same time at least 11 times since I was born. Duh.
BA15: The Bible is in perfect harmony with all proven science, without contradictions.
GW15: False. The idea of special creation presented in Genesis contradicts the fact of evolution proven by science. I’ll give you another contradiction of this kind. Genesis says God created plants before the sun (compare Genesis 1:11 and 1:16), but science has proven that the sun came before the plants.
GW15: And you are still evading the moral issues. I’ve been recently thinking about the moral code in general. Here is what I came up with: “The core of ethics is just four principles: First, do no harm. Secondly, if you are able, prevent harm. Thirdly, if you are unable to prevent harm, then do your best to treat harm. And lastly, treat others as moral equals.” What do you think about that? Let’s discuss morality.
God “created,” the entire universe (which includes our sun) “in the beginning” (Genesis 1:1). The Hebrew word for “created” means to bring something into existence that has not existed.
Quite some time later, God had the earth’s atmosphere to clear up enough to allow “light” to reach earth’s surface. Some time after that, God “made” discs of our sun, our moon, and some of the stars, to become visible from the earth’s surface (Genesis 1:14). The Hebrew word for “made” does not include bringing something into existence that hasn’t existed previously.
Science supports these basic facts.
You have much more “faith” than we do, i. e., the multi-verse, abiogenesis, etc., and a whole of ‘liklies’ and ‘probablies.’
Darwin’s “evolved” fiches on the different Galapagos Islands were simply variations of the same species. The “evolved” peppered moths of England were some that were simply covered in coal soot.
Darwin’s imaginations fly in the face of the facts.
Bible Authenticity
BA16: God “created,” the entire universe (which includes our sun) “in the beginning” (Genesis 1:1).
GW16: First, God does not exist, and this has been proven. Secondly, you are missing my point. According to the order of creation described by Genesis, plants were created before the Sun. Just read the darn text, the plain text! But according to science the order was sun first, plants much later.
BA16: The Hebrew word for “created” means to bring something into existence that has not existed.
GW16: You are evading some central questions here. If God did exist, would he create by producing something out of nothing or by producing something out of something else? If the latter, then to produce our universe what pre-existing materials would he have used?
BA16: Quite some time later, God had the earth’s atmosphere to clear up enough to allow “light” to reach earth’s surface. Some time after that, God “made” discs of our sun, our moon, and some of the stars, to become visible from the earth’s surface (Genesis 1:14). The Hebrew word for “made” does not include bringing something into existence that hasn’t existed previously.
GW16: You are still missing my point. Read the darn text! Read Genesis 1:11-16!
BA16: Science supports these basic facts.
GW16: Absolutely not! I gave you two facts from science which conflict with two claims from Genesis. The men who wrote Genesis (and they were all men; women were suppressed at the time) knew almost nothing about science, cosmology, physics, or biology. You treat them as experts when they were not experts. You are living in an ancient world. Find your way to the modern world.
BA16: You have much more “faith” than we do, i. e.,…
GW16: I have no faith at all!
BA16: the multi-verse,
GW16: Once again, here you are misrepresenting my position. I told you just a few days ago that I do not believe in the multiverse. Why do you keep saying I do? That’s dishonest on your part. Or is your memory getting poor?
BA16: abiogenesis, etc.,
GW16: I believe that abiogenesis probably occurred, but I do not have faith that it occurred. Faith is a type of belief which is untuned to evidence. My belief that abiogenesis occurred is properly tuned to the evidence. I think it is 51% likely that it occurred, based on the evidence.
BA16: and a whole of ‘liklies’ and ‘probablies.’
GW16: It is “likelihoods” not “liklies.” It is “probabilities” not “probablies.” Yes, probabilities are a good thing! When you are not convinced beyond a reasonable doubt, then you should state your beliefs in terms of probabilities. That’s how science works. Duh.
BA16: Darwin’s “evolved” fiches on the different Galapagos Islands were simply variations of the same species.
GW16: They were “finches” not “fiches.” Yes, the variations in these finches on different islands demonstrated evolution. Darwin never claimed they were different species.
BA16: The “evolved” peppered moths of England were some that were simply covered in coal soot.
GW16: False. Over time, light colored moths evolved to become dark colored moths.
BA16: Darwin’s imaginations fly in the face of the facts.
GW16: The facts supported Darwin’s initial hypotheses.
GW16: Why don’t you want to talk about morality? Is that a difficult subject for you? Yes, I think it is.
We’re very familiar with Genesis 1. Moses wrote it, under “inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16 NKJV).
The days of Genesis 1 were not 24 hour days, but long epochs of time, at least thousands or millions of years, or longer.
God DID NOT create the plants before the sun. God “created” in Genesis 1:1.
As the earth cooled, its atmosphere cleared enough so that, in Genesis 1:3, “light” first reached the surface of the earth.
As the atmosphere continued to clear, and land began to appear (Genesis 1:9,10), the increasing light was a major factor in plants beginning to grow (Genesis 1:11,12).
As the atmosphere cleared further over time, in Genesis 1:14, God said, “Let lights appear in the sky” (NLT), and the discs of the sun, moon, and stars began to be visible from the surface of the earth (Genesis 1:16), for the first time.
The finches on the Galapagos Islands only demonstrated Micro-evolution, not Macro-Evolution. All of them were still finches, not some other species.
The peppered moths in England were still peppered moths, not some other species, demonstrating Micr, not Macro, evolution.
BA17: We’re very familiar with Genesis 1. Moses wrote it, under “inspiration of God” (2 Timothy 3:16 NKJV).
GW17: I am also very familiar with Genesis 1. Moses did not write it. God does not exist, and this has been proven. Why do you rely on ancient male authors who knew almost nothing of science and cosmology? Why are you locked in an era of roughly 3000 years ago? I invite you to join us here in the 21st century.
BA17: The days of Genesis 1 were not 24 hour days, but long epochs of time, at least thousands or millions of years, or longer.
GW17: False. The authors intended that the “day” in Genesis be interpreted as a 24 hour day. You can tell this from the context. You are just trying to spin the text to fit with your preconceived idea.
BA17: God DID NOT create the plants before the sun. God “created” in Genesis 1:1.
GW17: Yes, I agree. God did not create anything! Why? Because God does not, did not, and will not exist. However, the author of Genesis thought that God created the plants before the sun. Just read the darn text!
BA17: As the earth cooled, its atmosphere cleared enough so that, in Genesis 1:3, “light” first reached the surface of the earth.
GW17: You are trying to interpret Genesis in light of modern science when the author of Genesis knew almost knowing about science, including cooling of the Earth. The author of Genesis is not an expert in science. Stop spreading disinformation.
BA17: As the atmosphere continued to clear, and land began to appear (Genesis 1:9,10), the increasing light was a major factor in plants beginning to grow (Genesis 1:11,12).
GW17: You are cherry picking. Read the entire chapter. Pay close attention to chronological order.
BA17: As the atmosphere cleared further over time, in Genesis 1:14, God said, “Let lights appear in the sky” (NLT), and the discs of the sun, moon, and stars began to be visible from the surface of the earth (Genesis 1:16), for the first time.
GW17: Yes, according to the story God created the sun after the plants. Just read the darn text.
BA17: The finches on the Galapagos Islands only demonstrated Micro-evolution, not Macro-Evolution. All of them were still finches, not some other species.
GW17: Evolution works in the same ways, whether you call it “micro” or “macro” evolution. It is responsible for the diversity of species. But the author of Genesis claimed that God created the different species. So, Genesis cannot be correct. And we know from other proofs that God does not exist.
BA17: The peppered moths in England were still peppered moths, not some other species, demonstrating Micr, not Macro, evolution.
GW17: They were still moths, but they had evolved from one variety of a species to another variety of the same species. It’s still evolution. This conflicts with the idea of special creation presented in Genesis.
GW17: An analogy: It’s still gravity whether you drop a ball from one foot up or one mile up.
GW17: You are still evading the moral rule which I brought up. We know why.
Your mantra, “God does not exist,” doesn’t fly here. You’re barking up the wrong tree.
Sorry, Charlie, but Genesis 1 is in harmony with all proven science.
Moses didn’t need to know modern scientific details of what took place in the early universe and earth. God was there during the events of Genesis 1, because he designed and created everything.
Genesis 1 is more up to date than the latest scientific findings.
The Hebrew “yohm” (day) is not limited to 24 hour days. See Genesis 30:14; Proverbs 25:13; Zechariah 14:6-9.
In Genesis 1:3 the Hebrew ‘ohr’ is used, indicating light in general. or light diffused, which began to reach the earth’s surface for the first time, from the pre-existing sun and moon.
in Genesis 1:16 ma’ohr is used, indicated the source of the light, i.e., the sun, moon, and stars, when their discs first began to be visible from the surface of the earth.
No speciation occurred with the Galapagos finches or the peppered moths of England, only variations within their “kinds” (Genesis 1:21). Macro-evolution has never been observed, or proven, but only asserted!!!!
Gravity is an excellent illustration of God’s immutable laws!
BA18: Your mantra, “God does not exist,” doesn’t fly here. You’re barking up the wrong tree.
GW18: The truth flies everywhere, and “God does not exist” is the truth! When you barking the truth, every tree is the right tree.
BA18: Sorry, Charlie, but Genesis 1 is in harmony with all proven science.
GW18: Sorry, Buddy, but Genesis 1 is in serious conflict with proven science. I gave you just two examples, but here is another one. Genesis 1:1 says “In the beginning, God created the heavens and the earth…” According to science, the heavens and the earth were not created. They developed from the matter which was produced from energy at about 300K years after the Big Bang. So that is another conflict.
BA18: Moses didn’t need to know modern scientific details of what took place in the early universe and earth. God was there during the events of Genesis 1, because he designed and created everything.
GW18: Sorry, Charlie, but God does not exist. This has been proven. Most scholars now believe that Moses was a legendary figure. Here is a good explanation of this view: Did Moses Exist? UsefulCharts
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ptYz-Vu0dxY
BA18: Genesis 1 is more up to date than the latest scientific findings.
GW18: Nonsense! I already identified three details in Genesis which are contradictory to modern science. You aren’t thinking rationally about this issue.
BA18: The Hebrew “yohm” (day) is not limited to 24 hour days. See Genesis 30:14; Proverbs 25:13; Zechariah 14:6-9.
GW18: Yes, I agree, and that is why you need to look at context. From the context of Genesis, it is obvious that in this case a “day” referred to the typical 24 hour period or from one sun rise to the next consecutive one. Read the darn text.
BA18: In Genesis 1:3 the Hebrew ‘ohr’ is used, indicating light in general. or light diffused, which began to reach the earth’s surface for the first time, from the pre-existing sun and moon.
GW18: Read the entire text. Stop cherry picking.
BA18: in Genesis 1:16 ma’ohr is used, indicated the source of the light, i.e., the sun, moon, and stars, when their discs first began to be visible from the surface of the earth.
GW18: Read the entire text. Stop cherry picking.
BA18: No speciation occurred with the Galapagos finches or the peppered moths of England, only variations within their “kinds” (Genesis 1:21).
GW18: Straw man. I didn’t say one species changed to another in those two examples. I said evolution occurred with them. Once again, you are misrepresenting my position.
BA18: Macro-evolution has never been observed, or proven, but only asserted!!!!
GW18: False again. For the proof, read these books:
Why Evolution Is True? By Jerry Coyne
The Greatest Show on Earth. By Richard Dawkins
The Selfish Gene. By Richard Dawkins
On the Origin of Species. By Charles Darwin
The Book of Life: An Illustrated History of the Evolution of Life on Earth. by Stephen Jay Gould
BA18: Gravity is an excellent illustration of God’s immutable laws!
GW18: God has no laws because God doesn’t exist. The universe has reliable patterns of interaction which we call “natural laws,” not “God’s laws.” If God did exist, then scientists might call them “God’s laws,” but sadly God does not exist, regardless of our wishes.
GW18: When we are babies and children we view our parents as “gods,” and some human persons never get over this. As adults, they invent or they adopt a hypothetical god which rules the universe. As we sought our parent’s help, some of us seek the help of a hypothetical super parent, i.e. God.
GW18: And you continue to evade a conversation about morality. We know why.