Paperboy_J said:
I've never been a fan of this way of thinking. Life isn't so black and white. For one thing, a teapot is small, simple. You're comparing something small like a teapot to the divine creator of all that exists, which is silly. And that's the difference: nobody CARES if there's a teapot orbiting Mars. It's a friggin' teapot! We can't see it with our eyes, so that's reason enough to believe it's not there. And that goes for unicorns, elves, or whatever else you want to throw into the mix. They're small, insignificant, and ultimately don't matter. But God is a different story. And second, I believe you CAN disprove God's existance. You just have to explain how a universe can create itself. How is something born out of absolute nothingness? Explain the process. Explain how that works, how that can happen. When you can explain how a universe creates itself without any outside cause whatsoever, you will have disproven God! |
I'm glad you brought these points up. But first i must ask, why is "God" different than those other things you mentioned like say tooth fairy's? You can't see them, but if you are a child, you teeth still "magically" disappear.
But let's move to the real question.
So, the problem here is you are trying to understand the creation of the universe with mental processes from average common sense that were not created for that understanding. The truth here is "nothingness" does not exist. There is no place in the universe where Nothing at all exists. What you perceive as Nothing is a complex network of interactions between particles and opposite particles. Nothing is not your common concept of Nothing (Nothing as you talk about is actually Something) and Nothing is unstable. This instability leads to processes like what we can conjecture is the creation of different universes. Reality would be a collection of matter and non matter that always tends toward the other in a cosmic cycle. There is a good book on this from Doctor Strauss. I forget his first name.
Basically, when trying to understand the universe on a quantic level, you can't apply your notions of everyday common sense. In the quantic level a particle can exist in two places at once (this is fact. It had been proven experimentally). The rules are simply different and we weren't raised to innately understand them. We are equipped to deal with our everyday envyronment.
The thing is, that doesn't disprove God. It just disproves he was necessary to create the universe. Because, just like the tooth fairy, you can't directly prove it's inexistance. But, you can understand the process and realise that her existance is not very likely.
I see Abath made a very good point aswell. Even if what i just said can't directly be observed (though Strauss makes a strong case for it due to the law of conservation of energy and it fits). Under no means does that lend any credit to the idea that a "God" would've done it. Because God, is the lack on an answer. How did he do it? Magic? Where did he come from? Who created him? Magic? And how many times has something in our reality been explained by magic?
There is therefore a strong inconsistancy in the God answer.
