[Karen M]

Hello again Must


>>>Karen: No, an idea is not experienced through senses.<<

Must: How does this not make it supernatural by the definition you gave?<<<

The definition I gave: Anything that is experienced through senses that is not material or energy.



>>>By definition atheism states that we have no "creator" in the theist sense (atheist). Do you agree that atheism inherently says that there was no creator of this universe?(by creator i mean a being who purposely created this universe by some action) <<<

Strong atheism says this. I am an atheistic agnostic, meaning that I will assume there is no purposeful creator until you give me evidence, but I am not making an absolute claim that a creator can not exist.


>>>Therefore, you believe that this universe is moving in a "predetermined" way?<<<

Yes.


>>>If so, what started the ball rolling?<<<

It could have been anything. It could have been another naturalisitic force.


>>>Two options here:
1. Something with a reason behind it
2. Something without a reason behind it
The first would be a "creator," and the second is "random chance." Because atheism by definition chooses the second, random chance began this universe.<<<

Wrong. Just because something was not purposely created does not mean it is random in the sense you are using. Also, what makes you think that what created the universe didn't also need a beginning? Whats more plausible: a creator created a creator who created a creator who created a creator who created a creator who created the universe? Or a naturalistic force caused a naturalistic force which caused a naturalistic force which made the universe? The naturalistic force is more likely because it does not require you to go outside of nature into the supernatural to percieve it.



>>>An atheist worldview (there are numerous) generally includes these factors:
1. Knowledge
2. No god (in the deity\creator sense)<<<

1. Knowledge
2. A belief there is no purposful creator or a lack of belief in a purposeful creator(I am the second).



>>>This is the definition i am going by and supporting. When i say "God" i do not mean any "god" such as Allah, Shiva, or phase-shifted pink unicorns. "God" is a specific proper noun that i am simply using as an identifier.<<<

Prove it is true though...


>>>It really works because all truth is relative to Him. You are presupposing that there is an "absolute" above God. There is not; all truth is relative to Him, therefore it is truth if He says it is. There is no greater "truth" than that which He defines.<<<

Prove this also


>>>Atheism says that the forces were not created<<<

Not necessarily.



>>>, because this would mean that a deity exists (thus you would be a theist and not an atheist).<<<

No, just because the forces were created does not mean they were purposely created by an omnipotent God.


>>>My worldview is consistent and has a logical answer for this conundrum.<<<

I would object to the statement that your worldview is consistant, but that is another topic. It works for this particular arguement, though I think its a bit more of a wild jump than a "logical answer" Atheism is also consistent for this arguement and it simply says that there is not yet enough information to know.


Have a nice day

Karen