/lit/ - Literature

>>22556724
>The rules demand a creator
The rules of the world are only applicable within the world. They have been learned through inductive reasoning which limits their scope. We believe the universe started 13 billion years ago from a single point, but that shouldn't be confused with the universe coming into existence at that time. Contemporary physics breaks down, there is no way to infer what happened prior to shortly after the big bang. Its simply indeterminate. To suppose that it did just come into existence is operating outside of the laws of the known universe. Christians believe that too, Yahweh can only exist outside of the laws of the known universe. But then they insist that one law does exist: causality. There is no reason to suppose this though, coming out of nothing is just as plausible as coming out of something eternal.
>Atheists are making a semantic argument
"Atheists" tend to accept "phenomena" and not "creator" because phenomena isn't a loaded term, there is no reason to suppose agency or sentience to what, if anything, caused the universe. "Atheists" don't have an opinion on whether the universe is eternal or if it came from nothing or something, they just reject that it is a sentient entity that has strong opinions on what people should be doing on the grounds of extravagance.