Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Quite simply, Hawking believes that the universe began to exist.
Because I can't use the witness of the Holy Spirit as evidence for others. Surely, you understand that.
Yes, I can understand. As I said, I haven't seen one good objection (or "shredding") to the KCA yet.But I seriously don't know where else we can go with this argument. I think we've tried everything. Last off topic thing, I promise... What if we make a time machine, go back 2500 years, and remove the KCA from history?
You are incorrect. Craig merely claims that p2 is more plausibly true than not.If you believe him, you're showing P2 to be incorrect. P2 is a statement of certainty instead of the probability you're referencing here.
It is completely relevant. If you are personally discrediting the very individuals you are citing as supporting your KCA, should not everyone in this forum be aware of it?
Your evasion pretty much addresses it.This is just off-topic and I will not address it. Please stay on topic.
He also believes that the universe is billions of years old.Quite simply, Hawking believes that the universe began to exist.
Then why do you bring it into the discussion?Because I can't use the witness of the Holy Spirit as evidence for others. Surely, you understand that.
Do you think Hawking posits anything existed prior to the beginning of the universe ? Again, I think you are taking some of his ideas out of context.Quite simply, Hawking believes that the universe began to exist.
And yet this seems to be what you are referencing anyways, which is why I don't understand why you are spending so much time focusing on a vague argument that has more holes in it then a Dunkin Donuts. Are you convinced because of what you are calling the witness of the Holy Spirit, or are you convinced because of the KCA ?Because I can't use the witness of the Holy Spirit as evidence for others. Surely, you understand that.
I am under the impression that he even coined the term "more plausibly true than...", because "unsubstantiated" has such a negative ring to it.You are incorrect. Craig merely claims that p2 is more plausibly true than not.
Yes, I can understand. As I said, I haven't seen one good objection (or "shredding") to the KCA yet.
...but I appreciate your discussion.
I have observed that Joshua says "more plausible than not", while WLC says “more plausible than their negations”.I am under the impression that he even coined the term "more plausibly true than...", because "unsubstantiated" has such a negative ring to it.
Only because I answered a question. If the unbeliever had not asked their question, I would not have given that answer. I will not reply to you any more on this. I've answered this before and after all, it's off-topic.Then why do you bring it into the discussion?
I really don't care. Some atheists on this thread have been claiming that certain scientists (like Sean Carroll and Vilenkin) have shown that the universe did not have a beginning, so all I wanted to do was to show that several other notable (atheistic) scientists (Hawking, Krauss and Vilenkin actually refutes Carroll's model) have publicly stated that the universe probably did have a beginning ...in effect confirming that p2 (the universe began to exist) is more plausibly true than not.Do you think Hawking posits anything existed prior to the beginning of the universe ?
Lol!!!! No, in fact, even with all the attacks on this thread, the KCA has stood rock solid and no one has offered a good objection to it yet.And yet this (the witness of the Holy Spirit) seems to be what you are referencing anyways, which is why I don't understand why you are spending so much time focusing on a vague argument that has more holes in it then a Dunkin Donuts. Are you convinced because of what you are calling the witness of the Holy Spirit, or are you convinced because of the KCA ?
I already answered this. The Christian God did not "begin to exist". He is the "I am".
Who appointed you the sole arbiter of that assessment? Have we anyone on record as finding the argument convincing, in itself? It didn't convince you, did it?Lol!!!! No, in fact, even with all the attacks on this thread, the KCA has stood rock solid and no one has offered a good objection to it yet.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?