Creation ex nihilo challenge

[justlookinla]

Yes, you simply used a different euphemism for created. Semantically, there is no difference.

What word would you use for the process whereby the universe we observe now, but didn't observe before the big bang, came forth?

No. This universe existed but in a different form. That is the point of my original contention 2 days and 180 posts ago.

I'm speaking of the universe in it's present form in contrast to the universe in it's prior, different, form. The big bang pre-universe universe form contrasted to the beginning, per the big bang, of the present form universe. Something which didn't exist in it's present form now exists in it's present form. What word would you use to describe that?

No, because the way you are using them them is still as euphemisms for "created" (as in "God created the heavens and earth).

I'll try to use the word you're comfortable with to describe the process from which the current form of the universe arose from the big bang if you'll let me know. Assuming you believe in the big bang.

There was no "pre-present universe". It is all the same universe just like the string was always the same string.

Didn't you indicate above that the universe existed in a different form from the universe which exists today?

See above. There was no "pre-present" universe. The universe was always present.

Your answer to the question above should address this.

 

[HitchSlap]

No.

From Wikipedia:
SOURCE

And I'm supposed to accept his definition of faith?

Ain't gonna happen.

No wonder you guys like it.

Hey, any time I can get a fundie to read something over than the bibles, I consider it beneficial.

Carry on.

 

[AV1611VET]

Hey, any time I can get a fundie to read something over than the bibles, I consider it beneficial.

Carry on.

[Indirectly] dissing our martyrs isn't what I would call "beneficial."

I know you didn't mean it though -- (I think).

 

[Strathos]

Although in AV's case, saying he reads "Bibles" would be incorrect.

 

[AV1611VET]

Although in AV's case, saying he reads "Bibles" would be incorrect.

You're right, Strathos; but there is a technicality.

I have a copy of the KJB's Predecessor, the AV1560 Geneva, which some consider God's choice for the Pilgrims.

 

[Queller]

What word would you use for the process whereby the universe we observe now, but didn't observe before the big bang, came forth?

Changed form.

I'm speaking of the universe in it's present form in contrast to the universe in it's prior, different, form. The big bang pre-universe universe form contrasted to the beginning, per the big bang, of the present form universe. Something which didn't exist in it's present form now exists in it's present form. What word would you use to describe that?

See above.

I'll try to use the word you're comfortable with to describe the process from which the current form of the universe arose from the big bang if you'll let me know. Assuming you believe in the big bang.

You know, not once have I said I believe this particular theory. I simply offered it as an alternative to your claim "something created everything or nothing created everything" were the only two possibilities.

Didn't you indicate above that the universe existed in a different form from the universe which exists today?

Yes, but it is still the same universe.

Your answer to the question above should address this.

I hope I have finally answered the question.

 

[Strathos]

You're right, Strathos; but there is a technicality.

I have a copy of the KJB's Predecessor, the AV1560 Geneva, which some consider God's choice for the Pilgrims.

I actually don't have that one, although I have looked at an online version.

 

[agua]

I didn't demand that YOU do it. The challenge is simply to demonstrate that it can even be done.

According to infinite regression it must have been done don't you think ?

 

[AV1611VET]

I actually don't have that one, although I have looked at an online version.

I can read It, but I can't write the language.

 

[PsychoSarah]

I can read It, but I can't write the language.

How exactly does that work?

 

[Strathos]

How exactly does that work?

The grammar and such is different, but at least it's recognizable English, compared to something like Beowulf

 

[justlookinla]

Changed form.

See above.

You know, not once have I said I believe this particular theory. I simply offered it as an alternative to your claim "something created everything or nothing created everything" were the only two possibilities.

Yes, but it is still the same universe.

I hope I have finally answered the question.

Neither do I believe this particular theory, but there are still implications, conclusions from the theory.

For those who embrace the viewpoint that the universe we now experience came forth (hope I'm using the correct term) from a previous form of the universe, then the conclusion would be that one's existence is the response of the universe mindlessly acting on itself. The cause of everything, and I do mean everything, is the universe which wasn't produced by any cause.

In effect, the universe becomes 'God'. The 'something'.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

[Indirectly] dissing our martyrs isn't what I would call "beneficial."

I know you didn't mean it though -- (I think).

Your martyrs? Yours?

 

[AV1611VET]

Your martyrs? Yours?

Yes, ours -- as opposed to Mohammad's.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Yes, ours -- as opposed to Mohammad's.

You identify strongly with them?

 

[AV1611VET]

You identify strongly with them?

They are examples of our martyrs.

Hebrews 10: 35b ... and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:
36 And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:
37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
38 ( Of whom the world was not worthy: ) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

They are examples of our martyrs.

Hebrews 10: 35b ... and others were tortured, not accepting deliverance; that they might obtain a better resurrection:
36 And others had trial of cruel mockings and scourgings, yea, moreover of bonds and imprisonment:
37 They were stoned, they were sawn asunder, were tempted, were slain with the sword: they wandered about in sheepskins and goatskins; being destitute, afflicted, tormented;
38 ( Of whom the world was not worthy: ) they wandered in deserts, and in mountains, and in dens and caves of the earth.
39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise:
40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

You identify strongly with them?

 

[AV1611VET]

You identify strongly with them?

Don't put me through an inquisition, Mr. Strawberry.

Let me repeat myself:

[Indirectly] dissing our martyrs isn't what I would call "beneficial."

I know you didn't mean it though -- (I think).

This has nothing to do with me, personally.

 

[Mr Strawberry]

Don't put me through an inquisition, Mr. Strawberry.

Hardly an inquisition, just a question you seem very uncomfortable with.

Let me repeat myself:

This has nothing to do with me, personally.

Nothing to do with you personally and yet they are 'your' martyrs?

 

[Queller]

Neither do I believe this particular theory, but there are still implications, conclusions from the theory.

For those who embrace the viewpoint that the universe we now experience came forth (hope I'm using the correct term)

No, I said "changed form". That isn't the same thing as "came forth".

from a previous form of the universe, then the conclusion would be that one's existence is the response of the universe mindlessly acting on itself.

No, the universe isn't acting on itself. That doesn't even make sense.

The cause of everything, and I do mean everything, is the universe which wasn't produced by any cause.

No, the universe isn't causing anything. The universe simply is.

In effect, the universe becomes 'God'. The 'something'.

Except that the universe isn't creating anything which was part of your claim that either "something created everything or nothing created everything"