If "I can't guess there might be a contradiction" is your idea of good enough evidence to believe in something I've got a bridge to sell you.
Upvote
0
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.
We have to assume they have an abstract, eternal character and a law giver is completely cohesive with that. I have no problem with that, but the evidence like I said supports my point.
We don't know this to be true. The Big Bang model posits expansion from a singularity about 14 billion years ago. No idea what did or didn't exist before that.No, I was arguing that OUR universe had a beginning and that space, matter, energy and time didn't exist until our universe did.
Think of all the variables that must have come together for god to want to design our universe the way believers claim it did. If any of those were even slightly different it would have created a universe with slightly different constants, and we all know that all scientists accept that would mean a vastly different universe.You haven't provided any support for that assertion.
Why would laws that govern OUR universe be eternal when the universe they govern didn't?You haven't shown that the natural laws can't be an uncaused cause.
Are you trying to tell me what I'm arguing as if you know and I don't. Rather arrogant don't you think? I've not claimed nor implied that God started "it all with our universe". This link provided the support for MY CLAIM that there was nothing and then there was our universe with space, matter, energy and time. His evidence said that going back there is nothing...nothing at all and then there is something...our universe. What comes prior if there is a prior to this nothing and then something be it trillions and trillions of universes or absolutely nothing whatsoever is not part of my claim.Then you picked an odd article to support your argument, since the guy clearly doesn't agree with you if he believes there are other universes.
But let's be honest here, you really are arguing that there was nothing and then god started it all with our universe.
Why would the good that governs or universe be eternal?Why would laws that govern OUR universe be eternal when the universe they govern didn't?
Yes? They exist with space, matter, energy and time. So what about them?You know, then existing with matter and energy and what not.
Lots of other universes aren't nothing. They are lots of other universes. That's why your link disagrees with you.Are you trying to tell me what I'm arguing as if you know and I don't. Rather arrogant don't you think? I've not claimed nor implied that God started "it all with our universe". This link provided the support for MY CLAIM that there was nothing and then there was our universe with space, matter, energy and time. His evidence said that going back there is nothing...nothing at all and then there is something...our universe. What comes prior if there is a prior to this nothing and then something be it trillions and trillions of universes or absolutely nothing whatsoever is not part of my claim.
God is not part of the natural world He created, the laws of physic are what governs the natural world that He created because the laws of physics are laws that the law giver gave. The laws of physics make more sense in theism than they do by a purely naturalistic worldview. The laws would be part of the law giver, the fine tuner and the creator of the natural world and as such would be prior to the natural world existing as they existed in the mind of God prior to His creation.Why would the good that governs or universe be eternal?
Same reason.
Then why does he say there was nothing, nothing at all and go on and say there were a multitude of universes. He is saying the same thing I am. I don't care if there are a multitude of universes and it is not part of my claim.Lots of other universes aren't nothing. They are lots of other universes. That's why your link disagrees with you.
Physicists are claiming that the universe came from nothing. That is why they are trying to explain how something could come from nothing.We don't know this to be true. The Big Bang model posits expansion from a singularity about 14 billion years ago. No idea what did or didn't exist before that.
So what are you claiming that I am saying is incorrect or unknown exactly?
What we know is that our universe didn't exist, no space, no energy, no matter, no time.
Yes, we do.The statement you posted 2 posts ago and which prompted my response:
We do not know that.
No, God would not be part of the natural world. He would have created the natural world.
Now is that a fact?
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/HC02Ae03.html
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...ds-most-Christian-nation-within-15-years.html
Communist governments are not exactly famous for promoting religion. More commonly they try to suppress it, because "The Party" doesn't like the competition.
You haven't shown how an un-caused cause needs fine tuning or how something which is not of the natural world would need fine tuning.
Why would laws that govern OUR universe be eternal when the universe they govern didn't?
God is not part of the natural world He created,
the laws of physic are what governs the natural world that He created because the laws of physics are laws that the law giver gave.
The laws of physics make more sense in theism than they do by a purely naturalistic worldview.
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?