How Did God Come Into existence?

[CalledOutOne]

God did not come into existence. Christianity does not teach this. God always was and always will be.

Have you ever heard of TAG?
If you have, you probably haven't heard a good version of it (eg. Matt Slick's).

Here's Dr. Greg Bahnsen's version. I posted it on the other thread, but I don't think anyone took the time to watch the debate. It's ~2 hours. When you get some time. Click play, sit back, grab some popcorn or chips, and give it a listen.

Greg Bahnsen vs. Gordon Stein: The Great Debate (FULL) - YouTube

A very basic (and extremely unsatisfying for most) version of this can be found at http://www.proofthatgodexists.org.

 

[Chany]

Neither you or me has any idea as to how everything in the known universe got to be the way it is. So back to the point. How did God come into existence and why would you believe something on faith alone?

You beg the question. God never came into existence; God always existed. Most of us don't believe in faith alone. We have been explaining that to you, but you're an empiricist and ask for physical evidence of a being that isn't really physical.

If you want to play the "we can't know anything" game, I can do that. At that point, all logic is thrown out the window. I don't like that deflection.

 

[Shane Plew]

Well I guess you'de have to read the Bible for that or ask someone who knows a lot about Christianity. In my few years of following the faith, I don't know much either. That's kinda the reason I was looking for websites like this. So i can learn and understand more. Sorry that I couldn't do much in helping you with your questions :3

I do read the Bible and haven't found an answer to my question.

 

[Shane Plew]

I wasn't deflecting anything, I was simply stating a fact. I also think that anyone who thinks we can't know anything is a moron. Since you claim that God has always existed and I believe that a plausible answer for how the universe got to where it is today is that it always existed, I will change up my question.

What do you base your beliefs in God on if not faith? Not one person has said why they believe other than faith. Also what other evidence is there besides physical evidence? If something exists at all it has physical properties and physical properties can be observed. And are you implying that God is spiritual by saying that he is not physical? If so, where did you get the absurd idea that souls exist?

 

[CalledOutOne]

I wasn't deflecting anything, I was simply stating a fact. I also think that anyone who thinks we can't know anything is a moron. Since you claim that God has always existed and I believe that a plausible answer for how the universe got to where it is today is that it always existed, I will change up my question.

The problem with this is that the universe is not self-sufficient. God is.
Matter is not self sufficient. The universe is constantly losing energy. What's replacing it? Matter can be converted to energy, but if the universe always existed it would have ran out in eternity past. Make sense?

I find the argument from first cause to be helpful in proving God's existence. It is impossible for the universe to cause itself, or it would have to pre-exist itself. So you are one the right track, but you seem to have made the wrong conclusion. The only conclusion would be God. There would have to be something self-sufficient supporting the universe. Since God has no beginning, He is the answer to the argument from first cause. Unless of course you go in the other direction and decide that nothing truly exists.

 

[Shane Plew]

God is not the only conclusion. While I agree that this universe would have run out of energy by now I don't agree that the universe or universes(I don't know which and neither do you) can't be self sufficient. The only way for energy/matter/information to disappear is through a black hole. We don't know if the energy/matter/information actually ceases to exist, is simply moved somewhere else, or something else.

Now what about the rest of my questions?

 

[CalledOutOne]

God is not the only conclusion. While I agree that this universe would have run out of energy by now I don't agree that the universe or universes(I don't know which and neither do you) can't be self sufficient. The only way for energy/matter/information to disappear is through a black hole. We don't know if the energy/matter/information actually ceases to exist, is simply moved somewhere else, or something else.

Matter is being converted to energy. What's converting it back?
According the entropy, the universe is constantly losing energy.
You're going to have to make a lot of assumptions if you are going to find a conclusion other than God.

Now what about the rest of my questions?

I'll go back and answer them. You might have to be patient while I try to interpret them.

 

[CalledOutOne]

What do you base your beliefs in God on if not faith? Not one person has said why they believe other than faith.

The absolute true laws of logic, science, mathematics, and morality.

Also what other evidence is there besides physical evidence?

See above.

If something exists at all it has physical properties and physical properties can be observed. And are you implying that God is spiritual by saying that he is not physical?

He is certainly immaterial. Things that are immaterial exist. The laws of logic, for example, exist and are immaterial.

If so, where did you get the absurd idea that souls exist?

The idea comes from the presupposition of God. The Christian doesn't come to the conclusion that souls exist without presupposing God.


If you want an explanation of the first two answers, please scroll up and find my post with the video of the debate of Greg Bahnsen.
It will cover TAG (the Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God).

 

[Girder of Loins]

biblical "evidence"

Throughout the Bible, He is mentioned as the Creator and that He has no beginning and no end(as He is the Beginning and the End). The only way this would work is if He did not exist within this universe, as then He would be submitted to our physical laws, and we would still be stuck with "where did the universe come from?"

 

[LekryceMack]

No I don't, but I will happily wait for one. I don't even care if I ever know because the point is quite irrelevant to my existence. Unlike you I'm okay with saying I don't know how something works and neither does anyone else.

Well the reason i believe is because in my darkest times of being in jail, uncertain, almost killed, etc...I kept my faith in the unseen (God) i trusted the unseen (Our lord) and he got me out of my pit. Its really faith that builds your understanding. Heck if you really biblical proof read everything Jesus speaks about. If there is no God or higher power, then who the heck would be this jesus guy claiming to be him and dying for that belief, stating that whoever believes in him will be free and have eternal life???? There are written records of Jesus so thats a fact that his real. Now if Jesus s real, than God has to exist, because many many many people in this world have prayed and trusted and yield to his spirit (as of myself) and have had experiences with him. Breakthroughs, manifestations, healing, etc. Jesus said it himself not everybody will believe. Faith is trust in the unknown. The bible says it to its all FAITH. So its really your choice. You don't have to understand it. But when you trust it, live by it, you will have understanding. Other than that, waiting for the creates answer in the world in a forums certainly won't get you anywhere. If you want some other proof look at the devil and his demons. Demons and evil spirits exists. So if they exist, goes who else does....

 

[Shane Plew]

He is certainly immaterial. Things that are immaterial exist. The laws of logic, for example, exist and are immaterial.

Unfortunately the laws of logic cease to exist if there are no minds form logical thoughts. Does the same thing apply to God? This would definitely destroy the idea that he is omnipresent and potentially all powerful.

There is no mathematical or scientific evidence for God or a god. Also it is not logical or reasonable to assume that God or a god exists. It is not logical or reasonable to assume anything. But as was previously stated, we have to assume that our thoughts are even related to reality. I don't think that is a very good argument because it is unable to be tested or proven. We have absolutely no reason to believe that what we perceive as reality isn't reality. As for the idea of a god existing, we do have plenty of reason to believe this is a false idea.

I may or may not get to the rest of the rest of the things you said. At least I have an answer, or at least a partial one, as to why you believe in God. It isn't because of faith but a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of science and/or potentially an assumption that God exists before searching for evidence.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Unfortunately the laws of logic cease to exist if there are no minds form logical thoughts. Does the same thing apply to God? This would definitely destroy the idea that he is omnipresent and potentially all powerful.

There is no mathematical or scientific evidence for God or a god. Also it is not logical or reasonable to assume that God or a god exists. It is not logical or reasonable to assume anything. But as was previously stated, we have to assume that our thoughts are even related to reality. I don't think that is a very good argument because it is unable to be tested or proven. We have absolutely no reason to believe that what we perceive as reality isn't reality. As for the idea of a god existing, we do have plenty of reason to believe this is a false idea.

I may or may not get to the rest of the rest of the things you said. At least I have an answer, or at least a partial one, as to why you believe in God. It isn't because of faith but a misunderstanding or misinterpretation of science and/or potentially an assumption that God exists before searching for evidence.

There is a reason that you deny the existence of God and it has nothing to do with proof. I can show this to you. Examine what your initial reaction to the evidence of God's existence I offered already in this thread. Did you think that you could continue to deny God because you are not a scientist, or philosopher but 'Surely somewhere, sometime, a philosopher or scientist will come up with an explanation for universal, immaterial, unchanging laws apart from God?' Did you try to come up with an alternate explanation on your own? OR Did you even consider that the proof was valid? OR (as it seems that you have actually done) did you simply look over the evidence and ignore it to continue in your way of thinking? The last would be rejecting any rational way of thinking and deliberately continue in your misinformation which means that your lack of the knowledge of truth is your own fault for not truly seeking the truth.

I think you are confusing my assumption with my presupposition.
You assume there is no God therefore you block out all logic and reason as evidence.

The Laws of logic definitely exist despite whether or not a mind exists that can interpret them. It is not like the instantiation principle (if all red objects went out of existence, then red would cease to exist) as everything that exists is logical. So unless you are willing to say that nothing exists, then logic will always exist. They are what's known as absolute truth. This means that they are always true anywhere in the universe at any given time.

Since you don't seem to want to watch the video I posted (and it seems as though you are just taking any assumption other than the only logical answer (ie. God)), I will post two links to a text version of what TAG is.

Not the best:
The Transcendental Argument for the Existence of God | CARM.org

Much better and much shorter!:
Proof That God Exists.org

Let me define absolute truth.
The law of non-contradiction is an absolute truth. A statement that contradicts itself is not a true statement. For example, to say that a cloud is not a cloud is not a true statement.
Whether a mind exists that conceives this law is irrelevant. This law is true as gravity is true. I can deny gravity all I want but if I jump out of a 20-story building I'm going to fall and hit the ground.

Please visit the links above. They are all the proof any person really needs. Not only this, but if would actually show that since you are considering the existence of God, then you would actually be seeking the truth. To not look at arguments of the other side is proof that you are not willing to know the truth and you are only trying to suppress it just like the Bible says you would do in Romans 1 which gives more evidence since you would be proving Romans chapter one to be true.

 

[DaneaFL]

You beg the question. God never came into existence; God always existed. Most of us don't believe in faith alone. We have been explaining that to you, but you're an empiricist and ask for physical evidence of a being that isn't really physical.

Why can God always exist but the universe can't? This is a fallacy called "special pleading" where the rules apply to everyone else's ideas except yours.

Asking where God came from is just as valid as asking where did the universe come from.

Also, you don't get off the burden-of-proof hook by just saying "god isn't physical"

If God has any perceivable affect on reality then he should leave some kind of evidence behind. but there's not any evidence that some unseen intelligence is pulling strings behind the universe.

Take dark matter for example. We can't see it, touch it, or directly measure it; but we've been able to weigh it and do tests on it purely indrectly from it's affect on normal matter.

If god existed, then we should be able to do the same thing. We might not be able to see him, hear him, or feel him, but we should be able to discern his influence on the physical world. but there's nothing. No god claim has been able to produce any results above blind chance.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Why can God always exist but the universe can't? This is a fallacy called "special pleading" where the rules apply to everyone else's ideas except yours.

Asking where God came from is just as valid as asking where did the universe come from.

Also, you don't get off the burden-of-proof hook by just saying "god isn't physical"

If God has any perceivable affect on reality then he should leave some kind of evidence behind. but there's not any evidence that some unseen intelligence is pulling strings behind the universe.

Take dark matter for example. We can't see it, touch it, or directly measure it; but we've been able to weigh it and do tests on it purely indrectly from it's affect on normal matter.

If god existed, then we should be able to do the same thing. We might not be able to see him, hear him, or feel him, but we should be able to discern his influence on the physical world. but there's nothing. No god claim has been able to produce any results above blind chance.

The laws of logic are unseen. They cannot be measured. They are immaterial. Do they exist?
How are these, which reflect the nature of the Christian God along with the laws of science, mathematics, and absolute morals, not evidence left behind by God?
How is order not evidence as opposed to randomness which would have occurred if the universe happened by chance (I've already explained in the other thread how entropy disproves that the universe is eternal? No rational person who understands entropy can deny that the universe is a finite thing.)

 

[Chris Blanks]

@CalledOutOne How are there laws of logic? Logic is largely subjective to the person you ask. If there are laws of logic, lay them on the table and explain them in detail.

 

[CalledOutOne]

@CalledOutOne How are there laws of logic? Logic is largely subjective to the person you ask. If there are laws of logic, lay them on the table and explain them in detail.

The laws of logic are not subject to any person. They are absolute.

For example, "the red ball is blue" can never be a true statement. It violates the logical law of non-contradiction. Even if there is a mind that conceives the red ball the be blue, that is an illogical thought. Logic is not subjective. It is absolute.

Furthermore, if the laws of logic are subjective, then it is a vain thing to use them in this argument. I could simply prove my point by using any illogical statement I desire: I love cats, therefore God exists.

 

[Chris Blanks]

The red ball is blue is not illogical, saying that the red ball is red is illogical. The ball is actually every color but red, as that is the color it reflects, but a fraction of the ball is blue. Here is how logic is subjective. To religious groups it is logical to kill heretics or people that disrespect their religion while for other religious groups it is not. That is logic be subjective to a individual's religion.

 

[CalledOutOne]

The red ball is blue is not illogical, saying that the red ball is red is illogical. The ball is actually every color but red, as that is the color it reflects, but a fraction of the ball is blue.

I was using a figure of speech. I don't suppose when you go to art shop to buy paint you say, "I want the paint which reflects red." No, you say, "I want red paint." You have misrepresented my argument. This is a straw man argument.

Here is how logic is subjective. To religious groups it is logical to kill heretics or people that disrespect their religion while for other religious groups it is not. That is logic be subjective to a individual's religion.

You are confusing the laws of logic and morals. Morals and logic are two different things.

Logic is not subjective. It is absolute. Since you either misunderstood or misrepresented my last example, I will provide another one.

It violates the law of non-contradiction to say, "the 20"X20"X20" cube is exactly 10'X10'X10'". Therefore, the statement is logically untrue.

 

[Chris Blanks]

Logic is a thought process, it is intertwined with morals, therefore it is subjective.

 

[CalledOutOne]

Logic is a thought process, it is intertwined with morals, therefore it is subjective.

Logic is not a thought process, although we can perceive it with our thoughts. Logic exists outside of our minds.

Why not consider the example I gave you before? If I conceive a thought involving a ball that reflects red and say that it reflects blue, then that is illogical. Otherwise logic is subjective and like I said before I could you use any argument and it would be logical.

I could beg the question all I want. It is logical in my mind isn't it? Therefore I'm right. But then in your mind your logic is different than mine. In your mind I'm wrong and in my mind your wrong. Who's right? Everyone and at the same time no one.