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.
Put a seizure warning on your post, SZ.
The universe as we know it is what we have to talk about. We also know that nothing in our universe existed prior to its existence and that includes space.
That is the consensus of most astrophysicists, that literally nothing existed. The singularity came out of nowhere into nowhere and began the somewhere.
Most astrophysicists and physicists disagree. From all evidence so far, the universe had a beginning and that there was no space, matter, energy or time. Space which is needed for a vacuum did not exist.
Fair enough. I can respect that. In fact, let me take this moment to congratulate you on your objectivity and open-mindedness. Even though we disagree I can respect a person who responds in honesty regardless of how that relates to mine in viewpoints. Thanks.The hug is for actually making an argument against the conclusion rather than claiming there is no objective evidence to support it.
What I am talking about are the conditions that allowed for the process at all.
Can you cite one example when intelligence did not arise from intelligence?
Of course we don't know but you do see the problem do you not? If it was a backward flowing regression we would still need the first cause no matter how far back the regression went. But I don't know is an acceptable answer.
What started the metaverse? See the same problem as with the regression.
Well first of all I want to say upfront that the universe's beginning is just one piece of the puzzle and that it is only one cog in the whole argument for God's existence. The natural explanations as shown above are not probable due to their problems and give rise to the question how natural causes can attribute to the natural world that didn't exist prior to the natural world or the natural realm, then this cause was outside the natural realm by necessity.
Space, matter, energy and time did not exist to have natural condition in or on or from in any time.
Explain natural conditions prior to natural conditions coming into existence?
You seem to be assuming that 'natural conditions', however you conceive them, are contingent on something else. That is just begging the question for the supernatural.
We are asking for evidence of the "If" in your statement.
The evidence of 'if'?
I said if we can create cars and airplanes, then it stands to reason God can create a universe. If you agree with the premise, then the existence of the universe is pretty strong evidence.
If a God can create a universe, yes, then the existence of the universe points to God.
Nope, that is not what you said when he quoted you. Here is the full quote:
I don't see anything there about cars and airplanes. You are aware of the Ninth Commandment, aren't you?
If a God can create a universe, yes, then the existence of the universe points to God.
Bob, the god of seizures and universes.
Scoffers.
I've been expecting you. hehe
Yes, looking at the quality of your posts I can see why you were expecting them.
The main reason God sent His Son is no one believed God exists.
So it's not for a lack of evidence that people don't believe. It's that you can not know God exists except by Jesus Christ. He is the way. There is no other way to know but Christ. You can not know He exists another way.
It is for lack of evidence for the theist's claims that people don't believe.
It is for lack of evidence for the theist's claims that people don't believe.
Deny it all you like but you know as well as anyone that faith is only required when there is no evidenceThat's what you think.
The main reason God sent His Son is no one believed God exists.
So it's not for a lack of evidence that people don't believe. It's that you can not know God exists except by Jesus Christ. He is the way. There is no other way to know but Christ. You can not know He exists another way.
Of course you were expecting us because you were told lies and the first thing a liar tells the people he is lying to is,Whatever. I was expecting you.
And hence, a tacit admission that there is NO objective evidence for God.
If it isn't able to differentiate between the two, then it isn't evidence to begin with.
What you are promoting is intellectual nihilism. Since the objective evidence can not demonstrate God you take a stance that disallows for the existence of objectivity. It is the intellectual equivalent to taking your ball and going home. If you can't play, no one else can.
Then why discuss the lack of a solid explanation for the beginning of the universe?
Why mention it at all? We are asking for objective evidence of God.
Wiki on formal fallacyThe antecedent in an indicative conditional is claimed to be true because the consequent is true; if A, then B; B, therefore A.
If God then universe. There exists the universe Therefore GodIf a God can create a universe, yes, then the existence of the universe points to God.
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?