In other words you have no idea and the entire concept behind your argument is that you don't know.He fully explained it was "that which existed". Can't you read?
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.
-
CF has always been a site that welcomes people from different backgrounds and beliefs to participate in discussion and even debate. That is the nature of its ministry. In view of recent events emotions are running very high. We need to remind people of some basic principles in debating on this site. We need to be civil when we express differences in opinion. No personal attacks. Avoid you, your statements. Don't characterize an entire political party with comparisons to Fascism or Communism or other extreme movements that committed atrocities. CF is not the place for broad brush or blanket statements about groups and political parties. Put the broad brushes and blankets away when you come to CF, better yet, put them in the incinerator. Debate had no place for them. We need to remember that people that commit acts of violence represent themselves or a small extreme faction.
The cosmological argument
- Thread starter Nooj
- Start date
If you're asking about the composition or nature of the Universe before the expansion, my answer is that I don't know.
Is there something wrong with saying that I don't know?
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Only when you're arguing what it couldn't be.
Saying the words, "I don't know" is a lot different then debating what it wasn't.
Upvote
0
Eh, O.K.
I looked back on the thread and you have a point.
But if you don't know then there is no reason to doubt that the universe came into existence from nothing.
You asked if you're missing something.
1. An actually infinite number of things cannot exist.
2. A beginningless series of events in time entails an actually infinite number of things.
3. Therefore, a beginningless series of events in time cannot exist.
1. The series of events in time is a collection formed by adding one number after another.
2. A collection formed by adding one member after another cannot be actually infinite.
3. Therefore, the series of events in time cannot be actually infinte.
The only reason it doesn't support it is because it would have to account for God.
Which would be harder to explain. Only because God would have to be explained.
And as far as I know, science can't even explain a simple, basic emotion.
Technically, things like love and hate don't exist.
So even if the existence of God was a universal truth, it would be beyond science to explain it.
Last edited:
Upvote
0
Similar threads
