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.
You keep asserting this. When are you going to explain how exactly "logic and reason" says this?Logic and reason do.
Things can not cause themselves.
Not necessarily the simplest, but the most obvious.
...and because we can't it is impossible?
Then how did everything get here?
And what for?
If there can be an eternal and uncaused God, logically and reasonably,Logic and reason do.
Things can not cause themselves.....
You forget the intelligent conscious processes.
If you say so.Because you miss the point.
How about the inconceivable one?
I did, but you don't get it, apparently...You keep asserting this. When are you going to explain how exactly "logic and reason" says this?
No, you're disqualified now.Unless they are gods?
Allright, that's true.I didn't say that. I merely pointed out that we have never observed anything being created. We don't know if it's possible.
Allright, that's true.
We should look what is most plausible then.
We can only say things are plausible or implausible based on the evidence.
True, we can only assess what is (im)plausible or (un)likely.He didn't say that it was impossible. He merely pointed out that "the rules" we are familiar with have not been tested in the unfamiliar terrain that is creatio ex nihilo. More to the point, we aren't sure whether there is any such terrain to navigate in the first place.
No,that's what logic and reason are to you.What you really mean is "magical thinking".
Speak for yourself.Philosophy is useless here.
Obviously.
Logical reasoning does not lead to the conclusion that the physics of the universe apply outside the universe.
Then why do they start out with stating evolution is true, and then franticly try to prove it (or just convince others in any which way)?As I understand it, nowadays physicists (and scientists generally) don't really talk of "causes" anyway. It's about finding explanatory models that best account for the data.
He who claims it's science.Of course one side has the burden of proof and the other doesn't...
He who claims it's science.
Nope, because it's a conviction of something very hard (if not impossible) to (dis)prove.I'm not claiming anything. You're claiming it's a god. The burden of proof is on you.
Nope, because it's a conviction of something very hard (if not impossible) to (dis)prove.
Science-ists who claim otherwise, which they often do boastfully, take the burden of proof.
I did, but you don't get it, apparently... So now what?
Obviously.
I don't know who would claim otherwise.
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?