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.
No.Look at it this way: everything He did --- at the time --- was outside of the Bible (with the exception of fulfillment of prophecy). It didn't become part of the Bible until it was divinely inspired and written down.
For instance, when Jesus walked on water, it was done ex Scriptura, but when He arose from the grave, it was fulfillment of Biblical prophecy.
See the difference?
What if the nature of reality doesn't require it to be created, just as the nature of God doesn't require God to be created?
Right, but there is no inherent logical preference for one or the other, except if you're willing to apply Occam's razor, which states that the simpler explanation is more likely the correct one, which seems to indicate a self-authoring or always-existing universe to be the more likely, as it eliminates a spurious explanation.Fact of the matter is though, a self-existing Creator of this universe, and this self-existing universe cannot co-exist.
Right, but there is no inherent logical preference for one or the other, except if you're willing to apply Occam's razor, which states that the simpler explanation is more likely the correct one, which seems to indicate a self-authoring or always-existing universe to be the more likely, as it eliminates a spurious explanation.
Jules Verne predicted correctly in his book 'Parise in the 20th Century' that there would be calculators, a world-wide communications network, high speed trains, and gasoline-powered cars.
It's the fufillment of a prophecy! Lets start worshipping Jules Verne!
How about you address Chalnoth's post without the Bible prophecies and quotes this time?Go right ahead --- if you think it'll do you any good.
Right, but there is no inherent logical preference for one or the other, except if you're willing to apply Occam's razor, which states that the simpler explanation is more likely the correct one, which seems to indicate a self-authoring or always-existing universe to be the more likely, as it eliminates a spurious explanation.
But then that wouldn't explain how a book --- completed in 96AD --- could predict the restoration of a nation, that occurred in 1948 --- not to mention the preservation of the race; and not just any race, but a race of people so hated, that it's eradication was almost sure to come within a few years or so.
How about you address Chalnoth's post without the Bible prophecies and quotes this time?
Chalnoth said:Right, but there is no inherent logical preference for one or the other, except if you're willing to apply Occam's razor, which states that the simpler explanation is more likely the correct one, which seems to indicate a self-authoring or always-existing universe to be the more likely, as it eliminates a spurious explanation.
This only would be amazing and miraculous IF that book completed in 96AD were locked away in a vault somewhere and not taken out again until 1950. Then, fulfillment of the prophecy would be remarkable indeed. As things are, with billions of people who read the book, you have to consider the fact that some people actively sought to fulfill it via political means.
But if a god can create himselfe why can't a universe do the same.
God isn't self-creating --- He is self-existing.
If God is self-existing, why did it take an eternity of his self-existence to create this thing, the Universe, relatively recently - compared to forever, which is the time he spent doing what exactly?
If God is self-existing, why can't the Universe be self-existing?God isn't self-creating --- He is self-existing.
It took six days to create the universe. What He did in Eternity Past, and what He will do in Eternity Future was not revealed to us.
Does scripture explain why or how wood burns?Occam's Razor supports Scripture hands down, as Scripture explains everything, whereas a self-existing universe explains nothing. All it does is gender questions, more questions, and many more questions.
If God is self-existing, why can't the Universe be self-existing?
I could go on and on. Scripture doesn't explain anything.
Right, but there is no inherent logical preference for one or the other, except if you're willing to apply Occam's razor, which states that the simpler explanation is more likely the correct one, which seems to indicate a self-authoring or always-existing universe to be the more likely, as it eliminates a spurious explanation.
Okay, from post 22 onwards, I think I've pinpointed where the argument ends up.Fact of the matter is though, a self-existing Creator of this universe, and this self-existing universe cannot co-exist.
You don't really have any argument against a self-existing universe aside from the point that a self-existing universe doesn't explain anything. My rebuttal is: A self-existing God doesn't explain anything either.Occam's Razor supports Scripture hands down, as Scripture explains everything, whereas a self-existing universe explains nothing. All it does is gender questions, more questions, and many more questions
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?