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.
I guess I would have to say "other". About 14 billion years ago there was the singularity that eventually expanded to become our universe. Or at least that's what the evidence points to. But beyond that, I have no idea so I'm hesitant to speculate.
This is going to be a chain of questions that is supposed to lead to the proving of genesis after much interpretation of cherry picked answers, isn't it?
I'm nothing if not honest. I'm not out to try proving anything. I am seeking to understand and simplify the beliefs of others who I don't agree with.The point of this thread is to try to clarify what others, particularly atheistic evolutionists (i.e., atheists who believe in evolution), believe about some specific items related to creation & evolution. I'm not interested in debating or arguing. I'm simply trying to get clarification of beliefs.
That is Aristotelian logic which according to Copi's intro logic textbook is mostly used for developing truth tables.Its not special knowledge, just logic.
A and (not A) are mutually exclusive.
Not necessarily. Keep in mind that deductive logic does not have to connect with reality. Inductive logic is another story but we are talking about deductive logic.So existence and non-existence are mutually exclusive.
We have no idea what "absolute non-existence" might or might not be so you cannot really draw any conclusions from the concept.If there was absolute non-existence, then we would not exist today.
Again deductive logic does not have to have any relation to reality. It strictly applies to the form of the argument so your statement that A and (not A) are mutually exclusive is not necessarily a reflection on the world and and the statement "existence and non-existence are mutually exclusive." does not necessarily apply.Thus we are in a state of existence.
Ok.Its not special knowledge, just logic.
I agree with this.A and (not A) are mutually exclusive.
This is where you mess up as only your first statement is a direct translation of the logical example you provided earlier.So existence and non-existence are mutually exclusive.
If there was absolute non-existence, then we would not exist today.
Thus we are in a state of existence.
False.
Logically, something can not come from nothing, there is something therefore there has always been something.
**Note i am speaking in absolute terms of existence
-existence cannot come from non-existence
I'm nothing if not honest. I'm not out to try proving anything. I am seeking to understand and simplify the beliefs of others who I don't agree with.
We have no idea what "absolute non-existence" might or might not be so you cannot really draw any conclusions from the concept.
I'm trying to go into this with as few assumptions as possible, but it's clear from the responses so far that most atheists are responding with something like "I don't know". Feel free to correct me if I've come to the wrong conclusion.The first thing that you may need to understand is that for some questions, atheists may not have any beliefs. I think you are going into this with the assumption that everyone has to have a belief. Atheists are just fine saying, "I don't know" for some questions about the origin of universes and the past.
I'm trying to go into this with as few assumptions as possible, but it's clear from the responses so far that most atheists are responding with something like "I don't know". Feel free to correct me if I've come to the wrong conclusion.
I'd say that it's a correct summation thus farI'm trying to go into this with as few assumptions as possible, but it's clear from the responses so far that most atheists are responding with something like "I don't know". Feel free to correct me if I've come to the wrong conclusion.
All of logic is based on this.No I am defining what "absolute non-existence" is.
The absence of everything, no matter, space, time or any other possible thing.
Based on that definition of nothingness then deductive logic can be used to show that since we are here, there has never been nothingness.
I am not drawing any conclusions from reality other than the fact that "something currently exists".
This is really a pointless discussion i guess because it all comes down to how you define your terms.
andLogically, something can not come from nothing, there is something therefore there has always been something.
I don't feel that either of these can be supported so I made some comments for consideration.-existence cannot come from non-existence
I don't think there's anything wrong with saying "I don't know". (I do it all the time!)Is there something wrong with a person stating; I don't know, when enough evidence is not available to make a conclusion?
I'm trying to go into this with as few assumptions as possible, but it's clear from the responses so far that most atheists are responding with something like "I don't know". Feel free to correct me if I've come to the wrong conclusion.
True or false: Several billion years ago there existed a formation of mass and/or energy that eventually spawned the material for the known universe.
- True
- False
- Other (please elaborate)
True or false: Several billion years ago there existed a formation of mass and/or energy that eventually spawned the material for the known universe.
- True
- False
- Other (please elaborate)
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?