Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Why God allows evil
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="MyChainsAreGone" data-source="post: 74035641" data-attributes="member: 241841"><p>Thanks for the reply on point.</p><p></p><p>I don't think "We just don't know" really addresses my challenge. And I don't think that it proves "straw man."</p><p></p><p>I do think that science postulates that all things have a beginning... that's why the Big Bang is offered as an explanation to the beginning of the universe. Does anyone suggest that matter is eternal? Has always existed? That fails the second law of thermodynamics because, with endless time past, that law demands that equilibrium will have been reached.</p><p></p><p>So the fact remains that all this "stuff" had to come from somewhere. My representation of the belief that there was once nothing, and then there was everything is still apt... even if the suggestions/theories of how it happened may differ.</p><p></p><p>The first law of Thermodynamics demands that matter cannot be created or destroyed. While the second law guarantees equilibrium within a closed system. These two laws are literally at odds with one another when considering the origin of the universe...</p><ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">1st Law - Energy/Matter cannot be created or destroyed. There can be no beginning.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">2nd Law - Because there's not yet equilibrium, there must be a beginning.</li> </ul><p>In a naturalist perspective, there's no logical reconciliation of these two laws... because it (the universe) is a closed system.</p><p></p><p>The only thing that can reconcile these two laws is the postulate that there must have been an agent outside of the closed system acting upon it.</p><p></p><p>Whatever atheists <em>do </em>believe about the origin of the universe, It's worth noting that it's still a matter of "faith." And the whole point of my original post was that it is more reasonable and consistent with the laws of physics to believe in that "Outside Agent" than it is to deny that Agent exists.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="MyChainsAreGone, post: 74035641, member: 241841"] Thanks for the reply on point. I don't think "We just don't know" really addresses my challenge. And I don't think that it proves "straw man." I do think that science postulates that all things have a beginning... that's why the Big Bang is offered as an explanation to the beginning of the universe. Does anyone suggest that matter is eternal? Has always existed? That fails the second law of thermodynamics because, with endless time past, that law demands that equilibrium will have been reached. So the fact remains that all this "stuff" had to come from somewhere. My representation of the belief that there was once nothing, and then there was everything is still apt... even if the suggestions/theories of how it happened may differ. The first law of Thermodynamics demands that matter cannot be created or destroyed. While the second law guarantees equilibrium within a closed system. These two laws are literally at odds with one another when considering the origin of the universe... [LIST] [*]1st Law - Energy/Matter cannot be created or destroyed. There can be no beginning. [*]2nd Law - Because there's not yet equilibrium, there must be a beginning. [/LIST] In a naturalist perspective, there's no logical reconciliation of these two laws... because it (the universe) is a closed system. The only thing that can reconcile these two laws is the postulate that there must have been an agent outside of the closed system acting upon it. Whatever atheists [I]do [/I]believe about the origin of the universe, It's worth noting that it's still a matter of "faith." And the whole point of my original post was that it is more reasonable and consistent with the laws of physics to believe in that "Outside Agent" than it is to deny that Agent exists. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
Ethics & Morality
Why God allows evil
Top
Bottom