if not God then who/what?

As far as I can tell, there has been no declaration from God about her being eternal either, and I'm not even sure a mere declaration carries much weight on its own. The Big Bang theory says that the universe used to be a singularity, but that doesn't mean it wasn't the universe, and even if you want to get semantic about it and say its a different thing, its still not 'ex nihilo'.

 

Then lets bring in the "turtles" as you mentioned. Where did the singularity come from? The infallible Word of God declares that God is eternal.

 

A few of many bible verses that mention the eternal God listed at bottom of page.. I noticed the old and tired infinite regress defense of activist atheists and other anti-God minions. Its a well known fact that infinite regress is solved via and within the framework of spirituality metaphysics, the bible and by the KCA cosmological argument and other well known philosophical ontological arguments, writings etc.



Genesis 21:33
Abraham planted a tamarisk tree in Beersheba, and there he called upon the name of the LORD, the Eternal God.

Psalm 90:1-4

Lord, you have been our dwelling place
throughout all generations.

Before the mountains were born
or you brought forth the earth and the world,
from everlasting to everlasting you are God.

You turn men back to dust,
saying, “Return to dust, O sons of men.”

For a thousand years in your sight
are like a day that has just gone by,
or like a watch in the night.

Ephesians 3:10-11

His intent was that now, through the church, the manifold wisdom of God should be made known to the rulers and authorities in the heavenly realms, according to his eternal purpose which he accomplished in Christ Jesus our Lord.

Deuteronomy 33:27

The eternal God is your refuge




reva

 

Again evdience ....read and weep my athiest fellow members.....



The kalam cosmological argument, by showing that the universe began to exist, demonstrates that the world is not a necessary being and, therefore, not self-explanatory with respect to its existence. Two philosophical arguments and two scientific confirmations are presented in support of the beginning of the universe. Since whatever begins to exist has a cause, there must exist a transcendent cause of the universe.
Source: "The Existence of God and the Beginning of the Universe." Truth: A Journal of Modern Thought 3 (1991): 85-96.



http://www.leaderu.com/truth/3truth11.html



reva

 

The universe beginning to exist from absolutely nothing is far less logical than to assume it came from something especially since the current scientific view is that the universe did begin, and is not eternal. If one has to say something caused the universe to begin to exist and not just any universe but one that supports life (which is a near impossible feat according to Penrose), its logical to assume that something is God because its attributes are the same as Gods. And because God is eternal via common sense and the writings about God and even science since God existed in an atemporal realm ‘before the big bang banged’ God must be eternal/atemporal and able influence ie act on physical causality temporal from that realm (remember time and space was created AFTER the Big Bang began to unfold).

Again the universe began to exist from an atemopral influence. This thing has all the attributers we ascribe to god ie it caused a universe to begin to exist that created we humans and everything else call it what you wish but, God is the most accurate name available. Its sad that emotional issues override your logical mind, hopefully you will come to terms with that and allow God in? Remember ;
Pride goeth before destruction. Also please see notes (below).

NOTES from Dr Craig;

"The kalam cosmological argument, by showing that the universe began to exist, demonstrates that the world is not a necessary being and, therefore, not self-explanatory with respect to its existence. Two philosophical arguments and two scientific confirmations are presented in support of the beginning of the universe. Since whatever begins to exist has a cause, there must exist a transcendent cause of the universe."

Source: "The Existence of God and the Beginning of the Universe." Truth: A Journal of Modern Thought 3 (1991): 85-96.



http://www.leaderu.com/truth/3truth11.html




reva

 

SHOW PROOF!

- - - Updated - - -

The kalam cosmological argument persists based on one huge assumption: there is a cause. That is why this argument fails.

 

Its about 6PM sunday and I just read my reply to Prof. The last long sentence in the first paragraph was a unedited mistake I cut off the word processer, It should of been this one instead.



An eternal is by definition atemporal and therefore stops infinite regression. How can infinite regression be an issue when the being is eternal? Time was created according only after the big bang began**. I suppose the reason for that supposition is that without physical matter time is a moot concept.

** All the forces including the super forces matter energy of all forms etc were created after the big bang began.

Sorry for the mistake prof.


reva

 

There is no absolute proof for any type, kind phenomena etc of physical reality RS only evidence. Like time proof is relative to the person submitting it.

Really? REAAAAY LOL? Well I will say you have a different conflict to the KCA’s feature etc than most. Remember the KCA assumes agreement with the big bang theory which is the most accepted theory of origins. So tell me how does the big bang or the universe’s ‘singularity’ begin to exist since there was no time matter or anything of a physical nature ie space atoms quarks quantum processes zpes or all energies, or even physical forces of nature etc ‘before’ the big bang? If you do have an idea in mind please present your sources and evidences as well? The source request is only if the information you base your claims etc on is not well known.


reva

 

What this comes down to is, are there other Universes out there or not.

Our Universe May Exist in a Multiverse, Cosmic Inflation Discovery Suggests

 

Most academics know what a philosophical god is. it’s a general term for God . What god is not relevant. If the God in question happens to create the universe and YOU what difference would a label have> Answer NONE. The end result is that God exists which destroys your argument. Asking ‘which god’ ‘what type god’ ‘what kind of religion do you …‘ etc etc is only diversionary attempt and shows weakness of concept. .

Bigotry is ugly.


reva

 

The Big Bang theory doesn't say that energy was created during the event. Rather, it is compatible with the idea that the energy existed prior to the event.

 

There is more evidence for the one universe big bang theory and its the most accepted theory. Again you are grasping for straws, well maybe that is a bit harsh, but you are doing what you accuse the religious folks of doing trying to call on theories and ideas that has no real evidence to support it.Kinda' sweet, eh?

Really I am not tryiong to bust your chops, its just that there is no empirical evidence for multi universes and their supporting theories. (no evidence that I know of and I love my telescope and such things) There are however loads of empirical and other evidences for our one universe and the standard hot model one universe big bang theory. Again nothing is impossible, there may be infinite universes with every possible scenario going on right now and that is a tenet of a real scientific theory. However as I said there is no empirical evidence for such theories.


reva

 

ABSOLUTELY WRONG ...google 'the first three min...' or much better >>>> http://www.astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/early.html


Nothing existed before T-0 which is fancy talk for when the big bang banged.


reva

 

Did you even read the link I posted?

Sorry to inform you, but unlike religion, science is not stagnate. Humans make new discoveries all the time, that changes human understanding of the universe.

You are free to claim that I am "grasping at straws', but in reality, you are the one grasping for straws because a multiverse would destroy your KCA argument. And we cannot have that, now can we?

 

This is really simple....all gods are simple man made ideas, you need to know which one you are dealing with, so you can defeat that 'god'. Obviously Zeus, Yahweh and Allah (just to name a few) all have different attributes. Its those attributes that you disprove, thus disproving that 'god'.

And no, no 'god' ever made me. I like YOU evolved from an ape like creature that lived millions of years ago. Orangutans, Chimpanzees, Gorillas and Humans can all trace their roots back to a single ancestor thanks to genetics.

Chromosome 2 (human)

Yes you and I are animals. We are Great Apes. You may not like it, you may not accept it, but you participation is MANDATORY by being human.

Yes, especially religious bigotry.

 

Matter probably didn't exist at T-0, but the idea that everything existed as a singularity before the big bang means there likely was a single concentrated point of energy.

You should read your own source, since it doesn't say anything about the creation of energy in general, but rather the development of forces. That would be conversion of and relationships between different energis, but not the creation of energy itself.

 

I would like to add on to Chromosome 2 (Human) with the following:

This held up in court (please see Kitzmiller v. Dover), to help keep creationism out of the classroom.

 

The problem I have with this argument is that time in the most fundamental sense is simply change. Anything that changes is by definition temporal since there is a moment when things are one way and another moment when things are different. To say that something is atemporal is to say that it doesn't change and something that doesn't change cannot cause another action.

If one believes time to be a property that began with the universe at the Big Bang, then there is no moment when the universe did not exist, hence it is eternal and does not need a cause. Quentin Smith goes into much more detail in the following article. http://infidels.org/library/modern/quentin_smith/self-caused.html

 

"force (fɔːs) n
1. strength or energy; might; power:"
www.thefreedictionary.com/force



Now you two go ahead and battle it out. I got my two cents worth in the discussion.

 

Energy

I believe the 'energy' that you are referring to in Burzmali post, would be of the first definition.

 

"
like•ly (ˈlaɪk li)

adj. -li•er, -li•est,
adv. adj. 1. probably or apparently destined (usu. fol. by an infinitive): something not likely to happen.

2. seeming like truth, fact, or certainty; believable: a likely story.

3. seeming to fulfill requirements or expectations; apparently suitable: a likely place to live.

4. showing promise of achievement or excellence"

Those probabilities are a witch.

"seeming (ˈsiːmɪ&#331 adj1. (prenominal) apparent but not actual or genuine: seeming honesty.

n2. outward or false appearance"

both found at www.thefreedictionary.com

 

If that is what you want to believe, then believe it. I don't recall anyone attempting to change what you believe.

 

You have made a positive claim regarding what 'time' is. Do you have verifiable PROOF?

Are you now suggesting that what one believes can have a physical affect on the universe?

 

We cannot know the unknowable. What we can do is limit entropy with our consciousness. A great deal of our fear comes from the unknown which adds entropy. Truly accepting our fears and then dealing with them with the least amount of entropy will result in greater satisfaction and success.

 

Time

All variations of the definition of 'time' mandate some type of change