-Removed-The existence of the universe is the proof for a creator.
The only other idea that would refute the idea that matter was created is the idea that matter has always existed.
I have to ask myself what reason would I have for believing that? What could cause me to reason out the idea that matter has always existed?
I can only rationally conclude that there is no cause that supports the idea that matter has always existed. It's a delusion.
While on the other hand the idea that matter came into existence from nothing by an act of creation is consistent with logical thought, and is the only viable rational conclusion a sound mind can arrive at.
Originally posted by josephwYou keep saying 'rationally' and 'logical thought' yet all you are doing is making totally unfounded assertions.
The existence of the universe [b]is the proof for a creator.
The only other idea that would refute the idea that matter was created is the idea that matter has always existed.
I have to ask myself what reason would I have for believing that? What could cause me to reason out the idea that matter has always existed?
I can only rationally conclu ...[text shortened]... ent with logical thought, and is the only viable rational conclusion a sound mind can arrive at.[/b]
You believe the conclusion and you jump to it without any actual reasoning whatsoever.
That you feel the need to hide your faith behind a claim of rationality and that you need to believe that atheists are deluded, is nothing more than a sign of the weakness of your faith.
Originally posted by josephwThis reads like a parody.
The existence of the universe [b]is the proof for a creator.
The only other idea that would refute the idea that matter was created is the idea that matter has always existed.
I have to ask myself what reason would I have for believing that? What could cause me to reason out the idea that matter has always existed?
I can only rationally conclu ...[text shortened]... ent with logical thought, and is the only viable rational conclusion a sound mind can arrive at.[/b]
Originally posted by josephwIt will not be your argument, but you that will be addressed. Something from nothing is,
The existence of the universe [b]is the proof for a creator.
The only other idea that would refute the idea that matter was created is the idea that matter has always existed.
I have to ask myself what reason would I have for believing that? What could cause me to reason out the idea that matter has always existed?
I can only rationally conclu ...[text shortened]... ent with logical thought, and is the only viable rational conclusion a sound mind can arrive at.[/b]
and always will be the great question for me. If there was a simple explanation someone
would bring it up, but there isn't. So what they are left with is attack the messenger, or put
off the question. Some may suggest other events else where, could cause all things here,
but that doesn't really answer the question either, it only pushes it away. just to avoid it by
casting another layer of what if this, or that occurred else where."
Some place else could do it, not someone in their minds.
Originally posted by FMFAll you posts are a parody of reason brought on by a pseudo psychological need to prove you think you know what you're talking about.
This reads like a parody.
If you can't see the reason in the idea that what exists is the evidence for a creator, then you're delusional. There it is, the whole universe on display right before your very eyes as evidence signifying the genius of a creator, but you'd rather believe anything else without evidence than admit you're lying to yourself to the contrary.
No evidence exists that proves that what exists wasn't created, but what exists is the evidence for a creator. Pure, undiluted, clear, rational logic.
Originally posted by KellyJayRight! One question is, how did something come from nothing? There's no answer to that question that the human mind can comprehend aside from the concept of creation.
It will not be your argument, but you that will be addressed. Something from nothing is,
and always will be the great question for me. If there was a simple explanation someone
would bring it up, but there isn't. So what they are left with is attack the messenger, or put
off the question. Some may suggest other events else where, could cause all things h ...[text shortened]... this, or that occurred else where."
Some place else could do it, not someone in their minds.
One alternative view is that the universe has always existed, but that defies reason because there's no way of knowing that except by personal experience.
The only rational answer to the question of the origin of the universe is that it was created from nothing by an omniscient creator.
Acknowledging a creator settles the mind and generates a tranquil and peaceful soul.
2 edits
Originally posted by josephwSimple logic. If that which exists is evidence of a creator of that which exists, then the existence of a creator is evidence of a creator of that creator. This leads to an infinite regress.
All you posts are a parody of reason brought on by a pseudo psychological need to prove you think you know what you're talking about.
If you can't see the reason in the idea that what exists is the evidence for a creator, then you're delusional. There it is, the whole universe on display right before your very eyes as evidence signifying the genius of a c ...[text shortened]... created, but what exists is the evidence for a creator. Pure, undiluted, clear, rational logic.
The problem is that the supernatural defies logic and eventually necessitates an appeal to mystery. Either that, or an admission that what exists is not evidence of a creator. This latter admission is not, by any stretch, an argument for or against the existence of a creator.
Originally posted by JS357Why compare something everyone dates with someone who is eternal?
Simple logic. If that which exists is evidence of a creator of that which exists, then the existence of a creator is evidence of a creator of that creator. This leads to an infinite regress.
The problem is that the supernatural defies logic and eventually necessitates an appeal to mystery. Either that, or an admission that what exists is not evidence of a c ...[text shortened]... latter admission is not, by any stretch, an argument for or against the existence of a creator.
Originally posted by josephwAh, so you think that because you can't comprehend how the universe came into being without a creator, there must be a creator? Well that's an interesting insight into your psyche, but it's certainly not a logical argument.
Right! One question is, how did something come from nothing? There's no answer to that question that the human mind can comprehend aside from the concept of creation.
One alternative view is that the universe has always existed, but that defies reason because there's no way of knowing that except by personal experience.
The only rational answer to the ...[text shortened]... reator.
Acknowledging a creator settles the mind and generates a tranquil and peaceful soul.
Originally posted by avalanchethecatSo in your mind where did everything come from?
Ah, so you think that because you can't comprehend how the universe came into being without a creator, there must be a creator? Well that's an interesting insight into your psyche, but it's certainly not a logical argument.
Originally posted by KellyJayLike you and josephw and everybody else, I haven't got the faintest idea. I'm ok with that, I don't feel a need to pretend that I know and tell others how mad they are for nailing their colours to a different imaginary mast.
So in your mind where did everything come from?
Originally posted by avalanchethecatOkay if you can not come up with a viable alternative than what have you to complain about?
Like you and josephw and everybody else, I haven't got the faintest idea. I'm ok with that, I don't feel a need to pretend that I know and tell others how mad they are for nailing their colours to a different imaginary mast.
2 edits
Originally posted by KellyJayWhy not classify the universe as eternal? You have not dealt with the premise that all that exists is evidence of a creator but that creator's existence is not evidence of a creator. Why not accept that what exists is only evidence of its own existence.
Why compare something everyone dates with someone who is eternal?
But also, how do you get from a "what" to a "who"?