***[Moderator Note] Pahu is no longer a member of Think Atheist.  If you would like to add your thoughts to this thread, that is your prerogative; however, the original poster is not able to respond.[/Moderator Note]***

When we set out to explain why and how something happens, we must use the evidence, facts and experience available to us if we are to arrive at a logical conclusion. Using available evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we know that the universe had a beginning and that before that beginning there was no universe and therefore there was nothing. We know this because of the Law of Causality (for every cause there is an effect and for every effect there is a cause). Based on this law, we can use the following logic:

 

1. The universe exists.

2. The universe had a beginning.

3. Before the beginning of the universe, there was no universe.

4. Since there was no universe, there was nothing.

5. Since the universe does exist, it came from nothing.

6. Nothing comes from nothing by any natural cause.

7. Therefore the cause of the universe is supernatural.

8. Life exists.

9. Life always comes from pre-existing life of the same kind (the Law of Biogenesis).

10. Life cannot come from nonliving matter by any natural cause.

11. Since life does exist, the cause of life is supernatural.

 

Many people with a naturalistic worldview assume everything can be explained by natural causes. From the beginning, they reject the possibility of a supernatural cause. Because of this they are left with no scientifically valid answers to the question of how the universe could come from nothing, which is impossible by any natural cause of which we are aware. Many answers have been proposed that go beyond the realm of known evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation and therefore enter the realm of fiction.

 

The same logic applies to life. Using available evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we know that life only comes from pre-existing life of the same kind.

 

[color=blue][i]“Spontaneous generation (the emergence of life from nonliving matter) has never been observed. All observations have shown that life comes only from life. This has been observed so consistently it is called the Law of Biogenesis. Evolution conflicts with this scientific law by claiming that life came from nonliving matter through natural processes”[/color][/i] [[url=http://www.creationscience.com/onlinebook/]From “In the Beginning” by Walt Brown[/url]]

 

Life never comes from non-living matter by any natural cause of which we are aware.

 

Now that we have seen proof that God exists, using logic based on known evidence, experience, facts, observation and experimentation, we need to see if He has revealed Himself to us. In the Holy Bible there are hundreds of prophecies given by God who is speaking in the first person. In both Bible and secular history we find that those prophecies have been accurately fulfilled. No other writing on earth comes close to doing this! Only God can accurately reveal the future, ergo, He is the author of the Holy Bible. Within the pages of the Holy Bible He reveals His nature, our nature, His relationship to us, our need for salvation and His plan of salvation for us.

 

The reason the universe and life cannot come from nothing by any natural cause, but can come from a supernatural cause is because God is the self-existent creator of everything and everyone. He is not subject to His creation. He created it and sustains it. It is a mistake to judge God by human standards and human perspectives. God reveals that He is omnipotent, omniscient and omnipresent.

 

If you are interested in more detailed proof, read, [i]“Evidence that Demands a Verdict”[/i] by Josh McDowell.

 

[[url=http://www.iuniverse.com/bookstore/BookDetail.aspx?BookId=SKU-000005147#] From “Reincarnation in the Bible?” [/url]]

 

Views: 4774

Replies are closed for this discussion.

Replies to This Discussion

I propose that it's more rational to speculate that there is a multiverse than that there is a God.

We have direct testable evidence of the existence of one space-time continuum, so it is not completely unreasonable to speculate that there may be more than one.

On the other hand, we have absolutely no testable evidence of the existence of any god, so to propose that such a being might exist is to (if you'll pardon the expression) create the concept out of nothing -- nothing, that is, except the delusions and misapprehensions of millenia past.

More succinctly, to propose that there is more than one of something of which we know one exists seems more rational to propose that there is one of something of which we do not know that even one exists.

Reply by Akshay Bist 18 hours ago

The universe cannot be infinitely old or all useable energy would have been lost already (entropy).  This has not occurred.  Therefore, the universe is not infinitely old. Therefore, the universe had a beginning and since the universe is everything that exists, could it exist before it existed?

Ever heard of a multiverse?


Therefore, logically, there must be a single uncaused cause that has always existed.

Yes, the multiverse, not your imaginary friend.

 

Pahu: What is the evidence for a multiverse? Is it composed of matter? Did that matter have a beginning? Did it exist before it began? Does it make more sense to believe the multiverse came from nothing by some natural cause? Did it create itself before it existed? If not, wouldn't the cause still be supernatural?

 

If not, wouldn't the cause still be supernatural?

Its ridiculous that you still claim that your god didn't need a cause but the universe or multiverse did. You use entropy as your main argument. I have conclusively argued that entropy is something that couldn't have applied before the big bang as we don't know that the laws of physics were before then & that scientists say that the laws of physics as we know them were established in the first moments of the big bang.

Out side of that, I don't know. I'm no cosmologist or astrophysicist, though I doubt that even they know much more than that.

But that fact that we don't know doesn't imply the supernatural. Ages ago people attributed natural phenomena to gods. Rain, storms, floods, earthquakes, volcanic eruption & many other phenomena, even Love! Many mental illnesses were thought to be the work of the devil. Now because of science we know the natural reasons those phenomena.

I doubt that we'd ever be able to find out how the universe or the multiverse came into existence. But if we do, I doubt it will be some old guy with a beard that some people dreamed into existence a few thousand years ago.

The big problem D. Clair is that you cannot invoke God of the Gaps. Saying "I don't know how it happened so God did it!" Doesn't really answer any question at all. Instead it just gives a new word to the phrase "I don't know." So what do I see when theists say "God did it." I see them admitting that they don't know the answer. Second... let's pretend for a moment that an "intelligent agent" is required to start the universe... how do you know that agent is the God of Abraham? To say this is to take speculation to a level that is unprecedented. Furthermore... this violates

Actually the singularity isn't in the current model of big bang cosmology. This is from a research paper I wrote last year:

 

"...the current big bang model does not say that the universe started out as a singularity. Victor Stenger, a retired professor of physics and astronomy and adjunct professor of philosophy, explains in his book The Fallacy of Fine-Tuning: Why the Universe Is Not Designed For Us, that the singularity is a “mathematical proof by Cambridge cosmologist Stephen Hawking and Oxford mathematician Roger Penrose published in 1970” (Stenger 123). This proof only took into account general relativity, but didn't take into account quantum mechanics. General relativity “does not apply when distances and times become very small, on the order of what is called the Planck scale. The Planck length is the smallest measurable distance, 1.616*10^-35 meters. The Planck time is the smallest measurable time, 6.391*10^-44 second” (Stenger 125). Like I said before, the big bang theory states that the universe started out as a point with extremely high density about the size of an atom, so since general relativity doesn't apply, neither does the singularity. Big bang cosmology does not say the universe must have begun, it only describes it's expansion from a very early point in its history."

 

 Just a thought. I read about they are currently finding what appears to be old galaxies to far back in time as which by current theories shouldn't be there. Maybe the big bang was inside an existing universe.

 

That's cool. Where can I find the article?

 

wow... that would follow my infinite universe theory also...
I would agree. Do you know much on black holes? I have an infinite universe theory to pass by you...
I will isolate my response to this:  Where is your proof of number 3?
I was thinking the same thing :)

Why bother asking for proof of number 3? Number 3 is dependant on number 2...I would LOVE proof of that!

RSS

Support T|A

Think Atheist is 100% member supported

All proceeds go to keeping Think Atheist online.

Donate with Dogecoin

Members

Forum

Things you hate.

Started by Devlin Cuite in Small Talk. Last reply by Unseen 11 minutes ago. 117 Replies

Videos

  • Add Videos
  • View All

Services we love

We are in love with our Amazon

Book Store!

Gadget Nerd? Check out Giz Gad!

Into life hacks? Check out LabMinions.com

Advertise with ThinkAtheist.com

© 2014   Created by Dan.

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service