Search results

I think I may have to do a bit more reading up on this first, before I sound like an idiot too much more. Either way though, don't these fluctuations and particles rely on energy already being present?

You seem to be approaching this from a human time understanding though. It is not necessary for God to "decide" what he is going to do - or at least he certainly doesn't take "time" to do so. He necessarily knows what he is doing regardless of whether time passes by. It's not a problem to me for...

I do in one sense, but in another, no not at all. I can understand that to say "before" an event without time seems illogical, but how does this mean that a cause cannot be timeless?

Unless the cause originates from something timeless - ie a timeless eternal God?

Yeah I actually expected that to come up, but to be honest I find it very problematic. The statement I made "whatever begins to exist must have a cause" stems from the first principle of causality and can be expressed as "from nothing, nothing comes". Any proof (or disproof) would surely rely on...

1. So, if you heard a loud "bang" and asked "what was that?" and I replied "nothing", you would have no troubles accepting that? Why should it be any different for the "big bang"? 2. As far as I am aware, all other theories that propose an eternal universe haven't gained much scientific...

Are you using this as a way to say that there is no problem in believing that the universe originated from nothing , by nothing and for nothing? I think you may have underestimated the validity of the problem by getting rid of it with tricky wording. While yes, I agree with you, it is ridiculous...

*Confused* I'm comparing objective and subjective morality here. Not comparing the way in which either of them have become applicable for us. Am I missing something in your thought line?

It only took you 12hrs to get through? Nice work I sense a test coming on. I will answer in the affirmative. I imagine my next answer will probably involve the talking about of sin and how far the word "image" can be extended in meaning.

Because he may not have physical anatomy :P

Well of course I would tell him that - if given the opportunity to do so. In fact I tell him that now. If I am expected to believe in God without having any reason at all for doing so, I find that an entirely unfair situation to be in (although one that a God could create if He so desired)...

I don't feel that my own rationality can prove Gods existence if that is what you mean. I am humanly limited, so naturally God is going to know and be able to comprehend a lot more than I am. However, I think I should also have good reason for testifying for what I believe in. If I have no good...

Ha ha, I should probably restate (I seemed to have developed a habit for being misinterpreted) I did not mean to say that, other religious beliefs can combine with my beliefs to enhance Christianity. Not at all, for like you have said, belief in Christianity requires belief in an exclusive way...

It could mean they have any number of Gods to dismiss (Whilst the Christian will always have one less (if the Christian God was dismissed by the atheist)) :P

I don't think Ockham's Razor really applies in dismissing the whole possibility of God. Especially when all other explanations that fit Gods place are pseudo-science. ?? Which "religious" scientists believe this? When did they become a majority?

Eh, I don't think I would agree with that. Besides the fact that you could really only issue that argument against monotheistic religions, I don't really find that occurring in my own church or relationships I have with other Christians. Certainly in my case, I am super open to meeting people...

I honestly don't think a debate on abortion need even enter the biblical territory.

Yeah, your probably correct at first glance, so I suppose I should restate what I said. Rather instead of simply saying "under the atheist view these acts are worthless" I should say that "under the view of atheism, these acts hold no objective worth". Now while this may seem like an obvious...

Aha, be careful though as I was not arguing that human worthlessness makes it false. I was arguing that under this view, moral sentiments are worthless. It could very well be that human morality is worthless, but it is this which so many atheists seem to struggle with here. I hope I'm not being...

Thought, I would just make a new post instead of trying to join all your existing comments back together Katie :) We're at the point now, where we are so far beyond the original point of the discussion that I don't know what I am arguing about. In fact I think I'm probably actually agreeing...