Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT
Originally Posted by OldHat
Originally Posted by DBT

Well, it's not my truth.

So what do you believe? How do you think the Universe came into existence?

To believe the Universe appeared from nothing takes greater faith than believing in Christianity.



I think that quote came from someone else. You may have grabbed from the wrong poster. It's not something I'd say.

I made no claim that the universe came from nothing. I made no claim of knowing how it came about or if it did; it may be cyclic, a part of a multiverse or something yet unknown. I don't pretend to know.

There is no empirical evidence for either a static or multiverse. Science requires empirical evidence. They are just science fiction in the minds of physicists who disbelieve in God.

There is empirical evidence for a single point of Creation of time and ALL matter.

There is logical evidence for a creator. The evidence is for a supernatural Creator. For example,
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/wri...-of-god/the-kalam-cosmological-argument/
https://www.reasonablefaith.org/wri...al-argument-and-the-anthropic-principle/




Nobody has to believe in a multiverse or anything else. Science doesn't work like that. Multiverse, Branes, Cyclic Universe, etc, are proposals that need to be tested.

And yes, the evidence shows that the Universe began 13. 7 billion years or so ago....but that means in its present form. It is not known whether time began with the BB.

The universe could be cyclic, it could be a part of a multiverse....the point is: we don't know.

Then you live by faith. The faith that there is no God. The faith that science will explain the origin the universe and of physics itself.

The multiverse is not empirically testable. That is what makes it the perfect atheist fantasy. Branes are not an alternative explanation for the origin of the universe. There is positive evidence against a cyclic universe.

Quote

And: we don't know, therefore God, is not a solution.

The correct answer is: we don't know.

You don't understand deductive reasoning.





Nope. I'm aware of no god claims that have met their burden of proof. Not accepting a claim that has not met it's burden of proof requires no faith.

Like wise, not accepting your god claim does not equate to a faith "that science will explain the origin the universe (sic) and of physics itself." To date the scientific method is the best pathway for discovering the truth, but in no way implies all truths will be discovered.

As for "deductive reasoning", a false dichotomy is a logical fallacy, not deductive reasoning.


You didn't use logic or reason to get into this opinion, I cannot use logic or reason to get you out of it.

You cannot over estimate the unimportance of nearly everything. John Maxwell